Let’s be clear: Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili started this particular outbreak of violence. On the night of Aug. 7, Saakashvili ordered an artillery barrage against Tskhinvali, in South Ossetia, and sent an armored column to occupy the town, killing a number of Russian peacekeepers. As a result of a three-day battle Tskhinvali was in smoking ruins and thousands of people fled. However Russian claims of genocide appear to have been exaggerated.
The big question is Why? Was Saakashvili under the impression that NATO or the US military would intervene if Russia fought back? It seems hard to imagine that he would have invaded South Ossetia if he did not think he had American backing. How could he have had that idea?
Well now ... joint US-Georgian military exercises ended just hours before Georgian troops moved into the province. A senior Bush administration official acknowledged that “it’s possible that Georgians may have confused the cheerleading from Washington with something else.”
And the 'confusing cheerleading' goes back longer than that. The US foreign policy teams have crammed NATO expansion down the Russians’ throats since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The West has expanded military alliances up to Russian borders, and assumed that Russia would do nothing about it.
A Russian perspective
Former Soviet leader Mikhael Gorbachev points out that Russia has long been told to simply accept the facts on a number of issues:
On the independence of Kosovo, the Russians had insisted that independence for Kosovo would be a serious affront. Last February, the United States and the European Union, over Russia’s vehement objections, recognized an independent Kosovo.
On the abrogation of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, and the American decision to place missile defenses in neighboring countries:(today) August 20 2008 the US and Poland announced an agreement on the siting of 10 interceptor missiles in northern Poland.
On the unending expansion of NATO: Mr. Bush has promised NATO membership and its accompanying umbrella of American military support to Georgia.
Mr. Putin, angry at what he saw as American infringement right in his backyard, decided that Georgia was the line in the sand that the West would not be allowed to cross.
The McCain connection: McCain adviser also Georgia lobbyist.
Was McCain himself involved in setting this Russian bear trap? The Georgian crisis has created a campaign issue McCain can run on. The new trumped up threats about Russia make his antic-Soviet experience "relevant" again. And John McCain and friends were busy stirring the pot.
On April 17 McCain spoke with Saakashvili by phone, a call arranged by Randy Scheunemann, his major foreign policy adviser. Scheunemann is a leading neo-conservative lobbyist for oil companies and arms manufacturer. He was until recently a registered foreign agent for Georgia, and was Director of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. After the conversation, McCain issued a statement, saying that “we must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty.” Later that day, Scheunemann's Orion Strategies lobbying firm signed a new $200,000 deal with Georgia.
Bush team divided
Within the Bush administration, there is discord, as “the fight between the hawks and the doves” erupted anew, according to one administration official.
The hawks: Cheney and his aides and allies including the assistant secretary of state for Europe, Daniel Fried, see Georgia as a role model for their democracy promotion campaign. They have argued for more American military aid for Georgia, including Stinger antiaircraft missiles, so that it could defend itself against possible Russian aggression.
The “doves”: Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley and William J. Burns, the new under secretary of state for political affairs, have urged restraint. They argued that such a sale would provoke Russia, which would see it as arrogant meddling in its turf, the officials and diplomats said. Ms. Rice, for the time being, has won the fight against adding American-provided Stinger missiles to Georgia’s arsenal.
Is Saakashvili a democrat?
By last November, Mr. Saakashvili’s democratic credentials were becoming checkered. Accused by the opposition of corruption, arrogance and centralization, he declared a state of emergency. He won a snap election this year on a vote that the opposition said was rigged.
The oil connection:
If Saakashvili did believe he had US support, why did he not get it? Perhaps this is where that favorite foreign policy addiction – oil – plays a role in this dispute. The United States has poured hundreds of millions of dollars in aid and military hardware, mostly to protect the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline that bypasses Russia and Iran on its way to Turkey.
