Quote:
Originally posted by smooth
Of course I wouldn't as long as I knew how to read the warning signs. Of course that doesn't apply to people who don't know how to read or haven't been taught the meaning of a nuclear waste sign--one of the human rights abuses of Saddam was that he kept women and children from being educated (or at least only educated according to his mandate), correct?
Besides, the article isn't clear but it appears that soldiers may have _removed_ or at least tampered with the UN signs.
|
1) Even in Iraq, dangerous places have warning signs with skulls, and signs in their local language stating that it's dangerous.
2) I actually don't know about that education thing, but I *thought* the Iraqi women were as educated as the men, if only because Iraq was a secular, socialist country. If these women were uneducated (because they're shi'ites), it wasn't Saddam's fault, but their husbands' and village elders'.
3) The UN signs were *seals*; I doubt any looter would have stopped because of some stupid UN seal... Sorry, to me this is a non-issue.
Finally, if the US is to help the Iraqi people, the first thing they need to do is give the Iraqi people the means and *motivation* to help themselves. It simply won't work otherwise. FYI, after WW2, when we in the Netherlands were liberated, we didn't start looting or protesting against the liberators; we partied, and then went to work, to rebuild the country. We got help in the form of the Marshall plan, but we did most of the work ourselves. I don't see why the Iraqis can't do the same. Well, I do see that, of course: they're used to being told what to do, and to not take the initiative, after 30 years of dictatorship... But they have to change, or they will not succeed.