Malnutrition in Iraq

Friday, April 15, 2005 12:00 PM

As pointed out excessively by myself, there is one U.S. foreign policy when it comes to the Middle East. That policy is carried out by both parties in Washington, irregardless of which is in power at the White House or on Capitol Hill. Why? For the simple, self-evident reason that both parties are in the hands of the Israeli Lobby.

The article below reminds us that the economic sanctions (embargo) on Iraq started in 1990 under Bush Sr. The embargo was dutifully enforced throughout the Presidency of Bill Clinton. Obviously, it was all about "regime change" since day one, not about eliminating WMD. That was the cover story. It was all about destroying Iraq as a nation-state.

Now Bill Clinton and Bush Sr. are bosom buddies collecting money for the victims of the tsunami in east Asia. Yet, their polices in Iraq alone have gratuitously destroyed far more innocent people than the tsunami did.

Bush Jr. and his wrecking crew are following through on a pre-existing policy, long established and supported by both parties. They are just making a bigger mess of things. Senator John Kerry said that, should he be elected President, he was going to to a better job of executing essentially the same policy.

He was very careful not to state that he was going to reverse the American policy in the Middle East that got us where we are today. If he had, he would have lost even worse.
==========================================
Let them eat bombs
The doubling of child malnutrition in Iraq is baffling

Terry Jones / Tuesday April 12, 2005

The Guardian (London)

A report to the UN human rights commission in Geneva has concluded that Iraqi children were actually better off under Saddam Hussein than they are now.

This, of course, comes as a bitter blow for all those of us who, like George Bush and Tony Blair, honestly believe that children thrive best when we drop bombs on them from a great height, destroy their cities and blow up hospitals, schools and power stations.

It now appears that, far from improving the quality of life for Iraqi youngsters, the US-led military assault on Iraq has inexplicably doubled the number of children under five suffering from malnutrition. Under Saddam, about 4% of children under five were going hungry, whereas by the end of last year almost 8% were suffering.

These results are even more disheartening for those of us in the Department of Making Things Better for Children in the Middle East By Military Force, since the previous attempts by Britain and America to improve the lot of Iraqi children also proved disappointing.

For example, the policy of applying the most draconian sanctions in living memory totally failed to improve conditions. After they were imposed in 1990, the number of children under five who died increased by a factor of six. By 1995 something like half a million Iraqi children were dead as a result of our efforts to help them.

A year later, Madeleine Albright, then the US ambassador to the United Nations, tried to put a brave face on it. When a TV interviewer remarked that more children had died in Iraq through sanctions than were killed in Hiroshima, Mrs Albright famously replied: "We think the price is worth it."

But clearly George Bush didn't. So he hit on the idea of bombing them instead. And not just bombing, but capturing and torturing their fathers, humiliating their mothers, shooting at them from road blocks - but none of it seems to do any good. Iraqi children simply refuse to be better nourished, healthier and less inclined to die. It is truly baffling.

And this is why we at the department are appealing to you - the general public - for ideas. If you can think of any other military techniques that we have so far failed to apply to the children of Iraq, please let us know as a matter of urgency. We assure you that, under our present leadership, there is no limit to the amount of money we are prepared to invest in a military solution to the problems of Iraqi children.

In the UK there may now be 3.6 million children living below the poverty line, and 12.9 million in the US, with no prospect of either government finding any cash to change that. But surely this is a price worth paying, if it means that George Bush and Tony Blair can make any amount of money available for bombs, shells and bullets to improve the lives of Iraqi kids. You know it makes sense.

**

Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python. He is the author of Terry Jones's War on the War on Terror

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005