Sources
U.S. Watched as a Squabble Turned Into a Showdown, Helene Cooper, C.J. Chivers, Clifford Levy, The New York Times, August 18, 2008 US troops train Georgians amid tension by Douglas Birch and Misha Dzhindzhikhashvili Associated Press, Jul 21st, 2008 | TBILISI, Georgia What Did We Expect? By Thomas Friedman, The New York Times: August 19, 2008 Russia Never Wanted a War, by Mikhael Gorbachev, The New York Times: August 19, 2008 The Battle of Tskhinvali Tour of Tskhinvali undercuts Russian claim of genocide, By Tom Lasseter | McClatchy Newspapers, Associated Press, Sunday, August 17, 2008Oil pipelines
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Caucasian War Timeline
Timeline: 2008
January: Georgian Ministry of Defense released a “strategic defense review” that laid out its broad military planning for the breakaway regions.
March 19: Saakashvili was in Washington to push for NATO membership for Georgia
April 3: Bush lobbied NATO leaders for Ukraine and Georgia to be welcomed into a Membership Action Plan that prepares nations for NATO membership, the night before the NATO summit meeting in Bucharest, Romania. Mr. Bush lost that battle.
April 4: NATO leaders agreed to endorse a United States missile defense system based in Eastern Europe, and the Europeans said invitations to the membership plan for Georgia and Ukraine might come in a year, at the next summit.
April 17: McCain spoke with Saakashvili by phone, a call arranged by Randy Scheunemann, his major foreign policy adviser. After the conversation, McCain issued a statement, on that “we must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty.”
Scheunemann is a leading neo-conservative lobbyist for oil companies and arms manufacturer. He was until recently a registered foreign agent for Georgia, and was Director of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Later that day, Scheunemann's Orion Strategies lobbying firm signed a new $200,000 deal with Georgia.
April 21: a Georgian pilotless reconnaissance plane flying over Abkhazia was shot down. Georgia accused Russia of shooting it down while Mr. Putin expressed “bewilderment” at Georgia’s sending planes over Abkhazia.
May and June: Russia increased the number of troops in South Ossetia and sent troops into Abkhazia for ‘humanitarian’ reasons.
July: Condaleeza Rice in Tbilisi, where, aides said, she privately told Mr. Saakashvili not to let Russia provoke him into a fight he could not win. But her public comments were far more supportive.
July 21 - Aug 6: Joint US-Georgian military exercises involving more than 1,000 U.S. Marines and soldiers at a former Soviet base Monday, amid heightened tensions with Moscow.
August 1-5: Shelling from South Ossetia to Georgia proper increased significantly Georgian police officers were wounded by remotely detonated explosions in South Ossetia. Troops from Georgia battled separatist fighters, killing at least 6 people; the Georgians accused the South Ossetian separatists of firing at Georgian towns behind the shelter of Russian peacekeepers.
August 6: Separatists fired on several Georgian villages. The Russian Defense Ministry and South Ossetian officials say that Georgians provoked the escalation by shelling Russian peacekeeping positions in the region’s capital of Tskhinvali, along with civilian areas.
January: Georgian Ministry of Defense released a “strategic defense review” that laid out its broad military planning for the breakaway regions.
March 19: Saakashvili was in Washington to push for NATO membership for Georgia
April 3: Bush lobbied NATO leaders for Ukraine and Georgia to be welcomed into a Membership Action Plan that prepares nations for NATO membership, the night before the NATO summit meeting in Bucharest, Romania. Mr. Bush lost that battle.
April 4: NATO leaders agreed to endorse a United States missile defense system based in Eastern Europe, and the Europeans said invitations to the membership plan for Georgia and Ukraine might come in a year, at the next summit.
April 17: McCain spoke with Saakashvili by phone, a call arranged by Randy Scheunemann, his major foreign policy adviser. After the conversation, McCain issued a statement, on that “we must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty.”
