Xref: utzoo talk.politics.misc:64890 trial.talk.politics.peace:76 alt.desert-storm:10652 Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!looking!brad From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,trial.talk.politics.peace,alt.conspiracy,alt.desert-storm Subject: Re: Reparations Message-ID: <1991Mar04.070312.23832@looking.on.ca> Date: 4 Mar 91 07:03:12 GMT References: <9103022221.28338@mydog.UUCP> <16913@accuvax.nwu.edu> Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd. Lines: 43 In commenting on reparations in this manner, and saying they are wrong, one must consider several types of wrong. From a standpoint of justice, they are clearly right. Iraq should have to pay for what it did to Kuwait, particularly the malicious destruction and looting they did when they found out they were losing. It's the only just thing. The problem is complicated by who "Iraq" is. The problem with Germany is that the Germans of the 30s resented paying for what the Germans of the teens did under Kaiser Wilhelm. This was indeed fuel for Hitler. Many of the Iraqis who looted Kuwait have paid the ultimate price. The victim deserves reparation, but we must also be just in deciding who to take that from. From the Iraqi who opposed the war, but kept silent for fear of the secret police? The conscript who was press-ganged and ordered to sty on the lines or be shot by his own people? The problem is we have destroyed those who had the ability to pay and also were guilty. Most of them, anyway, and the allies dearly want the commanders who remain who fit that bill to also be eliminated one way or another. One commander in particular, of course. Yes, the Iraqis bear a sort of collective responsibility for allowing such a regime, for supporting it, by and large in the past. But how far does this go? I don't know the answer to that. One simple answer -- give parts of southern Iraq, including the famed Rumalla (or however you spell it) oilfield to Kuwait -- has some appeal, but it would also lead to long term resentment. After all, it was the ceding of Kuwait by Britain that, according to Saddam, caused this dispute. Any such solution would need an Arab mandate, not a western one. How much oil does Iraq have outside that field? If they have enough to rebuild without it, then taking it away has a certain justice to it. You tried for Kuwait, you lost instead of gaining. Of course, that lesson hasn't worked well in Israel, has it? Anything, other than the transfer of land, that will still have consequences a generation down the line should be avoided. We should try not to visit the sins of the parents upon the children. -- Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473