Tuesday, January 05, 2010
Iran sanctionsDuring the 1990s I was pretty much indifferent to the negative side of economic sanctions like those imposed on Iraq. Economic sanctions looked like a constructive alternative to military confrontation. I'm more skeptical now. In the case of Iran, sanctions targeted to deny them materials critical for nuclear weapons make sense to me. But for our militarists, the alleged Iranian nuclear program is just an excuse for promoting an invasion and new war in yet another Muslim country.
Daniel Luban writes in Neocons Worried That Sanctions Might Not Kill Enough Innocent Iranians LobeLog 12/30/09:
But targeted sanctions are evidently not gratuitously destructive enough to satisfy the “bomb Iran” crowd. Thus we see Commentary’s Jennifer Rubin complaining that such sanctions reflect the administration’s misguided desire to “avoid being too harsh, too effective, or inflict too much damage”. Instead of genuinely “crippling sanctions,” the weak-kneed administration “[doesn’t] want to topple the regime nor inflict much damage, just target those ‘elements’ they think are the really bad guys.”I'm not clear on what the best estimates of civilian death in Iraq due to sanctions really are. But the point is an important one.
| +Save/Share | |
Links to this post:
No subject for immortal verse
That we who lived by honest dreams
Defend the bad against the worse."
-- Cecil Day-Lewis from Where Are The War Poets?
[Tip: Point cursor to any comment to see title of post being discussed.]
SEARCH THIS SITE
News & Media Links