Iraq Wants the US Out - Our New Saigon Moment

[High_Gravity]

Tell ya what High_Gravity. I am going to Mumbai in May 2011. If you are up for it..we can meet for a couple of brews in Leopold's Cafe..

Mumbai Hangouts - 6 Popular Mumbai Hangouts with Cheap Beer

Lemme know. Just don't get to belligerent when you get drunk...

Do they sell malt liquor in Mumbai?

Dunno..this is going to be a first for me. Never been to India. Check out the link..

And my girlfriend is getting a little nutty over it. No wimmen allowed..

Well I hear Mumbai is a good place but becareful they did have those terrorist attacks there years ago.

 

[Sallow]

Do they sell malt liquor in Mumbai?

Dunno..this is going to be a first for me. Never been to India. Check out the link..

And my girlfriend is getting a little nutty over it. No wimmen allowed..

Well I hear Mumbai is a good place but becareful they did have those terrorist attacks there years ago.

Yep. At the Taj Mahal Hotel. My Girlfriend stayed there a while back. It's supposed to be the most beautiful in India.

Real shame.

 

[BlindBoo]

Saddam was No saint by any means.

But he lived in a tough neighborhood and these people were out to kill him and topple his government.

He just responded using weapons and money supplied by the U.S.

btw We didn't say jack when he gassed the Iranians.

Saddam invaded Iran. Iran was not out to kill him.

By the time it became widely known he was using gas against Iranian troops he was being supplied by many compainies in the West thanks to Ronnie Raygun. In fact Americans can say "And I helped"

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

On December 19-20, 1983, Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy — none other than Donald Rumsfeld — to Baghdad with a hand-written offer of a resumption of diplomatic relations, which had been severed during the 1967 Arab-Israel war. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld was again in Baghdad.

On that same day, the UPI wire service reported from the UN: "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers ... a team of UN experts has concluded ... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, US presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz."

......

According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

But that doesn't mean Libertarians supported either Saddam or Raygun! We didn't.

Your link contained not one meniton of the USA supplying or building chemical weapons for Iraq, at best the article states Rumsfeld held meetings with Iraqi's the same day they gassed Iranians.

Are you stating Rumsfeld passed gas?

From the link you complained about and obviously didn't read.

"A 1994 US Senate report revealed that US companies were licenced by the commerce department to export a "witch's brew" of biological and chemical materials, including bacillus anthracis (which causes anthrax) and clostridium botulinum (the source of botulism). The American Type Culture Collection made 70 shipments of the anthrax bug and other pathogenic agents.

The report also noted that US exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare facilities and chemical warhead filling equipment. US firms supplied advanced and specialised computers, lasers, testing and analysing equipment. Among the better-known companies were Hewlett Packard, Unisys, Data General and Honeywell."

 

[mdn2000]

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

You pile up questions faster than anyone can answer them, nice tactic, how about you step up and address some of the shit you through around.

Lets start by seeing if you can name Iran's beefs, no link please, your informed on the subject so just tell us what you know.

Go through the thread.

No, name the beefs, go back and quote yourself, its that simple, if you know what you speak of than its easily at the tip of your tongue, go ahead and post.

What is Iran's beef. You said it, I dont see it pointed out, you could easily provide a simplton one sentence answer, likely that is all you did in the first place, so go ahead, I wont go back in the thread to attempt and make sense of all your propaganda and rants.

You can either re-state if you already stated the beef or you can act like you really dont know. Either way, you serve my purpose, you refusal here is seen by a failure if anyone reads my post, I know casual readers of post will not take the time to dig your up your one comment in how many posts, people will simply see that I challenged Sallow and Sallow deflected and was unable to answer.

My point is when challenged, Sallow is hard pressed to provide an answer thus Sallow attacks the user and deflects from the topic.

 

[mdn2000]

Saddam invaded Iran. Iran was not out to kill him.

By the time it became widely known he was using gas against Iranian troops he was being supplied by many compainies in the West thanks to Ronnie Raygun. In fact Americans can say "And I helped"

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

On December 19-20, 1983, Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy — none other than Donald Rumsfeld — to Baghdad with a hand-written offer of a resumption of diplomatic relations, which had been severed during the 1967 Arab-Israel war. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld was again in Baghdad.

On that same day, the UPI wire service reported from the UN: "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers ... a team of UN experts has concluded ... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, US presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz."

......

