Americans got screwed

[rtwngAvngr]

Stop with the "context" shit RWA. You, more than anyone else on this board, have no idea what it means.

There is no valid argument justifing having given WMD's to Saddam. And absolutely no argument justifying giving him the technology to produce them on his own. None of his rivals had them, so it makes no sense to have given them to him. There is no "context" argument here at all RWA.

Wade.

Context matters and I do know what it means. There is a context argument. I made it. I suggest you get over it. Smell the coffee wade; you're almost always wrong.

 

[wade]

Context matters and I do know what it means. There is a context argument. I made it. I suggest you get over it. Smell the coffee wade; you're almost always wrong.

I this thread, you are clearly not using the word correctly.

How does "context" justify the Reagan/Bush adminstration giving Saddam WMD's AND the capacity to produce them himself?

I think you have the word "context" confused with the words "expediancy" and "stupidity".

Wade.

 

[padisha emperor]

Jim, I beieve that Ali posted a message with the list of the enterprises who sales or sold to Iraq. With letters A; B, C, K..........for the type of weapons.France had 8 enterprises...USA 24...and all the kind of weapons or technologies.....

 

[Comrade]

There is no valid argument justifing having given WMD's to Saddam.

We didn't 'give' Saddam gas or any other material or expert help in making the gas we know he eventually used on his own among others.

What he obtained was anthrax samples from a then-civilian science facility for making vaccines. Not super special anthrax, just the dead Camel kind of anthrax. They never used it.

And there is also no valid argument for giving OBL and his group Stinger missiles today, of course. But there was a reason for this, decades ago.

And absolutely no argument justifying giving him the technology to produce them on his own. None of his rivals had them, so it makes no sense to have given them to him. There is no "context" argument here at all RWA.

Wrong. Iran had gas WMD's, and so did Isreal. REGARDLESS, the USA DID NOT set up shop for Saddam to make chemical weapons. They never needed us for making chemical weapons.

 

[wade]

Hmmm... I think the evidence is clear...

USA CENSORSED IRAQ REPORT
According to the German Press Agency DPA, the Iraq weapons dossier report (from which the above information came), was reduced from a 12,000 page report to only 3,000 pages. Non-permanent members of the UN Security Council received only a truncated version of the weapons dossier. Data concerning foreign suppliers of Iraq are missing.

All information about the supplies from - and the support of - foreign companies, research labs and governments from the mid-1970's on, related to Iraqi arms programs, have been deleted.

The permanent Council members, the USA, Russia, China, France and Great Britain are aware of this censorship.

From information gathered from UN diplomats censorship was agreed on primarily upon the urging of the US. Among the constant members of the Security Council it was the USA that stood out by giving the strongest support to Saddam Hussain's regime by arming it with the means of mass destruction.

The report makes clear how strongly the Reagan and the first Bush administrations supported the arming of Iraq, from 1980 up to the Gulf conflict of 1990-91.
http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/weapons.html

However the information we do have at least implies very clearly that the constituants for Saddams chemical weapons were indeed purchased from the USA and with the Reagan/Bush Administration's approval:

CounterPunch - October 10, 2002

Helping Iraq Kill with Chemical Weapons:The Relevance of Yesterday's US Hypocrisy Today - by ELSON E. BOLES

The US not only helped arm Iraq with military equipment right up to the time of the Kuwait invasion in 1989, as did Germany, Britain, France, Russia and others, but also sold and helped Iraq to integrate chemical weapons into their US-provided battle plans while fighting Iran between 1985-1988.

A PBS Frontline episode, "The Arming of Iraq" (1990) detailed much of the conventional and so-called "dual-use" weapons sold to Iraq. The public learned from other sources that at least since mid-1980s the US was selling chemical and biological material for weapons to Iraq and orchestrating private sales. These sales began soon after current Secretary of State, Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Baghdad in 1985 and met with Saddam Hussein as a private businessman on behalf of the Reagan administration. In the last major battle of the Iran-Iraq war, some 65,000 Iranians were killed, many by gas.