Scheunemann is a leading neo-conservative lobbyist for oil companies and arms manufacturer. He was until recently a registered foreign agent for Georgia, and was Director of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Later that day, Scheunemann's Orion Strategies lobbying firm signed a new $200,000 deal with Georgia.
April 21: a Georgian pilotless reconnaissance plane flying over Abkhazia was shot down. Georgia accused Russia of shooting it down while Mr. Putin expressed “bewilderment” at Georgia’s sending planes over Abkhazia.
May and June: Russia increased the number of troops in South Ossetia and sent troops into Abkhazia for ‘humanitarian’ reasons.
July: Condaleeza Rice in Tbilisi, where, aides said, she privately told Mr. Saakashvili not to let Russia provoke him into a fight he could not win. But her public comments were far more supportive.
July 21 - Aug 6: Joint US-Georgian military exercises involving more than 1,000 U.S. Marines and soldiers at a former Soviet base Monday, amid heightened tensions with Moscow.
August 1-5: Shelling from South Ossetia to Georgia proper increased significantly Georgian police officers were wounded by remotely detonated explosions in South Ossetia. Troops from Georgia battled separatist fighters, killing at least 6 people; the Georgians accused the South Ossetian separatists of firing at Georgian towns behind the shelter of Russian peacekeepers.
August 6: Separatists fired on several Georgian villages. The Russian Defense Ministry and South Ossetian officials say that Georgians provoked the escalation by shelling Russian peacekeeping positions in the region’s capital of Tskhinvali, along with civilian areas.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
same old same old
New York Governor Paterson is calling for immediate action in the face of what he is describing as worst economic downturn in decades. And just what is he recommending to deal with it: “freezing state hiring and cutting prized programs, possibly including education and health care”.
Sounds familiar. Isn’t this what we have been doing for the past decade? So where is Paterson getting these not-so-fresh ideas? From a tried and true team – or perhaps a ‘tired and untrue’ team. Paterson has consulted with high-profile economists like Robert E. Rubin, the Treasury secretary in Bill Clinton’s administration, Ben S. Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman; Henry M. Paulson Jr., the Treasury secretary. Hven’t we seen these guys before. Is this what we can expect as proposed solutions to the crisis from a Democratic Administration in Washington? I hope not.
Opportunity Knocks as Paterson Tackles Budget
JEREMY W. PETERS, NYT, August 2, 2008
Sounds familiar. Isn’t this what we have been doing for the past decade? So where is Paterson getting these not-so-fresh ideas? From a tried and true team – or perhaps a ‘tired and untrue’ team. Paterson has consulted with high-profile economists like Robert E. Rubin, the Treasury secretary in Bill Clinton’s administration, Ben S. Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman; Henry M. Paulson Jr., the Treasury secretary. Hven’t we seen these guys before. Is this what we can expect as proposed solutions to the crisis from a Democratic Administration in Washington? I hope not.
Opportunity Knocks as Paterson Tackles Budget
JEREMY W. PETERS, NYT, August 2, 2008
no more avocado salad in January
Buying local gets a boost from oil prices, according to today's New York Times.
Extracted from an article in the business section (citation below).
The cost of shipping a 40-foot container from Shanghai to the United States has risen to $8,000, compared with $3,000 early in the decade, according to a recent study of transportation costs. Big container ships, the pack mules of the 21st-century economy, have shaved their top speed by nearly 20 percent to save on fuel costs, substantially slowing shipping times.
Soaring transportation costs also have an impact on food, from bananas to salmon. Higher shipping rates could eventually transform some items now found in the typical middle-class pantry into luxuries and further promote the so-called local food movement popular in many American and European cities. “This is not just about steel, but also maple syrup and avocados and blueberries at the grocery store,” shipped from places like Chile and South Africa, said Jeff Rubin, chief economist at CIBC World Markets and co-author of its recent study on transport costs and globalization. “Avocado salad in Minneapolis in January is just not going to work in this new world, because flying it in is going to make it cost as much as a rib eye.”
