Labor Rights in Iraq Redux

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by skywalker


He's talking about after the war

[Ramo]

You assume they'd be employed (and not just scabs would be hired).

That's what unions and strikes are for! Making sure workers get jobs.

Second, strikers who disrupt the business have much more of a bad impact on infrastructure building.

Oh come on, you can do better than that. Sounds like something Giannie would say. Care to back this up?

Unemployment doesn't lead to terrorism in other states.

In Palestine it does. And there aren't many other states where there's a foreign occupying power that's pissing off most of the population.

The ideology of radical Islam leads to it.

Except a lot of the terrorists in Iraq - probably by a large margin the majority of terrorists in Iraq are not Islamists. They're secular Arab Nationalists. And certainly, the vast majority of attacks on the infrastructure are perpretrated by Arab Nationalists.

Btw, many rich, wealthy people turned to terrorism as well (if you forgot who's on top of Al Qued

Yes, rich people turn to terrorism, but they recruit from the poor. If secular society isn't able to care for the people, they turn to extremists who are. If the PLO isn't able to give people jobs and Hamas gives them food, what do you think would happen?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious

you use the rant smiley when I point out the fundamental premise of your argument is wrong?

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's what unions and strikes are for! Making sure workers get jobs.

So they can sit out for months while the companies hire strike-breakers who are willing to only have 1500 employees?

Care to back this up?

If no one is working because they are on strike because of privatization (which isn't going away), no one is going to be able to build anything. It's just seems obvious.

Except a lot of the terrorists in Iraq - probably by a large margin the majority of terrorists in Iraq are not Islamists. They're secular Arab Nationalists. And certainly, the vast majority of attacks on the infrastructure are perpretrated by Arab Nationalists.

I call bull again. A large margin are not Islamists? Please. Yes, you have former Saddam loyalists, but after taking their man again, their power wanes greatly. The Islamists power goes nowhere with Saddam in jail.

If the PLO isn't able to give people jobs and Hamas gives them food, what do you think would happen?

So how does taking food from Hamas lead to killing yourself for them?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by skywalker


you use the rant smiley when I point out the fundamental premise of your argument is wrong?

What argument?

[Ramo]

So they can sit out for months while the companies hire strike-breakers who are willing to only have 1500 employees?

You're not very familiar with labor history, are you? If this were necessarily true, how exactly have the many, many, many examples of general strikes been successful? Unions and strikes exist for a reason - they have often been very successful - at very, very large scales, even in periods with high unemployement. The American Great Upheaval of 1877 comes to mind.

If no one is working because they are on strike because of privatization (which isn't going away), no one is going to be able to build anything. It's just seems obvious.

1. If no one is working, that means there's a successful general strike with no scabs. Which you said won't happen.
2. If they can hire strike-breakers, the infrastructure projects will continue unabated. So no problem, right.

I call bull again. A large margin are not Islamists? Please. Yes, you have former Saddam loyalists, but after taking their man again, their power wanes greatly. The Islamists power goes nowhere with Saddam in jail.

They're not simply "Saddam-loyalists," they're in general Arab nationalists. They're fighting to prevent Shia rule (which BTW is another reason unions are important - building solidarity between Sunni and Shia). Saddam has often been seperated from their cause. Look at, for instance, Falluja:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1071272706076&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

So how does taking food from Hamas lead to killing yourself for them?

The people are more willing to side with Hamas' cause since they actually give a **** about their welfare as opposed to the PLO. When you're disenfranchised and Hamas is willing to help you out, that's the first step in your recruitment.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious


What argument?

The one about Hitler.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by skywalker
The one about Hitler.

That wasn't an argument. It was just me being stupid.