Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FW: War on Iraq Test

Expand Messages
  • Bell, Elizabeth
    Interesting statistics. Elizabeth Bell, MPH STOP Activity Unit Polio Eradication Branch Global Immunization Division Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 24 6:16 AM
    • 0 Attachment

      Interesting statistics.

       

      Elizabeth Bell, MPH

      STOP Activity Unit

      Polio Eradication Branch

      Global Immunization Division

      Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

       


      War on
      Iraq IQ Test

      Do you know enough to justify going to war  with Iraq?


      1. Q: What percentage of the world's  population does the U.S. have? 
         A: 6%
      2. Q: What percentage of  the world's wealth does the U.S. have? 
         A: 50%
      3. Q: Which country has  the largest oil reserves? 
         A:  Saudi Arabia
      4. Q: Which country has the second largest  oil reserves? 
         A: Iraq  
      5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year  worldwide? 
         A: $900+  billion
      6. Q: How much of this is spent by the  U.S.? 
         A: 50%
      7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the  UN? 
         A: 10% (that's about$40  billion, the amount of funding initially requested  to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).
      8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War  II? 
         A: 86 million  
      9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological  weapons? 
         A: Since the early  1980's.
      10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical &  biological weapons on their own? 
         A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by  the US government, along with Britain  and private corporations.
      11. Q: Did the US government  condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran? 
         A: No  
      12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas  in the Kurdish town of Halabja in  1988? 
         A: 5,000
      13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the  time? 
         A: 0  
      14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America use  in Vietnam? 
         A: 17million.
      15. Q: Are there  any proven links between Iraq and September 11th  terrorist attack? 
         A: No
      16. Q: What is the  estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf  War? 
         A: 35,000
      17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the western forces during the Gulf War   
         A: 0
      18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by  U.S. tanks with ploughs mounted on the  front? 
         A: 6,000
      19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and  Kuwait after the Gulf  War? 
         A: 40 tons
      20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in Iraq between 1991 and  1994? 
         A: 700%
      21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim  it had destroyed in 1991? 
         A: 80%
      22. Q: Is there any  proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for anything  other than deterrence and self defense? 
         A: No
      23. Q: Does Iraq present  more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years  ago? 
         A: No  
      24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted  in the event of an attack on Iraq in  2002/3? 
         A: 10,000  
      25. Q: What percentage of these will be  children? 
         A:Over 50%  
      26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes  on Iraq? 
         A:  11 years
      27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq  between December 1998 and September  1999? 
         A: No
      28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September  1999? 
         A: 20 million  
      29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661  introduced, imposing strict sanctions on  Iraq's imports and exports? 
         A: 12  years
      30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in  1989 (per 1,000 births)? 
         A: 38
      31. Q: What was the  estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000  births)? 
         A: 131  (that's an increase of 345%)
      32. Q: How many Iraqis are  estimated to have died by October 1999 as a result of UN sanctions? 
         A:  1.5 million
      33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated  to have died due to sanctions since  1997? 
         A: 750,000
      34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq? 
         A: No
      35. Q: How many  inspections were there in November and December  1998? 
         A: 300
      36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems? 
         A: 5
      37. Q: Were the weapons  inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party  HQ? 
         A: Yes
      38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in fact, been  disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern  history." 
         A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM  chief.
      39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991  capacity to develop weapons of mass  destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to have discovered and  dismantled? 
         A:  90%
      40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons  inspectors back in? 
         A: Yes  
      41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by  1992? 
         A: Over 65
      42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between 1972 and 1990? 
         A: 30+
      44. Q: How many  countries are known to have nuclear weapons? 
         A: 8
      45. Q: How many nuclear  warheads has Iraq got? 
         A:  
      46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US  got? 
         A: Over 10,000  
      47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear  weapons? 
         A: The US  
      48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel  have? 
         A: Over 400  
      49. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we  become silent about things that  matter"? 
         A: Dr. Martin Luther  King, Jr

    • susan umstot
      Liz, Before I send this info out to other people, where did you get your statistics. Thanks (and Peace), Susan ...
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 24 4:47 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Liz,
        Before I send this info out to other people, where did
        you get your statistics.

