Iraq didnt Have WMD 's
- Thread starter Palehose
- Start date
Man, you need to step away from the bar. The World Series is over, the Palehose won, you have pause your drinking some day... :dizzy:
Evidently you are serious. You mean the same kind of WMD's that Saddam "had?" What exactly are you talking about here. You mean missiles that cause mass destruction? Or is this some kind of joke? I just need to show proof the United States has - and has used - WMD's? I really don't get it.
Well no just because the U.S. had WMD's and has used them in the past dosent prove a thing at least according to the Liberals .
Nobody argues the fact that Saddam had them and killed 200,000,000 Kurds with them after the 1st gulf war. In fact as far as I am aware Saddam is the last one to use them or the only Country I can come up with in the last 20 years that has .
Prove to me the U.S. has WMD's ?
I think we just act like we do to scare people ..so prove it
Nobody argues the fact that Saddam had them and killed 200,000,000 Kurds with them after the 1st gulf war. In fact as far as I am aware Saddam is the last one to use them or the only Country I can come up with in the last 20 years that has .
Prove to me the U.S. has WMD's ?
I think we just act like we do to scare people ..so prove it
Palehose said:Well no just because the U.S. had WMD's and has used them in the past dosent prove a thing at least according to the Liberals .
Nobody argues the fact that Saddam had them and killed 200,000,000 Kurds with them after the 1st gulf war. In fact as far as I am aware Saddam is the last one to use them or the only Country I can come up with in the last 20 years that has .
Prove to me the U.S. has WMD's ?
I think we just act like we do to scare people ..so prove it
Once again, you really need to brush up on your history. For one thing, stop throwing around ridiculous numbers of Kurds being gassed. In the last few weeks, in three different posts, you have stated that 150,000 / 200,000 and now 200,000,000 kurds were gassed. It was actually around 5,000 by all accepted estimates.
Secondly, this happened in 1988 during the Iran/Iraq war during a battle between the two states, not 'after the first gulf war.'
Thirdly, according to our own CIA, there is strong evidence that it was Iranian gas that killed the kurds. I'll find a source for that and post it.
Man, nearly everything you post is so riddled with inaccuracies it's not even funny.
Published on Saturday, July 3, 2004 by the Inter Press Service
Saddam Could Call CIA in His Defense
by Sanjay Suri
LONDON - Evidence offered by a top CIA man could confirm the testimony given by Saddam Hussein at the opening of his trial in Baghdad Thursday that he knew of the Halabja massacre only from the newspapers.
Thousands were reported killed in the gassing of Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in the north of Iraq in March 1988 towards the end of Iraq's eight-year war with Iran. The gassing of the Kurds has long been held to be the work of Ali Hassan al-Majid, named in the West because of that association as 'Chemical Ali'. Saddam Hussein is widely alleged to have ordered Ali to carry out the chemical attack.
The Halabja massacre is now prominent among the charges read out against Saddam in the Baghdad court. When that charge was read out, Saddam replied that he had read about the massacre in a newspaper. Saddam has denied these allegations ever since they were made. But now with a trial on, he could summon a witness in his defense with the potential to blow apart the charge and create one of the greatest diplomatic disasters the United States has ever known.
A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals.
Few believe that a CIA man would attend a court hearing in Baghdad in defense of Saddam. But in this case the CIA boss has gone public with his evidence, and this evidence has been in the public domain for more than a year.
The CIA officer Stephen C. Pelletiere was the agency's senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. As professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, he says he was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf.
In addition, he says he headed a 1991 Army investigation into how the Iraqis would fight a war against the United States, and the classified version of the report went into great detail on the Halabja affair.
Pelletiere went public with his information on no less a platform than The New York Times in an article on January 31 last year titled 'A War Crime or an Act of War?' The article which challenged the case for war quoted U.S. President George W. Bush as saying: ?The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.?
Pelletiere says the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report following the Halabja gassing, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need- to-know basis. ?That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas,? he wrote in The New York Times.
The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja, he said. ?The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. ?The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.?
Pelletiere writes that these facts have ?long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned.?
Pelletiere wrote that Saddam Hussein has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. ?But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them.?
Pelletiere has maintained his position. All Saddam would have to do in court now is to cite The New York Times article even if the court would not summon Pelletiere. The issues raised in the article would themselves be sufficient to raise serious questions about the charges filed against Saddam - and in turn the justifications offered last year for invading Iraq.
The Halabja killings were cited not just by Bush but by British Prime Minister Tony Blair to justify his case for going along with a U.S. invasion of Iraq. A British government dossier released to justify the war on Iraq says that ?Saddam has used chemical weapons, not only against an enemy state, but against his own people.? An inquiry report in 1996 by Lord Justice Scott in what came to be known as the arms-to-Iraq affair gave dramatic pointers to what followed after Halabja. After the use of poison gas in 1988 both the United States and Britain began to supply Saddam Hussein with even more chemical weapons.
