It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: UN Accuses US Forces of Starving Iraqi Citizens As A Weapon

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   
A former Swiss sociology professor and United Nations humans rights investigator. Jean Ziegler, has stated accusations that US forces in Iraq were depriving citizens of food and water and therefore were breaching international law. Us Forces have denied they deprived the citizens of the basic survival goods in the effort to flush militants from the beseiged townships. The act goes against the Geneva convention according to Mr Zeigler and he further stated that "A drama is taking place in total silence in Iraq, where the coalition's occupying forces are using hunger and deprivation of water as a weapon of war against the civilian population," The Tal Afar area has been in the headlines very dramatically in the news over the past weeks with the offensives in the township, the surrounding "Operation Iron Fist" along with the double suicide bombings this week that included Iraq's first female suicide bomber.
 



www.abc.net.au


The US military denied the charge and said that while supplies were sometimes disrupted by combat, food was never deliberately withheld.

Jean Ziegler, a former Swiss sociology professor who is UN special rapporteur on the right to food, said the Geneva Conventions banned military forces from using "starvation of civilians as a method of warfare".

He said that in Fallujah, Tal Afar and Samarra, Iraqi and US-led forces had cut off or restricted food and water to encourage residents to flee before assaults on entrenched Sunni insurgents over the past year.

Two 1977 protocols to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which lay down rules of conduct in armed conflicts, ban using deprivation of food or water as a weapon of war.


They also prohibit destruction of food stocks or interruption of food supply lines.

Mr Ziegler said he hoped the General Assembly would "condemn this strategy of the coalition forces" when he presents his report on the right to food in New York on October 27.

Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan, a spokesman for the US military in Iraq, said Mr Ziegler's accusations were baseless.

"Any allegations of us withholding basic needs from the Iraqi people are false," he said.

"In conjunction with our combat operations, we take all precautions to ensure that the Iraqi people are taken care of, as does the Iraqi Government," Lt Col Boylan said.

"There have in the past ... been some supplies that have been delayed due to combat operations, but they were due to transit the area once it was deemed safe. It does not do relief supplies any good if you have them going into a firefight."

Mr Ziegler said that he had been in touch with British authorities on the issue, and "a channel seems to be opening", but that attempts to start a dialogue with US authorities had been fruitless.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The methods beginning to be used in this war are a disgrace. I certainly can see why these people have taken the stance they have against westerners, if children, women stopped from basic supplies. Low acts.
Yes Mr Bush you may win the war, but at what cost to the world.





[edit on 14-10-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
funny, the UN starved iraqi's for 12 years and many other countries with sanctions and you believe this? like the UN cares suddenly? or is always correct?

jump on the propoganda bandwagon, anything bad about america must be true right?



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Its something call you brake it you own it, and US is responsible for the well being and welfare of the people in the country that it invaded in the false pretenses of "liberation"

If the US is using deprivation to pursue agendas is a disgrace.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   
namehere:

Actually, the UN wanted to ease sanctions, and the Clinton administration blocked it. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke even suggested they tighten them. Look it up.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   

The methods beginning to be used in this war a disgrace. I certainly can see why these people have taken the stance they have against westerners. Children, women stopped from basic supplies. Low acts.



You are jumping to conclusions there is no proof this has been done, it is nothing more then an allegation by the UN and a Human Rights organization.

And We all know only too well how effective the UN was with the food for oil program.


[edit on 10/14/2005 by shots]



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Uh is this "the" UN or someine IN the UN?

Also, US forces using starvation as a weapon?
Why? Sure its an inentive but utimatly leads to revolt.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by namehere
funny, the UN starved iraqi's for 12 years and many other countries with sanctions and you believe this? like the UN cares suddenly? or is always correct?

jump on the propoganda bandwagon, anything bad about america must be true right?


Americans always seem to forget, when they rail on the UN, that it is controlled by 5 countries.

Namely, the US, the UK, France, China and Russia.

The UN isnt some "other" entity that does what it wants you know, if the sanctions were so bad, then why did the US always block the lifting of them?



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

The UN isnt some "other" entity that does what it wants you know, if the sanctions were so bad, then why did the US always block the lifting of them?


No matter how you tried ot explain when it comes to the actions of our country and under Clinton back them, is "See not evil, heard no evil"

US along with other UN nations had as much fault on the opression of the people of iraq while punishing Sadam.