        Thanks (and Peace),
        Susan
        --- "Bell, Elizabeth" <eib6@...> wrote:
        > Interesting statistics.
        >
        >
        >
        > Elizabeth Bell, MPH
        >
        > STOP Activity Unit
        >
        > Polio Eradication Branch
        >
        > Global Immunization Division
        >
        > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > War on Iraq IQ Test
        >
        > Do you know enough to justify going to war with
        > Iraq?
        >
        >
        > 1. Q: What percentage of the world's population
        > does the U.S. have?
        > A: 6%
        > 2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does
        > the U.S. have?
        > A: 50%
        > 3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
        > A: Saudi Arabia
        > 4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil
        > reserves?
        > A: Iraq
        > 5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year
        > worldwide?
        > A: $900+ billion
        > 6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
        > A: 50%
        > 7. Q: What percent of US military spending would
        > ensure the essentials of
        > life to everyone in the world, according the UN?
        > A: 10% (that's about$40 billion, the amount of
        > funding initially
        > requested to fund our retaliatory attack on
        > Afghanistan).
        > 8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World
        > War II?
        > A: 86 million
        > 9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological
        > weapons?
        > A: Since the early 1980's.
        > 10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological
        > weapons on their own?
        > A: No, the materials and technology were supplied
        > by the US government,
        > along with Britain and private corporations.
        > 11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use
        > of gas warfare against
        > Iran?
        > A: No
        > 12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using
        > gas in the Kurdish
        > town of Halabja in 1988?
        > A: 5,000
        > 13. Q: How many western countries condemned this
        > action at the time?
        > A: 0
        > 14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America
        > use in Vietnam?
        > A: 17million.
        > 15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and
        > September 11th
        > terrorist attack?
        > A: No
        > 16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian
        > casualties in the Gulf
        > War?
        > A: 35,000
        > 17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military
        > inflict on the western
        > forces during the Gulf War
        > A: 0
        > 18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were
        > buried alive by U.S. tanks
        > with ploughs mounted on the front?
        > A: 6,000
        > 19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left
        > in Iraq and Kuwait after
        > the Gulf War?
        > A: 40 tons
        > 20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in
        > cancer rates in Iraq
        > between 1991 and 1994?
        > A: 700%
        > 21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did
        > America claim it had
        > destroyed in 1991?
        > A: 80%
        > 22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use
        > its weapons for anything
        > other than deterrence and self defense?
        > A: No
        > 23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world
        > peace now than 10 years
        > ago?
        > A: No
        > 24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon
        > predicted in the event of
        > an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
        > A: 10,000
        > 25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
        > A:Over 50%
        > 26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air
        > strikes on Iraq?
        > A: 11 years
        > 27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq
        > between December 1998 and
        > September 1999?
        > A: No
        > 28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on
        > Iraq between December
        > 1998 and September 1999?
        > A: 20 million
        > 29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661
        > introduced, imposing strict
        > sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
        > A: 12 years
        > 30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in
        > 1989 (per 1,000 births)?
        > A: 38
        > 31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in
        > Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000
        > births)?
        > A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
        > 32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died
        > by October 1999 as a
        > result of UN sanctions?
        > A: 1.5 million
        > 33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to
        > have died due to sanctions
        > since 1997?
        > A: 750,000
        > 34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
        >
        > A: No
        > 35. Q: How many inspections were there in November
        > and December 1998?
        > A: 300
        > 36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
        > A: 5
        > 37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to
        > the Ba'ath Party HQ?
        > A: Yes
        > 38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in
        > fact, been disarmed to
        > a level unprecedented in modern history."
        > A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.
        > 39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991
        > capacity to develop weapons of
        > mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors
        > claim to have discovered and
        > dismantled?
        > A: 90%
        > 40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons
        > inspectors back in?
        > A: Yes
        > 41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by
        > 1992?
        > A: Over 65
        > 42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America
        > veto between 1972 and
        > 1990?
        > A: 30+
        > 44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear
        > weapons?
        > A: 8
        > 45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?
        > A:
        > 46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?
        > A: Over 10,000
        > 47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear
        > weapons?
        > A: The US
        > 48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
        >
        > A: Over 400
        > 49. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we
        > become silent about
        > things that matter"?
        > A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
        >
        >


        __________________________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
        http://platinum.yahoo.com
      • Holland, Mark
        ... There are between 5 and 6 billion people on the planet. If we assume that only 1 billion of them lack the essentials (almost certainly a low estimate)
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 25 4:08 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          I'm an opponent of the war and agree with nearly all of the points below, but I can never hold my tongue when I see such black-and-white renderings of a complex situation. There are very few questions on this topic that can be meaningfully answered by "yes" or "no" or "6000". This reduces to just sloganeering. I'll pick just three:

          > 7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the UN?
          > A: 10% (that's about$40 billion, the amount of funding initially requested to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).

          There are between 5 and 6 billion people on the planet. If we assume that only 1 billion of them lack the essentials (almost certainly a low estimate) then this comes out to $40 per person per year. This is only about a 25-50% of the per-capita income in the poorest countries in the world. If you boosted the income of an average subsistence farmer in Malawi by 25%, would he/she really be able to afford "all the essentials"?

          > 17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the western forces during the Gulf War
          > A: 0

          This also can't be right: there was a well-publicized missile attack on a rear base that killed 28 American servicemen if I recall correctly.

          > 34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
          > A: No

          This is a word-game: what I've read suggests that he was extremely uncooperative to the point of blocking real inspections, and in response the U.S. put political pressure on the inspectors to find that he was violating the agreement no matter what the reality of the situation, and in response the inspectors were pulled. "No" hardly seems adequate to the situation.

          Mark


          -----Original Message-----
          From: susan umstot [mailto:srumstot@...]
          Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 7:48 PM
          To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [ujeni] FW: War on Iraq Test


          Liz,
          Before I send this info out to other people, where did
          you get your statistics.

