: does anyone have any thoughts on the Lincoln Douglas debate on -the use of economic sanctions to achieve U.S. foreign policygoals ought to be immoral.
Until last spring I was a staunch supporter of US-UN sanctions on Iraq and Libya. I opposed the sanctions on Cuba, for different reasons; because I felt that the US should be helping Cuba's socialist susystem, not trying to crush it. I opposed the Cuban sanctions specifically, but not sanctions in general. In fact, if you asked me then, I would have supported placing sanctions on Indonesia, Nigeria, maybe China, and several others of the more sordid tyrannies, some capitalist, some socialist around the world.
Since then I've had a change of heart. I went to a couple of rallies and I learned that a million Iraqi kids have died because of UN sanctions that restrict adequate food and medicine from reaching the people. Now, of course Saddam is bad, posibly teh worst major leader of any country in teh world (possible exceptions include General Suharto, Mullah Mohamed Omar of afghanistan [aka the Commander of the Faithful], and a few other villains. However, if I detest Saddam for causing the deaths of Iraqi civilians, how can I support policies that cause teh death of anotehr million? If we want to get rid of saddam Hsusein, and I certainly do, then we should go about it the honorable way. Assassinate the man, or invade Iraq; although people would die in an invasion, it's almost certain that casualties would be under a million, which is teh number of Iraqi kids who have died as of this moment.
Howevre, I certainly do not think that the US shoudl make a special effort to trade in or invest in Iraq, Nigeria, Indonesia, or otehr countries that carry tyranny to its moern extreme.