According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

But that doesn't mean Libertarians supported either Saddam or Raygun! We didn't.

Your link contained not one meniton of the USA supplying or building chemical weapons for Iraq, at best the article states Rumsfeld held meetings with Iraqi's the same day they gassed Iranians.

Are you stating Rumsfeld passed gas?

From the link you complained about and obviously didn't read.

"A 1994 US Senate report revealed that US companies were licenced by the commerce department to export a "witch's brew" of biological and chemical materials, including bacillus anthracis (which causes anthrax) and clostridium botulinum (the source of botulism). The American Type Culture Collection made 70 shipments of the anthrax bug and other pathogenic agents.

The report also noted that US exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare facilities and chemical warhead filling equipment. US firms supplied advanced and specialised computers, lasers, testing and analysing equipment. Among the better-known companies were Hewlett Packard, Unisys, Data General and Honeywell."

And if I take a hour I will show how the "witch's brew" was far from a chemical weapon, how it was France, Germany, and Italy that provided what you contend in this article. The report briefly at best addresses this and when I get back to this I will go through the report piece by piece. I read the report and will get back to it, sorry no time, I off to the store to get some food.

 

[mdn2000]

Saddam invaded Iran. Iran was not out to kill him.

By the time it became widely known he was using gas against Iranian troops he was being supplied by many compainies in the West thanks to Ronnie Raygun. In fact Americans can say "And I helped"

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

On December 19-20, 1983, Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy — none other than Donald Rumsfeld — to Baghdad with a hand-written offer of a resumption of diplomatic relations, which had been severed during the 1967 Arab-Israel war. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld was again in Baghdad.

On that same day, the UPI wire service reported from the UN: "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers ... a team of UN experts has concluded ... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, US presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz."

......

According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

But that doesn't mean Libertarians supported either Saddam or Raygun! We didn't.

Your link contained not one meniton of the USA supplying or building chemical weapons for Iraq, at best the article states Rumsfeld held meetings with Iraqi's the same day they gassed Iranians.

Are you stating Rumsfeld passed gas?

From the link you complained about and obviously didn't read.

"A 1994 US Senate report revealed that US companies were licenced by the commerce department to export a "witch's brew" of biological and chemical materials, including bacillus anthracis (which causes anthrax) and clostridium botulinum (the source of botulism). The American Type Culture Collection made 70 shipments of the anthrax bug and other pathogenic agents.

The report also noted that US exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare facilities and chemical warhead filling equipment. US firms supplied advanced and specialised computers, lasers, testing and analysing equipment. Among the better-known companies were Hewlett Packard, Unisys, Data General and Honeywell."

Quick note, you linked to an article, I took that a step further and read from the actual report, which do you wish to discuss, the article or the report.

 

[mdn2000]

First the article is a litany of ugly propaganda not even presenting facts, just heresy. The article references other articles from the New York times and Los Angeles times. One thing comes to mind is the NY Times article written by one of those journalist that was fired. Not relevant but thrown in I ad my own doubt and propaganda.

According to Norm, Iraq went to war with Iran at the command of Jimmy Carter in 1980. The author continues then to bring up the names of Haig, Rumsfeld, Reagan, and Bush. Where is the mention of Carter, if the author is correct in his propaganda than he must state Carter yet the author is attempting to blame the entire actions of Saddam Hussein on Conservatives. This is the kind of partisan crap that educates the ignorant and the fools. This one paragraph is entirely false, of course Chomsky's linguistic experts will correct me and point out that is not the intent.

Anyhow, the author is all over the place with quotes and accusations. I have easily discredited the author in about two minutes. The rest of the article will easily be proven false outside of checking the authors sources.

Blindboo, if you would narrow down what you think is the strongest point made in the article I will gladly take the time to see how well I can decimate the point.

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

Washington immediately began to "cast about for ways to undermine or overthrow the Iranian revolution, or make up for the loss of the Shah. Hussein's regime put up its hand. On September 22, 1980, Iraq launched an invasion of Iran. Throughout the bloody eight-year-long war — which cost at least 1 million lives — Washington backed Iraq

 

[American Horse]

BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.

Mr. Maliki spoke with The Wall Street Journal in a two-hour interview, his first since Iraq ended nine months of stalemate and seated a new government after an inconclusive election, allowing Mr. Maliki to begin a second term as premier.