          Thanks (and Peace),
          Susan
          --- "Bell, Elizabeth" <eib6@...> wrote:
          > Interesting statistics.
          >
          >
          >
          > Elizabeth Bell, MPH
          >
          > STOP Activity Unit
          >
          > Polio Eradication Branch
          >
          > Global Immunization Division
          >
          > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > War on Iraq IQ Test
          >
          > Do you know enough to justify going to war with
          > Iraq?
          >
          >
          > 1. Q: What percentage of the world's population
          > does the U.S. have?
          > A: 6%
          > 2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does
          > the U.S. have?
          > A: 50%
          > 3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
          > A: Saudi Arabia
          > 4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil
          > reserves?
          > A: Iraq
          > 5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year
          > worldwide?
          > A: $900+ billion
          > 6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
          > A: 50%
          > 7. Q: What percent of US military spending would
          > ensure the essentials of
          > life to everyone in the world, according the UN?
          > A: 10% (that's about$40 billion, the amount of
          > funding initially
          > requested to fund our retaliatory attack on
          > Afghanistan).
          > 8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World
          > War II?
          > A: 86 million
          > 9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological
          > weapons?
          > A: Since the early 1980's.
          > 10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological
          > weapons on their own?
          > A: No, the materials and technology were supplied
          > by the US government,
          > along with Britain and private corporations.
          > 11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use
          > of gas warfare against
          > Iran?
          > A: No
          > 12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using
          > gas in the Kurdish
          > town of Halabja in 1988?
          > A: 5,000
          > 13. Q: How many western countries condemned this
          > action at the time?
          > A: 0
          > 14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America
          > use in Vietnam?
          > A: 17million.
          > 15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and
          > September 11th
          > terrorist attack?
          > A: No
          > 16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian
          > casualties in the Gulf
          > War?
          > A: 35,000
          > 17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military
          > inflict on the western
          > forces during the Gulf War
          > A: 0
          > 18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were
          > buried alive by U.S. tanks
          > with ploughs mounted on the front?
          > A: 6,000
          > 19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left
          > in Iraq and Kuwait after
          > the Gulf War?
          > A: 40 tons
          > 20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in
          > cancer rates in Iraq
          > between 1991 and 1994?
          > A: 700%
          > 21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did
          > America claim it had
          > destroyed in 1991?
          > A: 80%
          > 22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use
          > its weapons for anything
          > other than deterrence and self defense?
          > A: No
          > 23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world
          > peace now than 10 years
          > ago?
          > A: No
          > 24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon
          > predicted in the event of
          > an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
          > A: 10,000
          > 25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
          > A:Over 50%
          > 26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air
          > strikes on Iraq?
          > A: 11 years
          > 27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq
          > between December 1998 and
          > September 1999?
          > A: No
          > 28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on
          > Iraq between December
          > 1998 and September 1999?
          > A: 20 million
          > 29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661
          > introduced, imposing strict
          > sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
          > A: 12 years
          > 30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in
          > 1989 (per 1,000 births)?
          > A: 38
          > 31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in
          > Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000
          > births)?
          > A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
          > 32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died
          > by October 1999 as a
          > result of UN sanctions?
          > A: 1.5 million
          > 33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to
          > have died due to sanctions
          > since 1997?
          > A: 750,000
          > 34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
          >
          > A: No
          > 35. Q: How many inspections were there in November
          > and December 1998?
          > A: 300
          > 36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
          > A: 5
          > 37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to
          > the Ba'ath Party HQ?
          > A: Yes
          > 38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in
          > fact, been disarmed to
          > a level unprecedented in modern history."
          > A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.
          > 39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991
          > capacity to develop weapons of
          > mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors
          > claim to have discovered and
          > dismantled?
          > A: 90%
          > 40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons
          > inspectors back in?
          > A: Yes
          > 41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by
          > 1992?
          > A: Over 65
          > 42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America
          > veto between 1972 and
          > 1990?
          > A: 30+
          > 44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear
          > weapons?
          > A: 8
          > 45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?
          > A:
          > 46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?
          > A: Over 10,000
          > 47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear
          > weapons?
          > A: The US
          > 48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
          >
          > A: Over 400
          > 49. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we
          > become silent about
          > things that matter"?
          > A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
          >
          >


          __________________________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
          http://platinum.yahoo.com




          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Bell, Elizabeth
          I didn t, it was forwarded to me. Most look pretty in keeping with the numbers I ve seen elsewhere though. The wording s a bit biased on some of them, but
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 25 4:43 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            I didn't, it was forwarded to me. Most look pretty in keeping with the
            numbers I've seen elsewhere though. The wording's a bit biased on some of
            them, but then there are few unbiased war-related items floating around the
            internet these days.

            Liz

            Elizabeth Bell, MPH
            STOP Activity Unit
            Polio Eradication Branch
            Global Immunization Division
            Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


            -----Original Message-----
            From: susan umstot [mailto:srumstot@...]
            Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 7:48 PM
            To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [ujeni] FW: War on Iraq Test

            Liz,
            Before I send this info out to other people, where did
            you get your statistics.

