TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Court: Execute Saddam Within 30 Days
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo your argument is out of all the countries that helped Iraq fight Iran that the U.S. somehow bears all the responsibility for the attrocities Saddam committed fighting that war,

Funny, I didn't get that from her at all. Rather, that we cannot necessarily wipe our hands clean as if we played no role in this Middle East conflict.

quote:

(that war btw was one of the most inneffective and strategically blunderous in the history of warfare on both sides not b/c of us) but when it comes to taking him down effectively by ourselves for invading and attacking three other countries and gassing his own people and in the hopes of trying to make the Middle East a better place in the 21st century, we're hypocrites? whatev dude.

Then perhaps we should have reconsidered playing both sides of the fence then? Iran-Contra seemingly comes to mind, perhaps not yours, but to most.

And yes, we are hypocrites in the sense that avid Bush-supporters have a propensity to examine Iraq history as if it existed only in the context of the past 6 years - they have WMDs, they have al-Qaeda connections, they bad, we good, they were always eeeevil, we were always good, let's attack. A bit of history on the context of how Saddam got into power, how WE helped maintain him in power over the years (some with covert CIA intervention, I might add), how we looked the other way when he gassed his people and the Iranians (with chemicals supplied by us - real nice), only to suddenly become so gosh darn eeeevil in the most recent years.

Did the f$cker deserve what he got? Hell yes he did, but we must not discount our existence in the part of his rise and maintenance of power either.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Did the f$cker deserve what he got? Hell yes he did, but we must not discount our existence in the part of his rise and maintenance of power either.

I try to be as even handed here as I can, I'd dearly love to beat on the USSR for selling about $30,000million worth of arms over the course of the conflict but theyre no longer, so thats beating a long dead horse. China and contemporary Russia still have a lot to answer for the current condition of the middle east in their arms sales and elsewhere around the globe.
(So does France and Germany for that matter...)
This is something the UN seems to be ill-equipped to cope with it seems, the almighty dollar gets in the way of peace for the US, Russia and China who constantly veto things because it will cost them sales of armaments and other various things.

What the US has to answer for is its pragmatic ideology.
Rest of the world dosn't really expect either China or Russia to behave in a humanitarian fashion, they never have and dont forseably look to go in for any kind of moral highground when it comes to making a dollar. The US however, expouses freedoms and humanitarianism amongst the worlds people, this gets discarded though when it comes to a buck by being involved in some kind of war to keep the economy on the 'up' or getting a dirty job done without having to get their politicians own hands covered in blood and potentially filthy activities which would be lethal to their careers.
Basically, if you want the world to believe you hold some kind of moral superiority over the rest of us, its time you started behaving that way and lead by example and not just lip service to those principles.

The CIA flights out of western europe full of 'suspect persons', torture of suspects in foreign countries where its allowed, detaining people both in the US and foreign nationals for extremely long periods without trial and bringing about the most massive and draconian restrictions on freedom of your own people in the name of 'state security'.
These things are not something which is done by a democratic republic which was founded on freedom , these are things which dictators and warlords do in countries with civil rights abuses.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith I try to be as even handed here as I can, I'd dearly love to beat on the USSR for selling about $30,000million worth of arms over the course of the conflict but theyre no longer, so thats beating a long dead horse. China and contemporary Russia still have a lot to answer for the current condition of the middle east in their arms sales and elsewhere around the globe. (So does France and Germany for that matter...) This is something the UN seems to be ill-equipped to cope with it seems, the almighty dollar gets in the way of peace for the US, Russia and China who constantly veto things because it will cost them sales of armaments and other various things.