A majority of Iraqis—and some Iraqi and U.S. officials—have assumed the U.S. troop presence would eventually be extended, especially after the long government limbo. But Mr. Maliki was eager to draw a line in his most definitive remarks on the subject. "The last American soldier will leave Iraq" as agreed, he said, speaking at his office in a leafy section of Baghdad's protected Green Zone. "This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed."
<SNIP>
Say hello to Iran.
<SNIP>

"This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed."

" - He also said that even as Iraq bids farewell to U.S. troops, he wouldn't allow his nation to be pulled into alignment with Iran, despite voices supporting such an alliance within his government.

"For Iraq to be dragged into an axis or an orbit, that's impossible, and we reject it whether this comes from Iran, Turkey or the Arabs," he said.

He added that a kind of "paranoia" about a Tehran-Baghdad alliance in the U.S. is matched by a fear in Iran about U.S. influence: "An Iranian official visited me in the past and told me, 'I thought the Americans were standing at the door of your office,' " he said.

In an interview in Washington, Vice President Joe Biden also said Iran had failed to buy influence during the election or to co-opt Mr. Maliki, who was among the members of the current Iraqi government who briefly took refuge in Iran during the reign of Saddam Hussein. - "

 

[mdn2000]

Saddam invaded Iran. Iran was not out to kill him.

By the time it became widely known he was using gas against Iranian troops he was being supplied by many compainies in the West thanks to Ronnie Raygun. In fact Americans can say "And I helped"

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

On December 19-20, 1983, Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy — none other than Donald Rumsfeld — to Baghdad with a hand-written offer of a resumption of diplomatic relations, which had been severed during the 1967 Arab-Israel war. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld was again in Baghdad.

On that same day, the UPI wire service reported from the UN: "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers ... a team of UN experts has concluded ... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, US presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz."

......

According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

But that doesn't mean Libertarians supported either Saddam or Raygun! We didn't.

Your link contained not one meniton of the USA supplying or building chemical weapons for Iraq, at best the article states Rumsfeld held meetings with Iraqi's the same day they gassed Iranians.

Are you stating Rumsfeld passed gas?

From the link you complained about and obviously didn't read.

"A 1994 US Senate report revealed that US companies were licenced by the commerce department to export a "witch's brew" of biological and chemical materials, including bacillus anthracis (which causes anthrax) and clostridium botulinum (the source of botulism). The American Type Culture Collection made 70 shipments of the anthrax bug and other pathogenic agents.

The report also noted that US exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare facilities and chemical warhead filling equipment. US firms supplied advanced and specialised computers, lasers, testing and analysing equipment. Among the better-known companies were Hewlett Packard, Unisys, Data General and Honeywell."

I read the article, a lot of bull shit to address and to distract, so many tiny details. First, why call it just a, "1994 US Senate report". There is no reference to what report they speak. The only report I find searching on that year, the senate, Iraq, and chemical weapons is the "Riegle Report". In no way are we a 100% sure this is what Norm Dixon is referencing, Norm Dixon does not list sources, just propaganda.

Did you read the Riegle Report, is this what you wish to discuss, which page, you are aware that Democrat Senator Boxer and Democrat Senator Kerry participated in the report. Most likely why both Senators stated Saddam had WMD's and that was justification for the 2nd Gulf War.

So if its the Riegle report you wish to discuss that is fine with me. The article itself is not source, just propaganda.

How about this as the source, I am not sure but this may not be the full report. The report is proving Saddam's use of Chemical and Biological weapons against the US troops fighting the first gulf war. I think this is why the report is vaguely referred to only as the 1994 senate report.

 

[mdn2000]

Refugees, maybe you could explain why Iraqis should be relocated clearly to the other side of the globe?

Because we invaded their country, knocked over their government, destoryed their infrastructure, disbanded their military and caused civil unrest...for a reason that amounts to a war crime.

That's why.

Because we liberated their country, gave them government instead of dictatorship, are rebuilding infrastructure that never existed, disbanded the tyrants in the military, and restored much civility across the country.

The state you describe never existed in Iraq unless you describe rule under Saddam. All you prove is there is a religious minority that has yet to be defeated.

The people can be refugees in the Arab world easier then adjusting to life here. Still it would be nice to know exactly who we speak of, the conditions they lived in before we restored Liberty, and the conditions after. I would stay out of Iraq if I could, I cannot blame the people there. Still its there land. They should join us and fight for it. But than again, you pretty much state Obama is running and leaving behind a mess, why stay. From now on Iraq is all Obama. Any refugee problem must be addressed by Obama.