            Thanks (and Peace),
            Susan
            --- "Bell, Elizabeth" <eib6@...> wrote:
            > Interesting statistics.
            >
            >
            >
            > Elizabeth Bell, MPH
            >
            > STOP Activity Unit
            >
            > Polio Eradication Branch
            >
            > Global Immunization Division
            >
            > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > War on Iraq IQ Test
            >
            > Do you know enough to justify going to war with
            > Iraq?
            >
            >
            > 1. Q: What percentage of the world's population
            > does the U.S. have?
            > A: 6%
            > 2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does
            > the U.S. have?
            > A: 50%
            > 3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
            > A: Saudi Arabia
            > 4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil
            > reserves?
            > A: Iraq
            > 5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year
            > worldwide?
            > A: $900+ billion
            > 6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
            > A: 50%
            > 7. Q: What percent of US military spending would
            > ensure the essentials of
            > life to everyone in the world, according the UN?
            > A: 10% (that's about$40 billion, the amount of
            > funding initially
            > requested to fund our retaliatory attack on
            > Afghanistan).
            > 8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World
            > War II?
            > A: 86 million
            > 9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological
            > weapons?
            > A: Since the early 1980's.
            > 10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological
            > weapons on their own?
            > A: No, the materials and technology were supplied
            > by the US government,
            > along with Britain and private corporations.
            > 11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use
            > of gas warfare against
            > Iran?
            > A: No
            > 12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using
            > gas in the Kurdish
            > town of Halabja in 1988?
            > A: 5,000
            > 13. Q: How many western countries condemned this
            > action at the time?
            > A: 0
            > 14. Q: How many gallons of agent Orange did America
            > use in Vietnam?
            > A: 17million.
            > 15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and
            > September 11th
            > terrorist attack?
            > A: No
            > 16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian
            > casualties in the Gulf
            > War?
            > A: 35,000
            > 17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military
            > inflict on the western
            > forces during the Gulf War
            > A: 0
            > 18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were
            > buried alive by U.S. tanks
            > with ploughs mounted on the front?
            > A: 6,000
            > 19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left
            > in Iraq and Kuwait after
            > the Gulf War?
            > A: 40 tons
            > 20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in
            > cancer rates in Iraq
            > between 1991 and 1994?
            > A: 700%
            > 21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did
            > America claim it had
            > destroyed in 1991?
            > A: 80%
            > 22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use
            > its weapons for anything
            > other than deterrence and self defense?
            > A: No
            > 23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world
            > peace now than 10 years
            > ago?
            > A: No
            > 24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon
            > predicted in the event of
            > an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
            > A: 10,000
            > 25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
            > A:Over 50%
            > 26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air
            > strikes on Iraq?
            > A: 11 years
            > 27. Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq
            > between December 1998 and
            > September 1999?
            > A: No
            > 28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on
            > Iraq between December
            > 1998 and September 1999?
            > A: 20 million
            > 29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661
            > introduced, imposing strict
            > sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
            > A: 12 years
            > 30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in
            > 1989 (per 1,000 births)?
            > A: 38
            > 31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in
            > Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000
            > births)?
            > A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
            > 32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died
            > by October 1999 as a
            > result of UN sanctions?
            > A: 1.5 million
            > 33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to
            > have died due to sanctions
            > since 1997?
            > A: 750,000
            > 34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
            >
            > A: No
            > 35. Q: How many inspections were there in November
            > and December 1998?
            > A: 300
            > 36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
            > A: 5
            > 37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to
            > the Ba'ath Party HQ?
            > A: Yes
            > 38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had in
            > fact, been disarmed to
            > a level unprecedented in modern history."
            > A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.
            > 39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991
            > capacity to develop weapons of
            > mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors
            > claim to have discovered and
            > dismantled?
            > A: 90%
            > 40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons
            > inspectors back in?
            > A: Yes
            > 41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by
            > 1992?
            > A: Over 65
            > 42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America
            > veto between 1972 and
            > 1990?
            > A: 30+
            > 44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear
            > weapons?
            > A: 8
            > 45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got?
            > A:
            > 46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got?
            > A: Over 10,000
            > 47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear
            > weapons?
            > A: The US
            > 48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
            >
            > A: Over 400
            > 49. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we
            > become silent about
            > things that matter"?
            > A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
            >
            >


            __________________________________________________
            Do you Yahoo!?
            Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
            http://platinum.yahoo.com




            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Vyrle Owens
            25 March 2003 Dear Elizabeth, Thanks for forwarding this piece of information. I receive a lot of stuff these days, some of it recirculating from two/three
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 25 9:46 PM
            • 0 Attachment

              25 March 2003

               

              Dear Elizabeth,

               

              Thanks for forwarding this piece of information.  I receive a lot of stuff these days, some of it recirculating from two/three years ago.  This one I have not seen before.

               

               

              And to Mark,

               

              I appreciate what you said.  I do not worry so much about the details, recognizing that many are wrong, out of context, and in some cases representing a liberal dose of poetic license.  I think what is most important is not what something says, but that something said causes the recipient to “think,” to become engaged in the issues.

               

              I found the piece useful, if not exactly factual.