One likely outcome if transportation rates stay high, economists said, would be a strengthening of the neighborhood effect. Instead of seeking supplies wherever they can be bought most cheaply, regardless of location, and outsourcing the assembly of products all over the world, manufacturers would instead concentrate on performing those activities as close to home as possible.
But a trend toward regionalization would not necessarily benefit the United States, economists caution. Not only has it lost some of its manufacturing base and skills over the past quarter-century, and experienced a decline in consumer confidence as part of the current slowdown, but it is also far from the economies that have become the most dynamic in the world, those of Asia.
Source:
Shipping Costs Start to Crimp Globalization, By LARRY ROHTER, NYT : August 3, 2008
Extracted from an article in the business section (citation below).
The cost of shipping a 40-foot container from Shanghai to the United States has risen to $8,000, compared with $3,000 early in the decade, according to a recent study of transportation costs. Big container ships, the pack mules of the 21st-century economy, have shaved their top speed by nearly 20 percent to save on fuel costs, substantially slowing shipping times.
Soaring transportation costs also have an impact on food, from bananas to salmon. Higher shipping rates could eventually transform some items now found in the typical middle-class pantry into luxuries and further promote the so-called local food movement popular in many American and European cities. “This is not just about steel, but also maple syrup and avocados and blueberries at the grocery store,” shipped from places like Chile and South Africa, said Jeff Rubin, chief economist at CIBC World Markets and co-author of its recent study on transport costs and globalization. “Avocado salad in Minneapolis in January is just not going to work in this new world, because flying it in is going to make it cost as much as a rib eye.”
One likely outcome if transportation rates stay high, economists said, would be a strengthening of the neighborhood effect. Instead of seeking supplies wherever they can be bought most cheaply, regardless of location, and outsourcing the assembly of products all over the world, manufacturers would instead concentrate on performing those activities as close to home as possible.
But a trend toward regionalization would not necessarily benefit the United States, economists caution. Not only has it lost some of its manufacturing base and skills over the past quarter-century, and experienced a decline in consumer confidence as part of the current slowdown, but it is also far from the economies that have become the most dynamic in the world, those of Asia.
Source:
Shipping Costs Start to Crimp Globalization, By LARRY ROHTER, NYT : August 3, 2008
Friday, August 1, 2008
home ownership, racism and the subprime mess
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Before World War 2 less than 50% of US households owned their homes. By 1960 this had risen to nearly 65%, an increase fueled by deliberate government policy.
The Federal Housing Administration lowered the cost of buying homes by extending mortgage insurance, allowing banks to lend money at less risk and therefore at better terms to borrowers. Banks could now extend 30 year mortgages covering 80-90% of the buyer's cost at 6% interest.
But it was explicitly a whites only policy, guided by an FHA rule limiting loan underwriting to segregated white neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining. (Wikipedia: The term "redlining" ... describes the practice of marking a red line on a map to delineate the area where banks would not invest). 98% of 10 million loans guaranteed by the FHA went to whites.
Court cases in 1948 and 1953 struck down the policy but the practice, known as redlining, continued. In 1977, the Community Reinvestment Act tried to end the bias - it demanded that banks serve the communities from which they receive deposits, and undertake regular audits of their practice to ensure compliance.
Initially banks fought the CRA but in the 1980s they realized they could profit from it by providing subprime loans to a clientele they had previously failed to serve. The practice grew slowly. In 1994 only 5% of all new mortgages were subprime; by 2004 20% of home loans were subprime, and in 2006 50% of all new and refinancing home loans were subprime.
States that tried to head off the subprime lending by requiring 'tangible net benefits' statements to be issued by the lender were subjehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifct to intense and costly lobbying pressure to desist - political donations, boycott threats and the like. Only in North Carolina did such regulation survive - and now North Carolina is one of the states least affect by the foreclosure crisis.
Once again racism and attempts to get beyond it confound us.