The Scott inquiry had been set up in 1992 following the collapse of the trial in the case of Matrix Churchill, a British firm exporting equipment to Iraq that could be put to military use.
Three senior executives of Matrix Churchill said the government knew what Matrix Churchill was doing, and that its managing director Paul Henderson had been supplying information about Iraq to the British intelligence agencies on a regular basis.
The inquiry revealed details of the British government's secret decision to supply Saddam with even more weapons-related equipment after the Halabja killings.
Former British foreign secretary Geoffrey Howe was found to have written that the end of the Iraq-Iran war could mean ?major opportunities for British industry? in military exports, but he wanted to keep that proposal quiet.
?It could look very cynical if so soon after expressing outrage about the treatment of the Kurds, we adopt a more flexible approach to arms sales,? one of his officials told the Scott inquiry. Lord Scott condemned the government's decision to change its policy, while keeping MPs and the public in the dark.
Soon after the attack, the United States approved the export to Iraq of virus cultures and a billion-dollar contract to design and build a petrochemical plant the Iraqis planned to use to produce mustard gas.
Saddam Hussein has appeared so far without a lawyer to defend him. A Jordanian firm is reported to be speaking up for him. But the real defense for him could be waiting for him in Washington and London.
Saddam Could Call CIA in His Defense
by Sanjay Suri
LONDON - Evidence offered by a top CIA man could confirm the testimony given by Saddam Hussein at the opening of his trial in Baghdad Thursday that he knew of the Halabja massacre only from the newspapers.
Thousands were reported killed in the gassing of Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in the north of Iraq in March 1988 towards the end of Iraq's eight-year war with Iran. The gassing of the Kurds has long been held to be the work of Ali Hassan al-Majid, named in the West because of that association as 'Chemical Ali'. Saddam Hussein is widely alleged to have ordered Ali to carry out the chemical attack.
The Halabja massacre is now prominent among the charges read out against Saddam in the Baghdad court. When that charge was read out, Saddam replied that he had read about the massacre in a newspaper. Saddam has denied these allegations ever since they were made. But now with a trial on, he could summon a witness in his defense with the potential to blow apart the charge and create one of the greatest diplomatic disasters the United States has ever known.
A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals.
Few believe that a CIA man would attend a court hearing in Baghdad in defense of Saddam. But in this case the CIA boss has gone public with his evidence, and this evidence has been in the public domain for more than a year.
The CIA officer Stephen C. Pelletiere was the agency's senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. As professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, he says he was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf.
In addition, he says he headed a 1991 Army investigation into how the Iraqis would fight a war against the United States, and the classified version of the report went into great detail on the Halabja affair.
Pelletiere went public with his information on no less a platform than The New York Times in an article on January 31 last year titled 'A War Crime or an Act of War?' The article which challenged the case for war quoted U.S. President George W. Bush as saying: ?The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.?
Pelletiere says the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report following the Halabja gassing, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need- to-know basis. ?That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas,? he wrote in The New York Times.
The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja, he said. ?The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. ?The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.?
Pelletiere writes that these facts have ?long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned.?
Pelletiere wrote that Saddam Hussein has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. ?But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them.?
Pelletiere has maintained his position. All Saddam would have to do in court now is to cite The New York Times article even if the court would not summon Pelletiere. The issues raised in the article would themselves be sufficient to raise serious questions about the charges filed against Saddam - and in turn the justifications offered last year for invading Iraq.
The Halabja killings were cited not just by Bush but by British Prime Minister Tony Blair to justify his case for going along with a U.S. invasion of Iraq. A British government dossier released to justify the war on Iraq says that ?Saddam has used chemical weapons, not only against an enemy state, but against his own people.? An inquiry report in 1996 by Lord Justice Scott in what came to be known as the arms-to-Iraq affair gave dramatic pointers to what followed after Halabja. After the use of poison gas in 1988 both the United States and Britain began to supply Saddam Hussein with even more chemical weapons.
The Scott inquiry had been set up in 1992 following the collapse of the trial in the case of Matrix Churchill, a British firm exporting equipment to Iraq that could be put to military use.
Three senior executives of Matrix Churchill said the government knew what Matrix Churchill was doing, and that its managing director Paul Henderson had been supplying information about Iraq to the British intelligence agencies on a regular basis.
The inquiry revealed details of the British government's secret decision to supply Saddam with even more weapons-related equipment after the Halabja killings.
Former British foreign secretary Geoffrey Howe was found to have written that the end of the Iraq-Iran war could mean ?major opportunities for British industry? in military exports, but he wanted to keep that proposal quiet.
?It could look very cynical if so soon after expressing outrage about the treatment of the Kurds, we adopt a more flexible approach to arms sales,? one of his officials told the Scott inquiry. Lord Scott condemned the government's decision to change its policy, while keeping MPs and the public in the dark.