               

              As for the action in Iraq, words cannot express the depth of my disappointment that our administration not only got us to this point, but actually invaded the country.  Are we making history or simply repeating it?

               

              More later, maybe,

               

              Vyrle

               

               

            • Vyrle Owens
              25 March 2003 Dear ujeni folks, This came across my screen late last week. I think it is worthy of forwarding. Feel free to read or delete as you will. My
              Message 6 of 12 , Mar 25 9:53 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                25 March 2003

                Dear "ujeni" folks,

                This came across my screen late last week. I think it is worthy of
                forwarding. Feel free to read or delete as you will.

                My best to all of you,

                Vyrle



                HOW TO ABOLISH UNJUST WARS-AFTER THIS ONE IS OVER
                The Elements of World Peace Are Present on Both Sides of the Global
                Debate
                by Byron Belitsos
                Editor, ikosmos.com
                Publisher, Origin Press
                March 19, 2003

                In times of great crisis, opposites often arise together in
                pristine purity. Unleash a great evil in one place, and its nemesis
                arises somewhere else. Knock a dying paradigm off the world stage, and a
                new one kicks up out of the blue.
                But there's one other requirement: On its way out, the old model
                leaves behind an isolated but crucial truth, one that the new paradigm
                must incorporate if it is to be a genuine advance. The Bush
                administration, representing the last gasp of imperialist unilateralism
                in an interdependent world, is perversely teaching us one such isolated
                truth: that firm enforcement of international law is needed in a
                dangerous world.
                In his ultimatum speech on Monday night, Bush's Orwellian
                speechwriters dubbed our invasion of Iraq as "enforcement of the just
                demands of the world." Of course, most of us know better about Bush's
                brazen international antics, but the President is teaching us a cruel
                and bitter lesson about how to achieve a world without war and
                terrorism. The emerging new model, he is showing us, must incorporate
                the concept of decisive enforcement of global law. But in the new model,
                law enforcement will be embedded in the context of a genuine global
                democracy-a global governing structure that represents the will and
                reflects the sovereignty of the world's people.(1)
                Let me put it another way. Right now in our face, Bush's
                horrifying abuse of the high principle of international law enforcement
                is calling forth it's pristine opposite: The need for a genuine global
                legislature that can pass enforceable global laws, binding legislation
                that can be applied by a global executive branch and interpreted by duly
                appointed world courts-supported by a world constitution that jealously
                guards individual and national rights. And the first planks of this
                global constitution will be the abolition of war between nations and the
                binding adjudication of international disputes and criminal acts by
                legitimate world courts.
                The first imperative of world civilization is to outlaw murder
                of all kinds across national boundaries, and to use legitimate force to
                hold individual lawbreakers--and not entire nations like
                Iraq--accountable before legitimate standards of world justice.
                As I see it, the choice is stark: The force of law applied
                against individuals in a governed world, or the law of force applied
                against whole countries in a world of lawless anarchy-take your pick.(2)

                I witnessed a case in point, which I want to share with you as
                we embark on our catastrophe in Iraq. By all accounts, the Bush
                administration had descended last week into an unprecedented diplomatic
                chaos. One typical commentator, presidential candidate Senator John
                Kerry, called it "some of the weakest diplomacy in the history of the
                nation." The New York Times called it "a terrible diplomatic failure."
                But at the height of Bush's diplomatic delirium, what is arguably the
                very best moment in global diplomatic history occurred-the seating of
                the 18 justices at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague.
                This happy development is the mirror opposite of what Bush is now
                foisting on the world. It was fascinating to me how it presented itself
                at the lowest point of Bush's chaotic diplomatic frenzy in and around
                the UN Security Council.
                Although opposed with a vengeance at all points by the Bush
                administration, the ICC is as of March 11, 2003 officially inaugurated.
                It is now an operational reality. These 18 justices were elected by the
                90 or so signatories of the historic 1998 Rome Treaty. Remember that
                particular embarrassment? That's the statue creating the ICC that
                President Clinton signed in the final hours of his administration, which
                Bush "unsigned" last May, not long before he announced his intention to
                unilaterally attack Iraq without UN sanction.
                Here it was, the one institution that could deploy the existing
                (albeit weak) instruments of international law to bring the likes of
                Saddam Hussein before the bar of world justice, and Bush was trying to
                derail it. Russia and China balked at signing this treaty, now known as
                the Rome Statute, but the US actively tried to block the court's
                creation up until the moment last April when the treaty was ratified by
                the required number of signatories. No way, the American's said! We were
                going to enforce our own idea of world law, on our own selfish terms,
                and with that manly Texas mettle that knows best.
                Meanwhile, Bush set his Undersecretary of State John Bolton to
                work strong-arming countries into agreeing to exempt US citizens from
                the ICC's purview. The Republicans in Congress followed suit by pushing
                through the stupid (there is no other word for it) American
                Servicemember's Protection Act. But in the end the Bush administration's
                varied attempts to stop the launch of the ICC did not work. And last
                week they were morally upstaged by the event at the Hague, where 11 men
                and seven women--selected from a list of the world's finest
                jurists--were honored at a gala presided over by Queen Beatrix of the
                Netherlands. The inaugural ceremony was attended by foreign ministers
                and international diplomats from 100 countries-and of course was totally
                absent of representatives from the U.S.
                There is much to adjudicate: There are already plenty of cases
                on the docket for the ICC to begin reviewing and investigating. And to
                my Republican and libertarian friends who fear that the ICC is based on
                legal principles inferior to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights,
                have a look at this point-by-point comparison put together by Washington
                Working Group on the International Criminal Court:

