4 ms·
Interviewer: "We have heard that a half a million children have died. I mean that's more children than died in Hiroshima. You know, is the price worth it?" Alb
by b215826 5y ago
Interviewer: "We have heard that a half a million children have died. I mean that's more children than died in Hiroshima. You know, is the price worth it?"
Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."
This is from a 1996 interview with this woman [1] about the Iraq invasion. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8
- sha256sum 5y ago> This is from a 1996 interview with this woman [1] about the Iraq invasion. Actually in regards to the sanctions against Iraq during the Clinton admin. > Good riddance to bad rubbish. I’m sure we’ll hear plenty of swamp creatures lauding what a trailblazer she was over the next few days.
- simonh 5y ago> sanctions against Iraq during the Clinton admin Which administration were the sanctions imposed under? It seems really weird to make a partisan jab over that.
- sha256sum 5y ago> It seems really weird to make a partisan jab over that. What’s more weird is implicating partisanship where there is none. Maybe you think of things in this frame. Not everyone else does.
- simonh 5y agoI re-read the thread and you're right, you were just providing relevant context. My apologies.
- ok123456 5y agoGeorge H. W. Bush sanctioned Saddam to death instead of toppling his government. From the end of the Persian Gulf war until it was "liberated" it was basically impossible to do business in Iraq. Both parties carried this out.
- thephyber 5y agoImportant question. Looks like GHWBush after the Kuwait invasion[1] That said, presidents have the power to adjust sanctions if they affect too many innocents. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq
- nwellnhof 5y agoWell, you have to applaud her honesty.
- SilasX 5y agoYes, most politicians would adamantly deny the the facts, or that they were making a tradeoff at all. So, credit where credit is due (what little it might be).
- guelo 5y agoThe US is newly sanctioning Russia as well as long term sanctions on Iran, North Korea and Cuba. Are they worth it?
- jyounker 5y agoAs an America I say: Russia: Right now, worth it. North Korea: Who knows if it's worth it. Cuba: Not worth it. We're still upset that they kicked out our dictator. Iran: Not worth it. We're still upset that they kicked out our dictator.
- testfoobar 5y ago"Some of you may die, but it is a sacrifice I am willing to take." -Lord Farquaad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm2x6CVIXiE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm2x6CVIXiE
- IfOnlyYouKnew 5y agoThe invasion of Iraq, or at least the one you are alluding to, happened in 2002, six years after that quote and a few years after Albright was making those decisions. And what is it you are objecting to, exactly? Saddam was a sadist who gassed his own citizen. People demanded someone go in and stop him back then, like they are now asking for a no-flight-zone in Ukraine. Sometimes, there are no good choices. At the time, embargoes were seen as effective because they had just brought down South Africa’s regime of Apartheid, and (to some degree) the Soviet Union. The alternative in US politics was not non-interventionism. It was outright invasion, something that had to wait for an administration without Clinton and Albright. The “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iraq” party came in and that likely killed an order of magnitude more people, especially if you consider that it caused the collapse in Syria, as well.
- adamc 5y agoAnd in a different (VERY different) administration.
- guelo 5y agoThe first invasion of Iraq was in 1991
- IfOnlyYouKnew 5y agoYes, and it took what? 6 months? And guess who was not Secretary of State at the time?
- reducesuffering 5y agoSome context here. This was because Saddam and Iraq launched scud missiles at and invaded Kuwait. US coalition forces freed Kuwait from Iraq's invasion, then pushed into the border of Iraqi territory to destroy the scud missile launchers and then promptly secured a ceasefire and left, leaving Saddam's regime.
- thephyber 5y agoThis is the first thing I thought of when I saw her name. But I have to wonder what info she had that made her believe this? How many Iranians does in the 1980s in the war against Iraq? How many Kurds died to the government in Baghdad? I have started to question whether those in power actually have perverted value systems (as is a common meme) or whether they are privy to different facts. Not trying to apologize for this woman’s statement, just genuinely curious.
- adamc 5y agoIt's an important question to ask.
- creato 5y agoThey don’t even need to be privy to different facts for things like this to make some sense without resorting to assuming they have perverse values. You cited some possibilities yourself, data like that isn’t and wasn’t classified information. Most internet commentary and discussion on any matters of significance is hopelessly warped by an inability to understand context and scale. Some of that inability is bad faith argument, the rest is a mess of laziness, naivety, and shallow displays of superiority.
- thephyber 5y agoThe point of my comment wasn’t to ignore your very plausible explanations. I expect there are many people that suffer from those. The point was to point out that epistemology works best when you make a good faith effort to understand how other people arrived at their conclusions. I have spent a lot of time recently trying to understand why many people are convinced about things like New World Order / Global Cabal / QAnon / Soros, Stop the Steal, various vaccine/COVID topics, multiple religious beliefs, and even why Putin believed he should “protect” Ukraine (assuming good faith). It’s far easier to bridge misunderstandings if you understand their motives, intent, desires, and the chain of facts that inform their worldview.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- throwaway9870 5y agoI don't understand this video. If it was 1996, then is wasn't about the Iraqi invasion because it hadn't occurred yet. The 1993 action was not an invasion of Iraq. The caption says something about Iran, but I can't imagine what the US did to cause 1/2 million deaths of children in Iran. So what was this video actually about?
- denormalized 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- treebog 5y agoI guess her answer stands either way, but the idea that sanctions killed half a million children is Hussein’s phony propaganda, and subsequent research has shown no increase in child mortality during the time of the sanctions. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/04/saddam-hussein-said-sanctions-killed-500000-children-that-was-a-spectacular-lie/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/04...
- someotherperson 5y ago"We have investigated ourselves and found we have done nothing wrong" is the takeaway here. Rather than deferring to Liz Sly from WaPo, why doesn't the U.S government submit itself and the administrations of the 90s to The Hague so this can be confirmed?
- treebog 5y agoI’m not deferring to WaPo, but rather two academics at the London School of Economics. Their paper is linked in the WaPo article. I don’t believe either is affiliated with the US government, or even an American citizen, so I don’t see how their article could be called “investigating ourselves.”
- notsureaboutpg 5y ago