Saddam's On the Clock
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Monday, January 5, 2026 22:02
VIEWED: 13324
PAGE 14 of 16
So, you're saying it was OK for us to provide intel to Iraq on how to gas Iranians?
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Saddam and his 2 sons were truly evil monsters who killed and tortured 100's of thousands of Iraqis.
After being witness to the events in Iraq since their "Liberation" 3 years ago my opinion is the following :
Iraqis are vile, ignorant, brutal savages who DIDN'T DESERVE the freedom America & England tried in vain to bring to them. They have shown the world that they are more interested in killing themselves and anyone trying to bring democracy to them...in other words...Saddam & his boys WERE PERFECT FOR THESE IRAQI ANIMALS!
Saddam knew how to control them, brutalize them, torture them, and put down insurrections with deadly force.....because there t'aint no other f'ing way!
Bush and Blair have failed miserably in Iraq mainly because we've tried to be nice guys, tried to be politically correct, tried to conduct a war with the approval stamp of the f'ing UN and NY Times & ACLU, etc etc ...Why should a place like Falluja still even exist? Gorram rutting insurgent slaughterhouse city that hung Americans from a bridge should have been leveled down to sand..same with the whole Sunni triangle....but nooooo...we got this Vietnam disease which makes America & the West afraid to WIN anything...no we have appease the whole world...the same whole world that hates & is jealous of America, and roots for our demise.
So I say so long Saddam.....yeah you were a vile monster, but NO ONE knew Iraq like you sir!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Iraqis are vile, ignorant, brutal savages who DIDN'T DESERVE the freedom America & England tried in vain to bring to them. They have shown the world that they are more interested in killing themselves and anyone trying to bring democracy to them...in other words...Saddam & his boys WERE PERFECT FOR THESE IRAQI ANIMALS!
Bush and Blair have failed miserably in Iraq mainly because we've tried to be nice guys, tried to be politically correct, tried to conduct a war with the approval stamp of the f'ing UN and NY Times & ACLU, etc etc ..."
-------------------------------------------
WOW. I didn't know people like this existed anywhere but in cartoons.
I wouldn't know where to start on this one. Maybe rather than try to be all pacifist and politically correct and engage in civil debate we should just zap the mind clean so there's nothing left, and start over.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer, FYI:
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.
Billions of dollars worth of raw materials, machinery and equipment, missile technology and other "dual-use" items were also supplied by West German, French, Italian, British, Swiss and Austrian corporations, with the approval of their governments (German firms even sold Iraq entire factories capable of mass-producing poison gas). Much of this was purchased with funds freed by the US CCC credits.
The destination of much of this equipment was Saad 16, near Mosul in northern Iraq. Western intelligence agencies had long known that the sprawling complex was Iraq's main ballistic missile development centre.
Blum reported that Washington was fully aware of the likely use of this material. In 1992, a US Senate committee learned that the commerce department had deleted references to military end-use from information it sent to Congress about 68 export licences, worth more than $1 billion.
www.counterpunch.org/dixon06172004.html
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So, you're saying it was OK for us to provide intel to Iraq on how to gas Iranians?
Obviously not, since I didn't say that. But let's unload your question a bit.
The US provided Iraq intelligence on Iranian military dispositions. It didn't "provide intel...on how to gas the Iranians". The Iraqis decided to do that on their own - using Russian planes and guns and German-developed gas, BTW.
Still not sure how this applies to Al-Anfar.
---------------------------------------------
So far the Al-Anfar discussion has run like this, leaving out the attempts to sidetrack:
"American 'copters were used to gas Halajaba."
Nope. Russian or French jets.
"But...American chemical weapons were used on Halajaba"
Nope. Made in Iraq with German help.
"But...American chemicals were used to make those weapons."
Nope. No proof that they were used.
"But...but, America provided bio reactor vessels that could have been used to make biological weapons."
Nope. First, there's no evidence of that, and second, no biological weapons were used in Al-Anfar.
"But...Iraq got American personal computers."
So? I use mine for email.
"But...America didn't punish Iraq for the Al-Anfar campaign."
Neither did anyone else, and we did eventually punish them in 2003.
"But...but...but...that was illegal then."
Depends on who you ask.
"No! America's got to be the only villian behind Al-Anfar. I KNOW! They let air flow into Iraq, and the Iraqi pilots breathed it when they flew their Russian jets to drop their Iraqi bombs full of German developed gas on the Kurds. They're EVIL, EVIL I TELL YOU!!!"
At this point I reiterate my claim that the Halajaba attack and the entire Al-Anfar campaign are down to Saddam Hussein. It's his responsibility. He is the prime mover behind it. In hindsight, it probably would have preferable if we'd tried and hanged him in 1988, but predicting the future is difficult at best.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Okay, err we have reports coming in that brown people aren't really people. Erm, yes a source known only as ShinyEd has reiterated the 19th century position that some people are genetically inferior and need a firm hand to bring them in line, like one may do with a dog. Well obviously someone wouldn't treat a dog that way, dogs cost money and they all loyal and fuzzy, duh.
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Iraqis are vile, ignorant, brutal savages who DIDN'T DESERVE the freedom America & England tried in vain to bring to them. They have shown the world that they are more interested in killing themselves and anyone trying to bring democracy to them...in other words...Saddam & his boys WERE PERFECT FOR THESE IRAQI ANIMALS!
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No Geezer that's not how it went. We knew that Iraq was gassing people; Kurds as well as Iranians. We provided loans, equipment, and intel that probably ... and in some cases were... used to facilitate chemical warfare. No, we weren't the only ones. Plenty of help was funneled to Saddam from our regional allies and by other nations. What we and everyone else should have done- but didn't- was to stop all shipments to Iraq, put Iraq BACK on the list of nations that supported terrorism (Yep, there was such a list even back then) and break diplomatic ties with Hussein. Instead, we did just the opposite. But I don't intend quote entire articles here, so please read the last article that I linked which refers to a Senate report detailing our involvement.
I did notice one thing interesting tho- According to you the level of proof necessary to invade Iraq is at about the level of "suspicion"... because Iraq had plants and "dual use" technology, and despite the fact that the weapons inspectors under Blix found no evidence of WMD. But the level necessary to implicate the USA despite documents detailing our support of Iraq is "proof". 
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
What we and everyone else should have done- but didn't- was to stop all shipments to Iraq, put Iraq BACK on the list of nations that supported terrorism (Yep, there was such a list even back then) and break diplomatic ties with Hussein.
So we should now stop all shipments of food and humanitarian aid to North Korea and Sudan, maybe Zimbabwe and a few more, and let the people starve, as was happening in Iraq when we provided them such aid in the early '80s? Sure you're not a closet neo-con? I suppose then that you supported the embargo on Iraq after Gulf War I.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I noticed you didn't respond to my comment about the "level of proof" needed to implicate a nation, and how it seems to become more or less stringent depending on who it's applied to. Nor did you rebut the Senate Report detailing our support of a nation actively using chemical warfare agents.
Does this mean that you concede that we supported Saddam with dual-use materials, intel, and money while he was gassing Iranians and Iraqis? Does this mean that you now think that the level of proof that we applied to Saddam in 2003 was too harsh?
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME