🚀 go-pugleaf

I expected this sort of response to this posting including
the inevitable comparison to Versailles. I didn't expect
quite the degree of hyperbole generated by T.Poser,
however. Reread the posting -- the funds would come from
the oil income from the southern fields not by enslaving
Iraq. Those fields hold nearly 10% of the world's reserves --much
more than enough to pay the damages I mentioned. And even if
they were lost to Iraq entirely [ say to a resurgent Iran -- after
all SH tried to seize their 10% of the world's reserves] it would
still be wealthier than most 3rd world and many Arab states
[i.e. Egypt].  Note what it's done with the oil income in
the past -- $50B for weapontry from foreign sources, 
more billions to run a war
economy. [Most of the $2B debt to the US is for wheat...not guns]
The comparison to Versailles fails because it order to get the
huge reparations demanded by that treaty German industry had to
be rebuilt --- the debt hindered this process and enbittered the
population. But success in rebuilding supplied the very means to
resist paying the debt! [a strong industry]  Iraqi industry such as
it was neednt be rebuilt to pay reparations.  As for reparations
creating an Iraqi Hitler -- take another look at SH -- we've
already got him!  True he's not as competent overall -- but
he's excellent at terrorizing Iraqis. I doubt hardship will
generate a more competent Iraqi dictator. Reparations or no
we're unlikely to like the postwar Iraqi gov't. Even
with a Marshall plan the democracy at gunpoint solution that
worked in Germany and Japan won't here.  Depriving Iraq
of ready cash will reduce it's capacity to do harm, e.g.
replacing its foreign built arsenal.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
These Opinions are my own and have no
necessary relation to the opinions of my
organization.
David M. Woodcock