Kai Wright, The Subprime Swindle, The Nation, July 14 2008
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080714/wright
Before World War 2 less than 50% of US households owned their homes. By 1960 this had risen to nearly 65%, an increase fueled by deliberate government policy.
The Federal Housing Administration lowered the cost of buying homes by extending mortgage insurance, allowing banks to lend money at less risk and therefore at better terms to borrowers. Banks could now extend 30 year mortgages covering 80-90% of the buyer's cost at 6% interest.
But it was explicitly a whites only policy, guided by an FHA rule limiting loan underwriting to segregated white neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining. (Wikipedia: The term "redlining" ... describes the practice of marking a red line on a map to delineate the area where banks would not invest). 98% of 10 million loans guaranteed by the FHA went to whites.
Court cases in 1948 and 1953 struck down the policy but the practice, known as redlining, continued. In 1977, the Community Reinvestment Act tried to end the bias - it demanded that banks serve the communities from which they receive deposits, and undertake regular audits of their practice to ensure compliance.
Initially banks fought the CRA but in the 1980s they realized they could profit from it by providing subprime loans to a clientele they had previously failed to serve. The practice grew slowly. In 1994 only 5% of all new mortgages were subprime; by 2004 20% of home loans were subprime, and in 2006 50% of all new and refinancing home loans were subprime.
States that tried to head off the subprime lending by requiring 'tangible net benefits' statements to be issued by the lender were subjehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifct to intense and costly lobbying pressure to desist - political donations, boycott threats and the like. Only in North Carolina did such regulation survive - and now North Carolina is one of the states least affect by the foreclosure crisis.
Once again racism and attempts to get beyond it confound us.
Kai Wright, The Subprime Swindle, The Nation, July 14 2008
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080714/wright
fear of terrorism greatly exaggerated
I am still puzzling over why so many well informed and sensible people are struggling under the fear of terrorism. Apart from its value as political scare tactic, the rationale for buying into this phenomenon seems so thin. While the audacity and visual horror of the fall of the twin towers is all too real and the death toll tragic, why does this event seem to so many to be unique?
Was 9/11/01 the bloodiest day in US history? NO
September 17, 1862: the battle of Antietam: 5000 men dead, nearly 20,000 wounded - of whom 10% (another 2000) would soon die. (1)
Was this the first 'spectacular' terrorist attack in the US? NO
On April 19, 1995, a massive bomb inside a rental truck exploded, blowing half of the nine-story building into oblivion... When the smoke cleared and the exhausted rescue workers packed up and left, 168 people were dead in the worst [at that time] terrorist attack on U.S. soil. (2)
Was the attack on 9/11/01 the deadliest attack on a civilian population? NO
On August 6 1945, the city of Hiroshima was destroyed by the first atomic bomb used in warfare. The initial blast toppled the city, maiming and killing tens of thousands, but the radiation unleashed by the atomic bomb inflicted countless more with radiation poisoning. Within four months between 90,000 and 140,000 people of the city's population of 310,000 are estimated to have died. About one-third of Nagasaki City was destroyed three days later, leading to the deaths of 60,000-80,000 of its population of 250,000 within four months, the destruction of 18,000 houses in the city and over an area of 6.7 million square meters. For the following ten years many of the survivors, especially those exposed as children, suffered excess risk of leukemia. The excess risk for cancers other than leukemia continues today, and it seems likely that this will persist throughout the lifetime of the survivors. (3)
Another deadly day: Bhopal, India, December 3 1984
A runaway reaction at the Union Carbide chemical factory in Bhopal led to the release of lethal gases. Poison clouds from the Union Carbide factory enveloped an arc of over 20 square kilometers before the residents could run away from its deadly hold. The leak killed over 8,000 people in its immediate aftermath and caused multi-systemic injuries to over 500,000 people. (4)
Unnecessary death every day
Road traffic crashes kill about 43,000 Americans (approximately the population of Chapel Hill) per year (3). World-wide 3,000 people are killed in road traffic daily and about 30,000 more disabled. That is 1 million deaths, 10.9 million injured. (5)
All unnecessary deaths are tragic. Are those killed in terrorist attacks in New York and Washington D.C. more tragic than those killed on the roads, murdered by guns, or dead from atomic bombing or industrial carelessness? Or those who die from hunger, treatable illness, or exposure through homelessness? Not in MY book.