                http://www.wfa.org/issues/wicc/factsheets/usconst.html

                Other elements of the emerging global governance paradigm are
                showing up too, again, seemingly out of the blue and just in time to
                refute the doomsdayers and cynics among us. The pristine beginnings of
                world democracy--the innocent and fresh voice of the sovereignty of the
                world's people--a voice that can become one part of the legitimate
                underpinnings of a global democratic federal government, has been
                showing up in the massive peace demonstrations around the world. I would
                suggest that it is on that basis that one can elevate a vision of a
                radical expansion of the goals of the peace movement. This nascent peace
                and justice movement, which first showed its strength and diversity at
                the Seattle demonstrations against the WTO in 1999, should go beyond its
                mere antiwar or anti-imperialist sentiments; it should move toward the
                advocacy of a true global democracy under enforceable global law. There
                is no other sane or realistic way to global peace and justice.
                Today's misguided peace movement is largely marked by a naive
                utopianism that confuses human nature with angelic nature. Angels can
                live in peace without law and government-humans can't. Yes, of course,
                "world peace" is a wonderful ideal, and war is a great calamity. But we
                can't stop or abolish war without the force of law. Peace without
                justice under law is an illusion-a sort of truce until the next war
                comes along (e.g., the intractable Israeli-Palestinian stalemate). And
                justice, too, is unachievable without the just establishment of law by
                elected legislatures along with juridical institutions to apply the law.
                And juridical institutions are almost useless without enforcement
                mechanisms-the impotence of the UN is a case in point of course. On the
                international level, all this means, again, enforceable global law.
                Peace requires justice, and justice rests on legitimate and
                enforceable law. Only when the peace movement understands this crucial
                syllogism, and only when international businessmen learn that global
                commerce is impossible without enforceable global law based on true
                planetary democracy, we will have an end to unjust wars like the one we
                are now fighting. Only then will there be an end to the evil adventurism
                of the American imperium and a genuine solution to terrorism. Only then
                can we really tackle the daunting problems of global pollution and
                grinding poverty.
                A day will come, I have faith, when we will no longer need the
                George Bushes and the Saddam Husseins of the world to teach us their
                increasingly bloody and increasingly obvious lessons about how justice
                and peace are achieved on an all-too-human planet. To do it we will need
                enforceable global law-the crystallization of brotherly love on a
                planetary scale.

                [Read down for sources of more
                information]


                FOOTNOTES

                (1) The people of the world are the true sovereign of the planet,
                inherently; and each world citizen born on this planet possesses
                God-given inalienable rights inhering in their very personhood. The
                question for the 21st century becomes: Who represents that sovereignty?
                Who can legitimately protect human rights at the global level? And who
                is the true upholder and enforcer of global peace and justice?

                (2) The final stage of the insane logic of the latter strategy is Bush's
                plan for the weaponization of space.

                RESOURCES FOR A GOVERNED WORLD

                1. Some years ago, just before the fall of the USSR, I wrote, directed,
                and coproduced a 28 minute educational video about the concepts
                discussed in this essay. It is entitled "Toward a Governed World".
                Norman Cousins said, "the film is done with high professionalism and is
                as rewarding as it is important." I have dusted this off and am making
                copies available tonight for the first time in ten years for $15,
                including shipping cost and tax. (Sliding scale pricing for students or
                people on limited budgets.) Just email me your address and I will send
                you a copy with a bill.

                2. My website, ikosmos.com has a section on global governance, with
                essays and numerous links:

                http://www.ikosmos.com/content/globalgov/globalgov.htm


                I'll be emailing again soon with other information, contacts, and links.
                Any and all comments on this essay are most welcome. Permission to
                forward or copy this essay is granted. --Byron Belitsos
              • Holland, Mark
                Vyrle and ujeni, much as I respect your opinion I don t agree at all. I think the central reason a majority of people in this country support this war is that
                Message 7 of 12 , Mar 26 4:17 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                   
                  Vyrle and ujeni, much as I respect your opinion I don't agree at all.  I think the central reason a majority of people in this country support this war is that they've been feed oversimplifications about the threat, and that such representations don't cause people to think but rather cause "anti-thinking", a hardening of opinion to fact.  If I'm going to criticize the administration for its manipulation of the public opinion in presenting the case for war, I have to do the same when the article in question takes the other side.
                   
                  Mark
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Vyrle Owens [mailto:vyrle@...]
                  Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 12:47 AM
                  To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [ujeni] FW: War on Iraq Test

                  I appreciate what you said.  I do not worry so much about the details, recognizing that many are wrong, out of context, and in some cases representing a liberal dose of poetic license.  I think what is most important is not what something says, but that something said causes the recipient to "think," to become engaged in the issues.

