Thursday, 27 February 2003
Let’s see, my high school graduating class was about 400. So 500,000 would mean wiping out the entire class every year for 1200 years. But 1200 is also too big to grasp readily. A good-size theater, like Shea’s, has a capacity of maybe 2000-3000. So kill a capacity crowd 150-250 times. A pro baseball stadium: about 40,000, 12 times over. A pro football stadium, about 70,000, 7 times. Number killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings combined: 100-175,000 (depending on whose estimate you believe), would have to be done 3-5 times over (6-10 bombs). And, of course, double all those numbers for one million.
Revolt
of the backbenchers
Rebel
vote stuns Blair
Passionate debate shows the
scale of Labour revolt (some terrific excerpts in that one from the astonishingly blunt debate)
Meanwhile, the headline in Voice of America?
British Lawmakers Back Blair on Iraq
(Well, yeah, he did win the vote, but suffering the largest rebellion among one’s own party in the history of Parliament is hardly what I’d call being backed.)
Tuesday, 25 February 2003
We’ve got six more new subscribers, bringing the total to 31.
UN agencies have quietly been estimating the additional casualties likely to result from a new war (partly in order to plan relief efforts), and a draft of that report has been leaked. This Guardian article provides an overview: Counting the dead . And here’s the actual UN document, with some additional commentary.
"Medact" is a British organization of health professionals (the UK affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) that has also studied and produced a report on the likely consequences of another war: executive summary; full report
All the reports came up with numbers that are mind-numbingly large. I won’t try to summarize them here.
You may recall that the U.S. seized Iraq’s recent 12,000-page disarmament report to the UN and deleted 8000 pages—including details on where Iraq got the materials for making biological, chemical and nuclear weapons from in the first place—before releasing it to the rest of the Security Council. An analysis of the deleted pages (later leaked) shows that all five permanent members of the Security Council sold Iraq such materials. Suppliers in the U.S. include the Depts. of Defense, Energy, Commerce, and Agriculture, three of the national weapons labs, 24 companies, including Hewlett-Packard (nuclear and rocket technology), Dupont (nuclear technology), and Eastman Kodak (rocket capabilities), and 50 U.S.-based subsidiaries of foreign companies. After all, there’s good, red-blooded, American money to be made in selling this stuff—and then even more to be made blowing it up: Revealed: 17 British firms armed Saddam with his weapons
Perhaps all this helps explain why "…many people in the world increasingly think President Bush is a greater threat to world peace than Iraqi President Saddam Hussein" (Washington Post): Bush Faces Increasingly Poor Image Overseas
Saturday, 22 February 2003
First, does anyone still have a copy of my previous mailing (Thursday night/Friday morning, with the info from Jean about the int’l labor press conference and several news articles)? We’ve got some more newcomers on the list (bringing the total to 25) to whom I’d like to send a copy, and I didn’t save one. Thanks.
"Eyewitness from Iraq"
Bill Marx, local businessman and founder of Pax Christi WNY, just returned from a two-week journey through Iraq with a peace-making team. He’ll be reporting on his trip this Tuesday, at 10:00 am, UB Newman Center (209 The Commons). More detail on the flyer.
In a nice illustration of media weirdness, essentially the same story, based on the same AP dispatch, appeared in most media with the headline Non-Aligned Movement Urges Iraq Disarm, and text that emphasized the call for Iraq to disarm while downplaying the ministers’ rejection of a war. The two versions are quite amusing side by side.
The Philippine gov’t is implausibly claiming the U.S. troops won’t see combat—which is flatly contradicted by Pentagon officials: Manila Stresses U.S. Troops Not in Combat Role
Simultaneously, more U.S. troops are on the way to Colombia to try to collect the Americans who were shot down the other day. Turns out they were indeed working for the U.S. military (confirmed in the second article): US considers intervention in Colombia; US troops head to Colombia on rescue mission. [note to Sue: if Eddie hasn’t done his school report on Colombia yet, maybe this’ll give him some ideas.]
Thursday, 20 February 2003
Jean Dickson asked me to send back around to everyone the following link to info on a press conference that took place this week; labor organizations (unions) from many different countries have jointly taken a position against the war: US Labor Against War. (From that page you can also access an audio recording of the press conference.)
And now a few news items:
Short article about the American military operations that are already taking place within Iraq.
Rohan Gunaratna is research fellow at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence, University of St. Andrews, Scotland, and honorary fellow at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Israel. Previously, he was principal investigator of the United Nations’ Terrorism Prevention Branch, and he has served as a consultant on terrorism to several governments and corporations.
Leaders from 52 African countries have backed France’s opposition to a military intervention aimed at disarming Iraq. At their annual Franco-African summit in Paris, they endorsed a statement saying: "There is an alternative to war."
Wednesday, 19 February 2003
OTTAWA (Reuters)—After months of hesitation, Canada finally made it clear on Tuesday that it has no intention of contributing to a U.S.-led attack on Iraq that has not been blessed by the U.N. Security Council.