Sources:
1. David Remnitz and Hendrik Hertzberg, "A Year After", New Yorker, 9/16/02
2. www.cnn.com/US/OKC/bombing.html
3. Radiation Effects Research Foundation, http://www.rerf.or.jp/top/orge.htm
4. NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, Op-Ed Column NYT, August 18, 2004 and from NPR 6/15/03
5. Ian Roberts, professor of epidemiology and public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
posted by quixote at 3:31 PM 0 comments
Was 9/11/01 the bloodiest day in US history? NO
September 17, 1862: the battle of Antietam: 5000 men dead, nearly 20,000 wounded - of whom 10% (another 2000) would soon die. (1)
Was this the first 'spectacular' terrorist attack in the US? NO
On April 19, 1995, a massive bomb inside a rental truck exploded, blowing half of the nine-story building into oblivion... When the smoke cleared and the exhausted rescue workers packed up and left, 168 people were dead in the worst [at that time] terrorist attack on U.S. soil. (2)
Was the attack on 9/11/01 the deadliest attack on a civilian population? NO
On August 6 1945, the city of Hiroshima was destroyed by the first atomic bomb used in warfare. The initial blast toppled the city, maiming and killing tens of thousands, but the radiation unleashed by the atomic bomb inflicted countless more with radiation poisoning. Within four months between 90,000 and 140,000 people of the city's population of 310,000 are estimated to have died. About one-third of Nagasaki City was destroyed three days later, leading to the deaths of 60,000-80,000 of its population of 250,000 within four months, the destruction of 18,000 houses in the city and over an area of 6.7 million square meters. For the following ten years many of the survivors, especially those exposed as children, suffered excess risk of leukemia. The excess risk for cancers other than leukemia continues today, and it seems likely that this will persist throughout the lifetime of the survivors. (3)
Another deadly day: Bhopal, India, December 3 1984
A runaway reaction at the Union Carbide chemical factory in Bhopal led to the release of lethal gases. Poison clouds from the Union Carbide factory enveloped an arc of over 20 square kilometers before the residents could run away from its deadly hold. The leak killed over 8,000 people in its immediate aftermath and caused multi-systemic injuries to over 500,000 people. (4)
Unnecessary death every day
Road traffic crashes kill about 43,000 Americans (approximately the population of Chapel Hill) per year (3). World-wide 3,000 people are killed in road traffic daily and about 30,000 more disabled. That is 1 million deaths, 10.9 million injured. (5)
All unnecessary deaths are tragic. Are those killed in terrorist attacks in New York and Washington D.C. more tragic than those killed on the roads, murdered by guns, or dead from atomic bombing or industrial carelessness? Or those who die from hunger, treatable illness, or exposure through homelessness? Not in MY book.
Sources:
1. David Remnitz and Hendrik Hertzberg, "A Year After", New Yorker, 9/16/02
2. www.cnn.com/US/OKC/bombing.html
3. Radiation Effects Research Foundation, http://www.rerf.or.jp/top/orge.htm
4. NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, Op-Ed Column NYT, August 18, 2004 and from NPR 6/15/03
5. Ian Roberts, professor of epidemiology and public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
posted by quixote at 3:31 PM 0 comments
what it's about
Just the facts ma’am
I get tired of all those news stories that are filled with anecdotes and personal histories and color – and yeah, I don’t much like color commentaries when I’m listening to ballgames either. So I tend to go through the stories and pull out the data that I find useful. That’s what I intend to do here – to cannibalize (with full attribution) news articles and other stuff that I read and learn from and pass along the facts digest. For anyone who wants the full context I’ll provide the reference.
