I am SOOOOOOOO sick of hearing Saddam's use of chemical

[Sperk]

weapons when WE sold them to him. The whole country knows this now and still they talk to us like we are stupid. I think John Stewart was right when he said.."It's like they think we're retarded." Why doesn't ANYONE mention that maybe we can stop dictators without going to war by not supplying them with the weapons in the first place! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[skypilot]

1. There's also the fact that...

...it's never been proven conclusively (at least to my knowledge) that it was Saddam that used chemical weapons--if you're talking about the attack on Halabja. There's still debate on whether the chemical weapons used were from the Iraqi side or the Iranian side. It could also have been both and the poor people in Halabja, which is right on the border between Iraq and Iran, got caught in the middle.

[Sperk]

2. facts we don't need no stickin' facts!

Rummy told me so.

[matcom]

6. they were from Iran

blood agent to be exact. the 'agency' knows this full well

[treepig]

13. here's a pertinent link

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Middle_East/gassings.htm

on edit, i've posted this link before, and had it "debunked" by somebody who claimed that the cia only put out this evidence to cover the reagan administration who was looking pretty bad for supply mr. hussein with the gas he "used on his own people."

so there seems to be two options:

1) saddam did NOT gas his own people

2) the cia's mis-information on iraq goes back alot farther than the debacle over the currently missing WsMD.

[zbdent]

3. That could be a Repuke quote, right out of 1989-1990

up until August 2, 1990.

Back when the liberals in Congress and the human rights organizations were begging Bush and Reagan to stop supporting Saddam.

[Solomon]

4. You and I might not be stupid or retarded, but ....

[Loonman]

5. Easy Republican Stumper

Next time some vapid Bush-bot uses the "but he gassed his own people" argument, here's how to shut 'em up.

Ask them where it happened(Halabja)

Ask them when it happened(1988)

Ask them why it happened(Halabja was a strategic goal for both Iraq and Iran, the Kurds just happened to be in the way)

Ask them when it was that Saddam considered the Kurds "his people"(never)

Trust me, they won't know the answers to any of thses.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

7. So that makes it okay?

Because the U.S. sold him weapons, or Saddam didn't consider the Kurds "his" people, it makes gassing them okay? Just wondering at what point chemical warfare is no longer okay.

[skypilot]

9. No one thinks chemical warfare is okay.

Repubs using this talking point about Saddam "gassing his own people" as a justification for going into Iraq (15 years after the fact) and killing even more people is what most of us are tired of.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

10. You're missing the point...

the message is not about the morality of WMD, but the fact that the right-wing has used it as such a rallying cry. By exposing the ignorance of that argument, you take the wind out of their partisan argument.

An anecdote I posted in another thread:

"I recently got into this argument with this repug bozo where I used to work. He attested that the Army found some empty Silkworm missiles that "could", I repeat "could" contain chem weapons. I told him that you can put other things into Silkworms, but the bozo continued to hold to his point. I then fell back to my old standby response, that has become habit here on the boards: "Where did you hear that? Can you give me some evidence in print?" That shut him up."

Is not the WMD that is at issue HERE, it is that some of the people in charge are manipulating sad facts to their own ends. What we need are the facts, we can make our own distinctions.

Foamdad

edit: I meant to respond to #5

[Loonman]

12. Did I say that made it okay?

Jesus Christ.....

:eyes:

[HootieMcBoob]

14. Apparently Reagan and Bush I thought it was OK

They're the ones who supplied the weapons and they're the ones who refused to do anything about it in 1988 when it happened. Democrats in congress did everything they could to get Bush to end his support of Saddam. Republicans went so far as to send Rumsfeld to Baghdad to meet with Saddam and tell him that even though there was a lot of crazy talk in the U.S. about how we hate chemical weapons that he didn't have anything to worry about because he's still our dearest friend.

I for one am sick of having to clean up the messes that these mother fuckers create. People shouldn't be dieing because of their fuck ups.

<edit for clarity>

[CBHagman]

8. And the Reagan administration played both sides in the Iran-Iraq war

Remember the solemn declaration that the U.S. would never trade arms for hostages or negotiate with terrorists? Ask Ollie North defenders how they feel about the Reagan administration's decision to send hundreds of weapons to what's considered one of the "axis of evil."

The media (for example, The Washington Post) did bring up the gas attack on the Kurds in the recent past, hopefully making more than a few Bushites squirm, but the administration (and its GOP toadies) still loves to recite "He gassed his own people."

[salinen]

11. If it is true that chemical weapons were used

then, Saddam Hussein and the United States Government together gassed the Kurds. It should never be stated differently.

[DevilsAdvocate2]

15. Hmmm

Not to be argumentative....okay, maybe to be argumentative :) ... but that's like saying Ford, along with a drunk driver, should be responsible for deaths caused by a traffic accident. Or the bank that lent money so the drunk could buy the car. Plenty of our European allies were provided weapons by us. They haven't used them in such a manner.

[HootieMcBoob]

16. excuse me but

we're talking about chemical weapons here! Do you suppose they thought he was just going to keep them in his garage or was collecting them so that nobody else would be able to use them? Use you head! Your analogy is for shit. When somebody is sold a car they expect it to be used in the way it's intended, that is to drive. It's intended use is for transportation. If a death is caused by an accident it is -- say it with me -- AN ACCIDENT! Chemical weapons are made to kill large numbers of people. Their intended use is to produce mass death.

You have to be pretending right? Aren't you?

[DevilsAdvocate2]

17. My apologies

I should've used a gun rather than a car. We see it in society today. It's not the fault of the person who pulled the trigger, it's the fault of the gun manufacturer who produced a product that, when properly used, kills animals/people. Or so say the people filing the lawsuits. The manufacturers made the guns available, therefore they are to blame.

[skypilot]

19. The thing is...

...gun manufacturers don't make guns and then vilify people for using them. That would be a nasty bit of hypocracy.

[rman]

21. in this case the gun was sold to a known crook,

then the salesman complains about what the crook does with the gun, and goes after him guns blazing. that's hypocritical.

[HootieMcBoob]

22. Guns that are sold in this country are intended to be used

for sport or for personal protection. If the manufacturer or seller knowingly makes the guns available to criminals - known criminals then they should be blamed.

Again, We're talking about weapons of mass destruction being sold to Saddam Hussein! How can anybody support that?

[skypilot]

18. A question.

Excuse my ignorance about this, but have we provided any of our European allies with chemical or biological weapons?

[DevilsAdvocate2]

20. Not sure if we provided them or not

But i know they had them (or their "related-program-activities!) as far back as WW1. We definitely supplied them with nukes.

[nomatrix]

23. For a reader digest version

http://www.deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

International War Crimes Tribunal
United States War Crimes Against Iraq

It will probably make you sick. Worth noting the same players. Very mportant to read this.....


Iran-lraq War and U.S. Strategy


"The Bush administration has never presented any evidence whatsoever for its charges that Iraq used poison gas on its own citizens. Rather it has simply repeated the charges over and over in the press. This event is analyzed in considerable detail in a study published by the Army War College called, Iraqi Power and U.S. Security in the Middle East. The authors of that study conclude that the charges were false but used by the U.S. government to change public opinion toward Iraq. They even go so far as to suggest a conspiracy against Iraq: "The whole episode of seeking to impose sanctions on Iraq for something that it may not have done would be regrettable but not of great concern were this an isolated event. Unfortunately, there are other areas of friction developing between our two countries.''