Investigators turned up new scandals, including the involvement of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL), the giant Italian bank, and many of the very same circles of arms suppliers, covert operators, and policy makers in and out of the US government and active in those roles for years. The National Security Council, CIA and other US agencies tacitly approved about $4 billion in unreported loans to Iraq through the giant Italian bank's Atlanta branch. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the US government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

However, the early reports on BNL's activities and the startling revelations that the US government astonishingly knew that BNL was financing billions of dollars of purchases illegally, were rather comical in view of later revelations regarding who was involved. US government officials didn't just know and approve, but some were employees at BNL directly or indirectly. It was Representative Henry Gonzalez (D-Texas) who relentlessly brought key information into the Congressional Record (despite stern warnings by the State Department to stop his personal investigation for the sake of "national security").

Gonzalas revealed, for example, that Brent Scowcroft served as Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates until being appointed as National Security Advisor to President Bush in January 1989. As Gonzalez reported, "Until October 4,1990, Mr. Scowcroft owned stock in approximately 40 U.S. corporations, many of which were doing busies in Iraq." Scowcroft's stock included that in Halliburton Oil, also doing business in Iraq at the time, which had also been run by current Vice President Dick Cheney for a time. Recall that this year President George Bush Sr. faced suspicion of insider trading in relation to selling his stock in Halliburton. The companies that Scowcroft owned stock in, according to Gonzalez, "received more than one out of every eight U.S. export licenses for exports to Iraq. Several of the companies were also clients of Kissinger Associates while Mr. Scowcroft was Vice Chairman of that firm." Thus, Kissinger Associates helped US companies obtain US export licenses with BNL-finance so Iraq could purchase US weapons and materials for its weapons programs.
...
By late 1992, the sales of chemical and biological weapons were revealed. Congressional Records of Senator Riegle's investigation of the Gulf War Syndrome show that that the US government approved sales of large varieties of chemical and biological materials to Iraq. These included anthrax, components of mustard gas, botulinum toxins (which causes paralysis of the muscles involving swallowing and is often fatal), histoplasma capsulatum (which may cause pneumonia, enlargement of the liver and spleen, anemia, acute inflammatory skin disease marked by tender red nodules), and a host of other nasty chemicals materials.
http://www.counterpunch.org/boles1010.html

Rumsfeld 'offered help to Saddam' - Declassified papers leave the White House hawk exposed over his role during the Iran-Iraq war
US support for Baghdad during the Iran-Iraq war as a bulwark against Shi'ite militancy has been well known for some time, but using declassified government documents, the Washington Post provided new details yesterday about Mr Rumsfeld's role, and about the extent of the Reagan administration's knowledge of the use of chemical weapons.

The details will embarrass Mr Rumsfeld, who as defence secretary in the Bush administration is one of the leading hawks on Iraq, frequently denouncing it for its past use of such weapons.

The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs sold by a CIA front organisation in Chile, the report says.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html

More sources documenting US WMD program support to Saddam can be found here: http://www.betterworldlinks.org/book60l.htm

It is pretty damn clear that we gave Saddam a lot more than just non-weapons grade Anthrax.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yep. And we had the balls to take him out when he got out of control, unlike the euroweenies you love to slobber on. Get it?

 

[wade]

What I get is that you are a hypocrit who does not care about right and wrong.

Again - there was no excuse for the Reagan/Bush Adminstration having given WMD capacity to Saddam.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

What I get is that you are a hypocrit who does not care about right and wrong.

Again - there was no excuse for the Reagan/Bush Adminstration having given WMD capacity to Saddam.

Wade.

What you "get" is completely wrong. That's not suprising.

Your childish "you did it too" argument is trumped when one asks, "ok, who was was finally willing to pull the plug on saddam's regime?" and the answer comes back "the us and the coalition of the willing."

Thanks for playing, you've lost again.