Tuesday, December 27, 2005


Here's a comment that prompt my title for this post.

You just figured out that we are in a war...I guess you don't miss anything.The majority of causalities are being caused by terrorists and insurgents. Do you know how many deaths and murders and rapes occur in America? And we're not even in a war zone. Do you know how many people died in the tsunami last year? 200,000 people died. Do you get the picture now? Do you know how many people died under Saddam Hussein? No, no one does because mass graves are still being discovered; another one was discovered yesterday. SO according to you it was OK for Saddam to kill hundreds of thousands of people torture hundreds of thousands of people but when 30,000 people die in an attempt to establish a democratic state, then you get upset. Listen your fake conviction and selective outrage only proves that your disdain for Bush blinds you to reality and turns all accomplishments into nothing. Where was your feigned outrage when Hussein was torturing hundreds of thousands of people and committing genocide? Answer me that? All of a sudden death shocks you... go with the sheep my friend because you stand for nothing but weak attacks on a President.

I'll just give you the site and some of what is said from those site. Then please I would like for this person to comment again, OK?


Documents Reveal: When Saddam used chemical weapons in 1980's, US sent Rumsfeld to make sure IRAQ knew that US wouldn't let ghastly events effect US/IRAQI bussiness relationshipsRumsfeld Made Iraq Overture in '84 Despite Chemical RaidsBy CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS

Published: December 23, 2003

WASHINGTON, Dec. 22 — As a special envoy for the Reagan administration in 1984, Donald H. Rumsfeld, now the defense secretary, traveled to Iraq to persuade officials there that the United States was eager to improve ties with President Saddam Hussein despite his use of chemical weapons, newly declassified documents show.
Mr. Rumsfeld, who ran a pharmaceutical company at the time, was tapped by Secretary of State George P. Shultz to reinforce a message that a recent move to condemn Iraq's use of chemical weapons was strictly in principle and that America's priority was to prevent an Iranian victory in the Iran-Iraq war and to improve bilateral ties.
During that war, the United States secretly provided Iraq with combat planning assistance, even after Mr. Hussein's use of chemical weapons was widely known. The highly classified program involved more than 60 officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency, who shared intelligence on Iranian deployments, bomb-damage assessments and other crucial information with Iraq.
The disclosures round out a picture of American outreach to the Iraqi government, even as the United States professed to be neutral in the eight-year war, and suggests a private nonchalance toward Mr. Hussein's use of chemicals in warfare. Mr. Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials have cited Iraq's use of poisonous gas as a main reason for ousting Mr. Hussein.
The documents, which were released as part of a declassification project by the National Security Archive, and are available on the Web at http://www.nsarchive.org/, provide details of the instructions given to Mr. Rumsfeld on his second trip to Iraq in four months. The notes of Mr. Rumsfeld's encounter with Tariq Aziz, the foreign minister, remain classified, but officials acknowledged that it would be unusual if Mr. Rumsfeld did not carry out the instructions.
Since the release of the documents, he has told members of his inner circle at the Pentagon that he does not recall whether he had read, or even had received, the State Department memo, Defense Department officials said.


