Hmmm, if I am an Iraqi, living in the Iraq currently being rebuilt by the provisional government, I think I would tell the US that the money in accounts seized from the Saddam regime is money that was stolen from the Iraqi citizenry, and - as such - belongs to the people of Iraq and its new government. I believe that they would tell us that their claims take precedence over ours - no matter the personal sacrifice of our servicepeople.
So, when the US courts and lawyers come a'knockin for that cash saying, "Our clients were tortured, they deserve a piece of that money!", why wouldn't an Iraqi respond with, "Tortured? I can get a list of 50,000? 100,000?...other Iraqis that have been tortured since Saddam came to power! Get in line..."?
If it comes down to suffering torture at the hands of the Hussein regime, who takes precedence?
That's really what it is all about - whose claim takes precedence?
Also, I wonder whose money is it, really?
Is it Saddams? If so, give a piece to the US servicepeople who suffered.
Is it Iraqs? If so, they should get it back to help rebuild.
Is it ours because we seized it? If so, we can do whatever the hell we want with it, so make with the restitution.
Anyone know what legal cases are out there? Obviously, Germany had to make restitution to the Jewish victims, but that was a case of attempted genocide, not a doule handful of military personnel (and I am not trying to belittle the ugliness of torture - merely point out a difference in circumstance.).
I just don't see this as a "black and white" issue, but - then again - I rarely see foreign relations and foreign policy in that way.
|