Been there, done that:

My thread titled How Western greed created Hussein's Iraq:

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 Think the US is 100% at fault think again. Recently there has been an article in the Village Voice about an arms dealer who had connections with both American and Iraqi intelligence. This man prompted me to look into his past. That past is intertwined with not just the US but also other Western nations. "The revelations and allegations made by Mr. Soghanalian are, and must be, extremely disturbing to every American. They are disturbing to Mr. Soghanalian. He gives a first-hand description of official and unofficial American involvement in the enormous buildup of arms to Saddam Hussein. Much of this buildup occurred after the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988. He gives chilling accounts of the cozy relationship among high past and present U.S. Government officials who permitted, and in some cases, actually assisted his sales of many of the lethal weapons Saddam Hussein is now using to bring death to American military personnel and civilians throughout the Middle East region." UNITED STATES ARMS SALES TO IRAQ: EXCERPTS OF RECENT CBS `60 MINUTES' BROADCAST (House of Representatives - January 31, 1991) "German companies sold Saddam poison gas technology, and France, not only approved the sale of artillery to Iraq, but [also sold] armed helicopters and antiaircraft missile systems." Entered into the Congressional Record(site b) was a more complete transcript than the one above on January 31, 1991 and is from an episode of 60 Minutes implicating Western nations in the middle of the First Gulf War. Even stranger still is how Argentina figures into the Iraqi development of the Condor missle which is based on the Pershing: "France, however, could not keep up with the Germans when it came to the really dangerous stuff. German firms sold an entire poison-gas industry, complete with chemical ingredients and the machinery to make them. The famous Messerschmidt (sic) firm, still in business under the name MBB, became Saddam Hussein's main missile technology supplier. What MBB learned from the Pentagon about the US Pershing 2 missile it could pass along to Saddam for his new Condor 2 missile, which had the same range and configuration. Other German firms gave Saddam vital help in the difficult process of making nuclear weapons material." How Western greed created Hussein's Iraq By Gary Milhollin, a review of (12-22-91) THE DEATH LOBBY How the West Armed Iraq By Kenneth Timmerman. "To develop an even longer-range missile, Iraq turned to the German armament giant Messerschmitt, now doing business as MBB (Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm). MBB supplied the know-how for a 600-mile nuclear-capable missile called the Condor II that Iraq tried to develop jointly with Egypt and Argentina before the war. The missile's range and configuration are similar to that of the American Pershing, which MBB worked on at the Pentagon. The same MBB employee who worked on the Pershing at the Pentagon also represented MBB in Iraq for the Condor, and thus was in a position tn transfer American missile technology to Baghdad." Building Saddam Hussein's Bomb by Gary Milhollin, The New York Times Magazine, March 8, 1992, p. 30. "The performance of this regime in the Middle East has been somewhat problematic. Apparently as a result of US pressure, China has not delivered the M-9 missile to Syria to date, and the Condor project, (involving Argentina, Egypt, and Iraq) seems to have been stopped (although questions remain). However, the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) did not prevent Iraq from upgrading its Scud-B missiles, with technology and assistance provided by signatories such as Germany, Britain, and the US.22 Syrian and Iranian missile programs are growing constantly, and the major suppliers are either powerless or unwilling to intervene. In March 1992, North Korean Scud-C missiles, launchers, and equipment to manufacture these missiles, reached Iran and Syria." Israeli Arms Control Policy: Cautious Realism by Prof. Gerald Steinberg, Appeared in The Journal of Strategic Studies, Summer 1994 *22- Mike Eisenstadt, "The sword of the Arabs: Iraq's Strategic Weapons Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Washington DC 1990; Gary Milhollin, "Building Saddam Hussein's Bomb", New York Times Magazine, March 8, 1992 "SEVENTEEN British companies who supplied Iraq with nuclear, biological, chemical, rocket and conventional weapons technology are to be investigated and could face prosecution following a Sunday Herald investigation" Sunday Herald - 23 February 2003, Revealed: 17 British firms armed Saddam with his weapons, Investigation: By Neil Mackay Home Affairs Editor

Don't let me get started on the Iranian nuclear program as if people believe it just started a few years ago.

Lilith:
You do offer insight and objectivity from the small crowd that appear here from time to time.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo laugh all you want, but you cannot deny he was the only one person on the planet then who could have stopped it.

Thanks for paraphrasing what he said except even more blatantly false and ridiculous.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.