Liberation and democracy is only in the eye of the beholder.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
You are jumping to conclusions there is no proof this has been done, it is nothing more then an allegation by the UN and a Human Rights organization.


There is a lot of proof that this has been done in the past.



Washington Post September 19 2004

A team of civil affairs officers is working with Iraqi officials to restore basic services, including water and electricity, which U.S. forces had turned off for at least three days during the fighting.




Fox News October 1 2004

The city appeared calm late Friday except for American snipers on rooftops firing at anybody appearing in the streets below. Troops ordered residents to stay inside and announced a 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. curfew. Water and electricity services were severed.




Washington Post October 16 2004

Electricity and water were cut off to the city just as a fresh wave of strikes began Thursday night, an action that U.S. forces also took at the start of assaults on Najaf and Samarra. The only light was from illumination rounds, slowly descending flares that bathed the cityscape in an eerie half-glow.


There's more links here:
Denial of water to Iraqi Cities during US assaults



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Thanks Ace saved me the leg work


Shots, I don't personally think they would release something like this based on supposition. I would say it would be a foregone conclusion before it got to the stage of the UN announcing their accusations.



*Edit spelling
Gosh my keyboards spelling badly today.





[edit on 15-10-2005 by Mayet]



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Wait, is the UN stating this, is he speaking in an official capacity, or is he just some guy who happens to work for the UN?


cjf

posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
This does'nt seem like a UN probe and certainly not an official investigation. Doesn't the IRC and GC have the official word over this during a period of occupation?

Looks like a 'one horse show' trying to get noticed.

.



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Notice that those exmaples of water and electricity being cut off were during fighting. You cut off the water and electicity and your enemies don't have enough supplies to stay long and fight against you.



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Notice that those exmaples of water and electricity being cut off were during fighting. You cut off the water and electicity and your enemies don't have enough supplies to stay long and fight against you.


Right, and they are expecting another huge insurgent assault now after Oct. 15.

That's why they're back in total lock down mode, blowing up bridges and frankly starving people. No other way to put it.



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 04:43 AM
link   
They aren't starving the populace they are starving the "insurgent" the populace just happen to be unlucky enough to be in the crossfire as always. I highly doubt the US is directly targetting civilians allthough it is true they aren't shy of "collateral damage". They just justify it, put out a few (badly scriped) proganga pieces saying how great things are going over there and hope people just forget about. *Shrug* Move along nothing to see here.

[edit on 15-10-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Thanks Ace saved me the leg work



The examples given by ace referred to water/elec only that is hardly the same as starving since most people have water on hand at all times. Well that is if they are smart enough to do so. This is not the first time they have been without Elec and water, they survived then didn't they?



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   
The question has been raised several times but not answer. I'll raise it again.

Is this one guy's opinion (a guy who happens to also be a UN Human Rights worker)? Or, is this an OFFICIAL statement by the U.N.?

Also, is there any evidence of this denial of food? Does this "deliberate starvation" of the citizenry happen to fit the exact pattern dictated by that military officer? That is, does each example of "starvation" happen to coincide with a firefight, and lift immediately following the cessation of hostilities?

If so, I'd say it fits the military's explanation pretty well. It's nonsense to assume that in firefights, people will have the same access to goods and services (including water, electricity, and food) as they would during a ceasefire.

Now, if for two weeks before an attack, supply lines are cut and grocery stores are destroyed, then we have a problem.

Until then, it's more of the same...Boo America, Yay rest of the world...bleh...



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamburglar
The question has been raised several times but not answer. I'll raise it again.

Is this one guy's opinion (a guy who happens to also be a UN Human Rights worker)? Or, is this an OFFICIAL statement by the U.N.?


From the source article that was not quoted in the original, it states


A United Nations human rights investigator has accused US and British forces in Iraq of breaching international law by depriving civilians of food and water in besieged cities as they try to flush out militants.










Until then, it's more of the same...Boo America, Yay rest of the world...bleh...


With that I agree totally.



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Wow. Missed this. Good job Mayet.


I'm with marg, "You break it, you buy it." The US is responsible for Iraq - and Iraq's children. No starving them out or other deprivations. For shame.



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Wow. Missed this. Good job Mayet.


I'm with marg, "You break it, you buy it." The US is responsible for Iraq - and Iraq's children. No starving them out or other deprivations. For shame.


These are nothing more then allegations nothing hss been proven.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join