Soon after the attack, the United States approved the export to Iraq of virus cultures and a billion-dollar contract to design and build a petrochemical plant the Iraqis planned to use to produce mustard gas.
Saddam Hussein has appeared so far without a lawyer to defend him. A Jordanian firm is reported to be speaking up for him. But the real defense for him could be waiting for him in Washington and London.
kosar said:
lol yep I had a few too many 000's their its 200,000 plus verified in mass grave sites to this date .
Palehose said:Well no just because the U.S. had WMD's and has used them in the past dosent prove a thing at least according to the Liberals .
Nobody argues the fact that Saddam had them and killed 200,000,000 Kurds with them after the 1st gulf war. In fact as far as I am aware Saddam is the last one to use them or the only Country I can come up with in the last 20 years that has .
Prove to me the U.S. has WMD's ?
I think we just act like we do to scare people ..so prove it
Forget the zeros. I can buy that you meant 200,000 kurds killed by Saddam's WMD. The probelm is that this is still ridiculous. Approximately 5,000 kurds died by a blood agent. According to the CIA, Iraq was not known to have blood agents, but Iran was. The Kurds were in the crossfire of a battle between Iraq and Iran during that war. Britain and the US continued to supply Iraq with chemical weapons AFTER that incident.
It's beyond obvious to say that ONCE UPON A TIME Saddam had WMD because we helped deliver them to him and he used them against Iran.
However, parroting the ol' 'Saddam gassed 200,000 of his own citizens' is incredibly ignorant.
I'll repeat once again, this happened in a battle during the war that ended in 1988. You make it sound as if he leveled a Kurd area with WMD after the first gulf war and he killed 200,000 of them.
You're probably thinking(as it were) of the Shia rebellion that he crushed after the first gulf war and killed several hundred people with conventional weapons and executions.
The details of the over 200,000 found in mass grave sites which now I see in some estimates show as high as 400,000 have occured from somewhere around 1980 -1988 and than again after the Kurds thought they would get help from the US to over throw Saddam in 1991 . Guess you didnt read Schwarzkopf's book being that the most upsetting thing to him to date was the horror of having to watch Saddam gas an estimated 10 to 20,000 Men Women and Children after the Liberals in the UN decided the coalition forces could not advance to Bahgdad. But hey keep reading the left wing rags you will get some great conspiracy theory's thats for sure just dont expect to learn history . :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :s4:
I'll just wait until Kosar gets done embarrassing you before I begin... :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
By the way, guys, I've figured out why palehose uses that rolling guy so much. It's first on the list, and as a close follower of Dubbya, he has difficulty with multiple-step mechanisms... :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
By the way, guys, I've figured out why palehose uses that rolling guy so much. It's first on the list, and as a close follower of Dubbya, he has difficulty with multiple-step mechanisms... :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
Can someone prove to a Liberals standards that thje U.S. has WMD's ????? Still waiting ...having them and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent non combatants just isnt enough for a Liberal ! :mj07: :mj07: :scared
Chadman said:
The day Kosar embarrasses me will be the year the Cub's win the World Series shit for brains :mj07: :mj14:
Palehose,
Even if you and Manson aren't the same person, there is one clear similarity. The other righties on this board rarely touch or agree with anything you two loons say. It's not a coincidence.
Even if you and Manson aren't the same person, there is one clear similarity. The other righties on this board rarely touch or agree with anything you two loons say. It's not a coincidence.
Palehose said:
You know, maybe somebody would take you more seriously if you didn't throw in all your BS namecalling all the time. That is, if they didn't READ all your BS first.
Rule #1 in debating...don't namecall or curse...it shows a strong inability to form pertinent thought and illustates frustration in communication.
Dumbass.
What the heck. I will post a little in response, just to see your angle on this play out. Should be good...
Here is the full article from that bastion of mistruths...the free online encyclopedia...posting the link if you care to look at all the info there, even though I know you are just running an experiment.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
United States and weapons of mass destruction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Federal Government of the United States is known to possess three types of weapons of mass destruction: nuclear weapons, chemical weapons and biological weapons. The U.S. is the only country ever to have used nuclear weapons in combat. The U.S. arsenal of weapons of mass destruction is the largest in the world, along with Russia, depending on the definition.
Here is the full article from that bastion of mistruths...the free online encyclopedia...posting the link if you care to look at all the info there, even though I know you are just running an experiment.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
United States and weapons of mass destruction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Federal Government of the United States is known to possess three types of weapons of mass destruction: nuclear weapons, chemical weapons and biological weapons. The U.S. is the only country ever to have used nuclear weapons in combat. The U.S. arsenal of weapons of mass destruction is the largest in the world, along with Russia, depending on the definition.
We not only have them. We sell them just like Russia and N Korea do. But we say we sell them to good guys. Just like we did Iran and Iraq. When they were both are buddies in the late 70's and early 80's.