Saddam was "captured" a few days ago. Great. Now Bush Jr. has something to crow about for the next few days - at least until he "captures" Osama bin Laden. (My guess? He's magically captured a week or two before the US presidential elections)
Unfortunately, there's still one government that's a threat to world peace. This one government has consistently sabotaged attempts for a system of international justice, refused to pay the UN membership dues, and trod roughshod over international trade (in areas that are against its interests).
This government is currently detaining thousands of both foreign and domestic people without trial, habeus corpus, or even the knowledge of their 'capture' by their families, and has a policy of "pre-emptive strikes" to deal with foreign policy.
It consistently deprives its own citizens of basic necessities, such as medical care and education, in order to finance its own militaristic desires for global expansion. It's currently spending four billion dollars per month on its expansion in Iraq, when it won't give its own citizens proper social care. To give you an idea of just how much money that is, they've spent $89,605.74 in the one minute it's taken you to read this.
The US government is a threat to world peace; that much is clear. What hasn't been brought up is how much a threat it is to its own people. I think both will be highlighted if Saddam makes it to a public trial.
Already, there's a score of articles bringing up the US government's past dealings with Saddam; dealings that appear to have rewarded him for atrocities carried out in the early 80s.
I would say that you could argue that this is a different government, in a different time - but it's almost exactly the same government. At least, the players are all the same. What's changed is the motive behind these players' dealings with the wayward dictator.
Now, instead of fighting communism, they're rallying for an economic hegemony in the Middle East -- with them on top.
All that's standing in their way are those pesky dictators they endorsed in the past, who haven't necessarily turned completely against them, but definitely would like their piece of the pie.
Update: The Memory Hole is keeping a log of wounded soldiers here
We're not deprived education and healthcare. I am acquiring an education and I do have health care (at least while I'm in school). And in fact, the government gives damned near anyone who needs it financial aid to attend college. So I wouldn't say I'm deprived.
Socialized medicine is going to be a hard pill to swallow for this country, simply because it hasn't been done before. Clinton tried to launch it and everyone bristled. (well everyone being the HMOs and people scared of too much gov't intervention). IMHO, socialized medicine is great but I've seen a few flaws even in Canada's system that makes me wonder how the problems can be averted.
I agree that the military-industrial complex is still alive and thriving in the US. I agree that Dubbya is a crappy president and stearing us down a crappy road that makes me almost ashamed to be American. But he's not depriving us of basic human rights. Civil liberties, yes (and trust me I ain't too thrilled about *that*). But education and health care are still available at least to the majority of citizens. Most americans working full time have health care as provided through their workplace. Its not perfect, but its better than absolute zero, which I'd say is what a lot of people in Iraq had for a very long time. I'm not justifying the war (I'm incredibly anti-war), I'm just offering comparison.
-- Posted by >> Kethryvis » Tuesday, December 16, 2003 01:02 PMI have to disagree... according to the US census, an average of 14.7% of US citizens over 19 were left without any form of health insurance between 2000 and 2002.
Ironically enough, the worst of the states was Texas with nearly 25% lacking health insurance. Additionally, over 7.1 million children were not covered under health care in the same period.
The money being spent on killing people (or at least injuring them) is more than enough to set up a national health care system that covers everyone.
-- Posted by >> Darren » Tuesday, December 16, 2003 03:08 PMSome interesting details regarding the USs previous dealings with saddam, and osama, are interestingly detailed in "dude where's my country" (available on audiobook at youknowwhere).
Others have mentioned some of things that are deprived to the us, such as affordable pharmacare type items. IE: birth control. Apparently BC in the states is hugely more expensive than up here (anyone in the us: how much for a standard 12 pack of trojans? how much for a months supply of birth control (no idea what brands/availability on this one myself)).
If people can't afford birth control, they'll have kids, because people fuck, plain and simple. They have kids and then get moved into the projects or slums or inner city, whatever it's called, and live in substandard housing and in a crappy environment.
Of course, no one wants to work in places like that, so the "good" teachers end up working in nicer areas, and the kids who grow up in the inner city now have a substandard environment, and education, and of course job prospects aren't all that high.
This is a theory based on second hand information, so I'd like to find some prices to confirm or disprove this :)
-- Posted by >> Arcterex » Tuesday, December 16, 2003 03:27 PMIt's amazing to me the amount of $$ going into another country. It seems reasonable to assume that they are expecting a far larger payout for their trouble. What troubles me it the serious lack of ethics and two-tiered morality. You can't, logically, condemn torture and lack of transparency while simultaneously suggesting that torture (physical and psychological "pressures") will be conducted in private and to just trust you that it's different...
-- Posted by >> Suzanne » Wednesday, December 17, 2003 07:07 AMdarren - hear hear.
-- Posted by >> amanda » Wednesday, December 17, 2003 08:04 AMThere's no money in helping people. Gandhi couldn't even get a sandwich on his salary.
-- Posted by >> Artemis Clyde Frog » Wednesday, December 17, 2003 01:47 PMPost a comment
* under no circumstances will your email address be traded for a sack of quarters. No-sirree.