Out of context
On the other hand there are times when news headlines provide sound bytes that distort the original statement. In those cases I like to search for the original and do a fuller search for the meaning intended.
Way out there
Then there's the stuff that makes me mad, and I intend to put it out there.
I get tired of all those news stories that are filled with anecdotes and personal histories and color – and yeah, I don’t much like color commentaries when I’m listening to ballgames either. So I tend to go through the stories and pull out the data that I find useful. That’s what I intend to do here – to cannibalize (with full attribution) news articles and other stuff that I read and learn from and pass along the facts digest. For anyone who wants the full context I’ll provide the reference.
Out of context
On the other hand there are times when news headlines provide sound bytes that distort the original statement. In those cases I like to search for the original and do a fuller search for the meaning intended.
Way out there
Then there's the stuff that makes me mad, and I intend to put it out there.
the price of a child
This is one of several posts originally on a site I can no longer access - here for the record.
Monday, August 30, 2004
I heard Rick Santorum interviewed by Terry Gross today.
He told a sad but inspiring story of the birth and death of a baby son, whose endangered existence he and his wife chose not to terminate during her pregnancy. Despite intrauterine surgery, however, the baby was born prematurely and lived only two hours. Yet, according to the Senator, this life had its purpose, was part of God's plan. While I heard his story with sympathy, I couldn't help wondering - does the Seantor feel the same way about all the other endangered babies and children in the world - the starving, those sick with diseases which could be cured at a fraction the cost of the surgery performed on his son, those driven from homes in Darfur or killed in bombing in Iraq - or are their lives too all part of the plan?
Or is Senator Santorum's son in some way special? Just one example:
Malaria kills over 800 children every minute in sub-Saharan Africa. It is Africa's greatest single cause of child mortality; survivors suffer lifelong anemia, cognitive impairment and fatigue. It costs Africa $12 billion per year. It could be eradicated in 5 years. GlaxoSmithKline has already tested a prototype vaccine - but market forces are insufficient to drive this to market. Meanwhile the profit margins of pharmaceutical companies are 20% (compared to normal corporate profit levels of 3%. (1)
Would Senator Santorum consider supporting some non-market driven response to save the lives of these children? Or is that not in the plan?
Source" Indypendent news (NYC) 11/3/03, from a World Health Organization report, July 2003. See also malariavaccine.org and also emvi.org (European mvi).
Monday, August 30, 2004
I heard Rick Santorum interviewed by Terry Gross today.
He told a sad but inspiring story of the birth and death of a baby son, whose endangered existence he and his wife chose not to terminate during her pregnancy. Despite intrauterine surgery, however, the baby was born prematurely and lived only two hours. Yet, according to the Senator, this life had its purpose, was part of God's plan. While I heard his story with sympathy, I couldn't help wondering - does the Seantor feel the same way about all the other endangered babies and children in the world - the starving, those sick with diseases which could be cured at a fraction the cost of the surgery performed on his son, those driven from homes in Darfur or killed in bombing in Iraq - or are their lives too all part of the plan?
Or is Senator Santorum's son in some way special? Just one example:
Malaria kills over 800 children every minute in sub-Saharan Africa. It is Africa's greatest single cause of child mortality; survivors suffer lifelong anemia, cognitive impairment and fatigue. It costs Africa $12 billion per year. It could be eradicated in 5 years. GlaxoSmithKline has already tested a prototype vaccine - but market forces are insufficient to drive this to market. Meanwhile the profit margins of pharmaceutical companies are 20% (compared to normal corporate profit levels of 3%. (1)
Would Senator Santorum consider supporting some non-market driven response to save the lives of these children? Or is that not in the plan?
Source" Indypendent news (NYC) 11/3/03, from a World Health Organization report, July 2003. See also malariavaccine.org and also emvi.org (European mvi).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)