Because we liberated a country is not reason to accept refugees, they have a home, a land, a country. If they are unwilling to fight we do not need them, if they are unable to fight and Iraq cannot protect them Obama is ignoring a problem that is Obama's problem.

 

[trobinett]

Black As Coal:

BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.

I just love these dick heads, they can handle it, UNTIL, they CAN'T handle it, then its dial 911, and hope the United States sends the "Red, White, and Blue. Well, FUCK you, were tired of bailing your sorry ass's out of trouble. Get use to living on the edge, and if your family is dragged out of your house at 2:00 AM in the morning and your daughter is raped, well, I thought you could handle that.

Am I wrong?

.

 

[mudwhistle]

Black As Coal:

BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.

I just love these dick heads, they can handle it, UNTIL, they CAN'T handle it, then its dial 911, and hope the United States sends the "Red, White, and Blue. Well, FUCK you, were tired of bailing your sorry ass's out of trouble. Get use to living on the edge, and if your family is dragged out of your house at 2:00 AM in the morning and your daughter is raped, well, I thought you could handle that.

Am I wrong?

.

Muslims in Iraq are killing Christians by the bushel full and they don't want any U.S. interference. This is happening everywhere in the Middle East.

I figure it's time to leave. If they act up again...nuke the fuckers.

 

[MOOE]

I think you can´t change the culture there with our "great western style". I feel sorry for the american soldiers and soldiers from other countries still falling for nothing in this illegal war.

 

[hipeter924]

Refugees, maybe you could explain why Iraqis should be relocated clearly to the other side of the globe?

Because we invaded their country, knocked over their government, destoryed their infrastructure, disbanded their military and caused civil unrest...for a reason that amounts to a war crime.

That's why.

Because we liberated their country, gave them government instead of dictatorship, are rebuilding infrastructure that never existed, disbanded the tyrants in the military, and restored much civility across the country.

The state you describe never existed in Iraq unless you describe rule under Saddam. All you prove is there is a religious minority that has yet to be defeated.

The people can be refugees in the Arab world easier then adjusting to life here. Still it would be nice to know exactly who we speak of, the conditions they lived in before we restored Liberty, and the conditions after. I would stay out of Iraq if I could, I cannot blame the people there. Still its there land. They should join us and fight for it. But than again, you pretty much state Obama is running and leaving behind a mess, why stay. From now on Iraq is all Obama. Any refugee problem must be addressed by Obama.

Because we liberated a country is not reason to accept refugees, they have a home, a land, a country. If they are unwilling to fight we do not need them, if they are unable to fight and Iraq cannot protect them Obama is ignoring a problem that is Obama's problem.

That is true but many leftists support Saddam Hussein and the genocide of the Kurds, regardless of the way they see it and the chaos that resulted and continues, it is far better than what would have been had Saddam and his cronies remained in power.

They ignore how much people suffered under Saddam's rule (including state sponsored torture on random citizens and gangs of Saddam's street thugs), shrug it off and blame the USA for everything, the extent to which leftists worship Saddam Hussein as some kind of god or image of American 'reckless military action' is so ludicrous it makes left wing support of Communist dictators look like a casual business arrangement.

That Iraqi's 'hate the US, and wanted Saddam to remain in power' is bizare as both Kurds, and many Shiite's and Sunni's are thankful that Saddam Hussein was removed from power, and would have 'suffered' the 'occupation' a million times over than still have him leading the country.

But that hardly matters, if everyone hates you and they want your head, why give a shit what they think, if they want the US to care about ethics so much the Muslim radicals can start with ending suicide bombings of their own mosques and places of worship, and leftists can stop holding hands with terrorists and demonizing Israel, and at last see their own hypocrisy of claiming they want peace and supporting war against Jews and the US.

 

[FRIKSHUN]

Did you know “listen” and “silent” use the same letters?

Do you know that the words “race car” spelled backwards still spells
“race car”?

And that “eat” is the only word that if you take the first letter and
move it to the last, it spells its past
tense “ate”?

And have you noticed that if you rearrange the letters in “illegal
immigrants,” and add just a few more
letters, it spells: “Go home you free-loading, benefit-grabbing,
resource-sucking, baby-making,
non-English-speaking jackasses and take those other hairy-faced,
rag-headed, sandal-wearing, bomb-making,
camel-riding, goat-loving, raggedy-ass bastards with you.”

How weird is that?