                   

                  I found the piece useful, if not exactly factual.

                • Vyrle Owens
                  26 March 2003 Dear Mark, Thanks for your reply. I do agree we must be consistent and I appreciate the reminder. As to thinking, non-thinking, and
                  Message 8 of 12 , Mar 26 8:11 PM
                  • 0 Attachment

                    26 March 2003

                     

                    Dear Mark,

                     

                    Thanks for your reply.  I do agree we must be consistent and I appreciate the reminder.  As to thinking, non-thinking, and anti-thinking oversimplification may I ask for a more studied elaboration as to why the “majority” of people in this country support this war? 

                     

                    By the way, I also appreciate your willingness to continue to engage the conversation.  Among those with whom I associate, the anti-war people are too angry to listen, the pro-war people are too engaged in dreaming about victory to listen, a certain number of others are relieved that some action is finally taking place but don’t know what to say and do not appear to have ever been listening, a certain number are afraid to get involved trusting the leaders to know best, a few continue to be un-decided, and it seems that several are just waiting to see which way the fortunes and tragedies of war turn.

                     

                    It feels a little like the early 60’s when I myself was mostly clueless.

                     

                    Stay well,

                     

                    Vyrle

                     

                     

                     

                     

                  • Eric Bone
                    Vyrle s observation that it is difficult to have a worthwhile discussion of the war rings true with me. I find what I consider much noise and distraction, and
                    Message 9 of 12 , Mar 27 8:35 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Vyrle's observation that it is difficult to have a worthwhile discussion of
                      the war rings true with me. I find what I consider much noise and
                      distraction, and little consideration of basic principles and the decisions
                      that should come out of them. It is my inclination, as an apprentice
                      mathematician, to break down my reasoning into the most basic and most
                      clear pieces I can. Usually when I look at the discussion in the war, the
                      statements made do not stand up to scrutiny. This is true both for several
                      statements in the "War on Iraq Test" and in the list Paul fowarded. Mark
                      has already pointed out examples of these.

                      Here is the heart of my reasoning.

                      1. Assumption: There are circumstances where going to war is a better
                      alternative than not going to war.

                      a. One such situation is when the lack of
                      war would prevent large numbers of civilian deaths. Rwanda stands out as a
                      case when going to war would have been better. I believe Bosnia and Kosovo
                      also fall in this category.

                      b. Another situation is when a country or organization has
                      attacked you, or is soon going to attack you and you have no other way of
                      preventing this.

                      These are the only circumstances that I can think of as legitimate
                      justification for war. I have heard other categories of reasons, but I do
                      not accept them, and therefore I do not include them in my assumptions.

                      2. Question: Do either of these assumptions apply to the relationship
                      between the US and Iraq?
                      I don't believe situation (a) can be seriously considered.
                      That leaves situation (b). Has Iraq attacked us? Will Iraq
                      attack us soon?

                      3. The Threat:
                      Officials of the Bush
                      administration have claimed Iraq cooperates with Al-Qaeda, who attacked us.
                      The evidence they have presented for that has not been convincing to me.
                      That has not been the main claim. The main argument has been that Iraq
                      posesses chemical and biological weapons, and that they will use them soon
                      against us, whether on their own or in cooperation with a terrorist
                      organization. It seems plausible to me that Iraq posesses these weapons.
                      I have not heard any evidence that war is the only means by which we can
                      prevent Iraq from attacking us with these weapons.

                      4. Trust of the Administration:
                      I also know that the Bush administration has much more
                      information than I do. They are in a better position to decide whether war
                      is the only way to prevent an attack. If they have convincing information,
                      they have chosen not to make it public.

                      5. Conclusion:
                      The Bush administration has done nothing to win my trust concerning their
                      decisions in foreign policy and security. In fact, most of their decisions
                      since they came to power have led me to distrust them. Since I am not
                      convinced of their judgment, I do not trust them to make this decision
                      about going to war based on information that they do not share. I believe
                      that we should not engage in a war unless and until our enemy is an
                      immediate threat. I don't believe that is the case here. I believe that
                      Michael Moore is correct to say that we are at war for "fictitious
                      reasons."

                      There is plenty more to talk about, but I've spent too much time thinking
                      about this already.

                      -Eric
                    • Bell, Elizabeth
                      Thank you, Eric, for your eloquence. What you ve laid out falls more/most in line with my thinking at this time. I ve worked in countries with horrible regimes
                      Message 10 of 12 , Mar 27 9:00 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Thank you, Eric, for your eloquence.

                        What you've laid out falls more/most in line with my thinking at this time.


                        I've worked in countries with horrible regimes and in countries after
                        horrible wars. I am not a knee jerk peacenik (although in my idealistic
                        youth I was). Two quotes come to mind:

                        I believe in peace, but not peace at any costs.
                        -Bishop Desmond Tutu.

                        War is sometimes necessary, but it is always evil.
                        -Jimmy Carter

                        The two examples you cite are situations where we knew genocide was
                        happening and I was always horrified that the world community did not step
                        in. I still believe that Rwanda and Bosnia are almost unbearable
                        humanitarian failures, it gives me nightmares to think about it too much.