According to a New York Times article in August, 2002, Col. Walter P. Lang, a senior defense intelligence officer at the time, explained that D.I.A. and C.I.A. officials "were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose" to Iran. "The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern," he said. One veteran said, that the Pentagon "wasn't so horrified by Iraq's use of gas." "It was just another way of killing people _ whether with a bullet or phosgene, it didn't make any difference."
Now consider just how deceptive the recent comments from the White House are. In late September spokesman Ari Fleischer said that British Prime Minister Blair's dossier of evidence is "frightening in terms of Iraq's intentions and abilities to acquire weapons." A few days later, while making his case against Saddam, President Bush said "He's used poison gas on his own people." Bush deceives because he hides the fact that US officials, including his father, had no qualms about helping Saddam gas Iranians. What is truly frightening are the US policies toward Iraq, the cover ups of those policies, and the US officials who personally profit in the millions of dollars from those policies. To whatever degree Saddam is a tyrant, he would not be that without the US government.
The question is not whether Saddam is willing to use chemical or other weapons of mass destruction again. The question is whether the US is currently selling and helping countries use weapons of mass destruction.
Details about Iraq killing Iranians with US-supplied chemical and biological weapons significantly deepens our understanding of the current hypocrisy. It began with "Iraq-gate" -- when US policy makers, financiers, arms-suppliers and makers, made massive profits from sales to Iraq of myriad chemical, biological, conventional weapons, and the equipment to make nuclear weapons. Reporter Russ Baker noted, for example, that, "on July 3, 1991, the Financial Times reported that a Florida company run by an Iraqi national had produced cyanide -- some of which went to Iraq for use in chemical weapons -- and had shipped it via a CIA contractor." This was just the tip of a mountain of scandals.


According to information obtained by the AGWVA, there is irrefutable evidence to show that the Unites States government provided and encouraged Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The United States Department of Commerce and The American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) provided at least 80 shipments of biological agents that were not attenuated (or weakened) and were capable of reproduction. These shipments included such virulent agents as Anthrax, West Nile Virus and Clostridium botulinum (S.R.103-900, May 25, 1994, pg. 264). The AGWVA also found it very disturbing to learn that on December 19, 1983, the Middle Eastern envoy who carried a handwritten note from President Reagan to Saddam Hussein, to "resume our diplomatic relations with Iraq" was none other than our present Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. (while he was President of Searle Pharmaceutical at the time)

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.

Stop trying to justify this President by attacking others and get the facts about your Republican party, and this Administration.


Opinionnation said...

Thanks for stopping by but you dodged the questions and you passed blame onto Rumsfeld for Saddam Hussein gassing Iran. It's typical but it's still a dodge. You have a very interesting way to look at the world. Fighting the spread of communism was the wrong thing to do? French President Chirac met with Saddam as well as top French officials to allow Saddam to steal from the Iraqi poor. They encouraged Saddam to continue as is because they would veto any UN resolution for war. Blame Reagan, Bush, Clinton, America but not Saddam. That’s very typical and frankly not worth my time. You have yet to make a point and you have yet to make sense. Maybe you could answer the questions but I doubt it.

LETS TALK said...

Your logic amaze me. If you would have clicked on to the sites I reference, most of your statement would not be necessary. Anyone who read the reference would know that Rumsfeld is not all to blame. Reagan, other countries and the American people who, didn't raise a voice, not even now are also to blame. Saddam is guilty of his crimes and should be punished by a court of Law. But Sir, when our administration is guilty, shouldn't they to be judged. I mean you judged Clinton on lying to a Grand Jury. You seem to be stuck on death and other countries and not seeing what our country has done. You sound like my kids, trying to blame the others wrong doing to justify theirs. Wake up Sir, America is not innocent.
Yes death occur all around us everyday, that's life. Sometimes nature is the cause and sometimes other people are the cause of many deaths and when that happens we all as a people of the human race should pull together and help others effected by natures events and through a court of law, judge others who have violated or caused deaths and punish them in what ever way agreed to. There's a song that says Lord you came from Heaven to the Earth just to show us the way and I just feel that we as a human race have not found that way.
I've had my share of Military Service and I've seen my share of death. I believe that if there's a reason for a war, then find. Bring it on, but when there's no reason, then dont.
We cant go around the world overthrowing a leader or a dictator, because he is wrong or doing his people wrong. If that is the case then Iran, China and a lot of other countries should be on our list.
It's kind of funny, but most of the people who feel that we should go to war for this or that, are the people who have never seen combat or got out of serving when they had the chance.
Now I find that most college student today, who are for this war are not in line to sign up to fight as others. If you can say that you believe in this or that, then go fight for this or that, be it a war or what ever.