                        I guess the bottom line at this point is that I do not trust this
                        administration, nor its stated reasons for starting this war. I do not
                        support this kind of unilateral action and think we will pay the diplomatic
                        price for years to come. I believe in the UN and wish we had given
                        diplomacy and the inspectors more time, but I also can not stand Saddam
                        Hussein and what he and his regime have done to the people of Iraq for so
                        long.

                        I just want this to be over quickly.

                        Liz

                        Elizabeth Bell, MPH
                        STOP Activity Unit
                        Polio Eradication Branch
                        Global Immunization Division
                        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Eric Bone [mailto:bone@...]
                        Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 11:36 AM
                        To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: RE: [ujeni] FW: War on Iraq Test

                        Vyrle's observation that it is difficult to have a worthwhile discussion of
                        the war rings true with me. I find what I consider much noise and
                        distraction, and little consideration of basic principles and the decisions
                        that should come out of them. It is my inclination, as an apprentice
                        mathematician, to break down my reasoning into the most basic and most
                        clear pieces I can. Usually when I look at the discussion in the war, the
                        statements made do not stand up to scrutiny. This is true both for several
                        statements in the "War on Iraq Test" and in the list Paul fowarded. Mark
                        has already pointed out examples of these.

                        Here is the heart of my reasoning.

                        1. Assumption: There are circumstances where going to war is a better
                        alternative than not going to war.

                        a. One such situation is when the lack of
                        war would prevent large numbers of civilian deaths. Rwanda stands out as a
                        case when going to war would have been better. I believe Bosnia and Kosovo
                        also fall in this category.

                        b. Another situation is when a country or organization has
                        attacked you, or is soon going to attack you and you have no other way of
                        preventing this.

                        These are the only circumstances that I can think of as legitimate
                        justification for war. I have heard other categories of reasons, but I do
                        not accept them, and therefore I do not include them in my assumptions.

                        2. Question: Do either of these assumptions apply to the relationship
                        between the US and Iraq?
                        I don't believe situation (a) can be seriously considered.
                        That leaves situation (b). Has Iraq attacked us? Will Iraq
                        attack us soon?

                        3. The Threat:
                        Officials of the Bush
                        administration have claimed Iraq cooperates with Al-Qaeda, who attacked us.

                        The evidence they have presented for that has not been convincing to me.
                        That has not been the main claim. The main argument has been that Iraq
                        posesses chemical and biological weapons, and that they will use them soon
                        against us, whether on their own or in cooperation with a terrorist
                        organization. It seems plausible to me that Iraq posesses these weapons.
                        I have not heard any evidence that war is the only means by which we can
                        prevent Iraq from attacking us with these weapons.

                        4. Trust of the Administration:
                        I also know that the Bush administration has much more
                        information than I do. They are in a better position to decide whether war
                        is the only way to prevent an attack. If they have convincing information,
                        they have chosen not to make it public.

                        5. Conclusion:
                        The Bush administration has done nothing to win my trust concerning their
                        decisions in foreign policy and security. In fact, most of their decisions
                        since they came to power have led me to distrust them. Since I am not
                        convinced of their judgment, I do not trust them to make this decision
                        about going to war based on information that they do not share. I believe
                        that we should not engage in a war unless and until our enemy is an
                        immediate threat. I don't believe that is the case here. I believe that
                        Michael Moore is correct to say that we are at war for "fictitious
                        reasons."

                        There is plenty more to talk about, but I've spent too much time thinking
                        about this already.

                        -Eric









                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • Vyrle Owens
                        27 March 2003 Dear all, Not to change the subject or anything but just in case you may be interested in something of more permanent relevance than war, I just
                        Message 11 of 12 , Mar 27 5:13 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          27 March 2003

                          Dear all,

                          Not to change the subject or anything but just in case you may be
                          interested in something of more permanent relevance than war, I just
                          finished an outstanding book about soil and other things. Should be of
                          particular interest to the natural resource and agriculture folks but
                          also relevant to other interests as well.

                          Hillel, Daniel J., "Out of the Earth: Civilization and the Life of the
                          Soil", 1991, The Free Press, New York


                          Part 1 is "For Soil Thou Art"

                          The final part is: "Unto Soil Shalt Thou Return"

                          The Author is a professor at University of Massachusetts.

                          Enjoy,

                          Vyrle
                        • Vyrle Owens
                          27 April 2003 Dear everyone, We are planning a get-together, (picnic, potluck, barbecue/braii) for everyone who can come on Saturday, 21 June. Mid-morning to
                          Message 12 of 12 , Apr 27, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            27 April 2003

                            Dear everyone,

                            We are planning a get-together, (picnic, potluck, barbecue/braii) for
                            everyone who can come on Saturday, 21 June. Mid-morning to late
                            afternoon.

                            Let us know if you will be in the neighborhood (Dayton, Oregon, not too
                            far from Portland) and come on by. More details and directions to
                            follow.

                            Vyrle and Dolly
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.