posted 04-02-2003 10:46 PM            

So did the good ol USA.

Sold Saddam his VX and Anthrax.

Had NO PROBLEM with letting Saddam smash the Kurdish uprising during the first Gulf War.

posted 04-03-2003 01:09 AM            

Had NO PROBLEM with letting Saddam smash the Kurdish uprising during the first Gulf War.

pretty sure we had 40 or 44 POW'S and it was a condition for their return was to leave saddam's inhouse biz inhouse...it's a shame it sucks...and we are back...saddam has already used weapons against us and kuwait that were a material breech of the u.n resolutions...all saddam had to do was destroy and or produce the weapons...and he could continue to kill and mame iraqi's forever...the u.n was happy with that and so was the french german chinese and russians....

fairly disgusting

Bush SR. LOVED to do buisness with him untill Saddam doublecrossed him.

this is the last time I'm posting this...SADDAM INVADED KUWAIT YOU DUMMY !

saddam offered the U.S oil dirt cheap to let them take over kuwait and WE that's the U.S said NO !

desert shield began

you freakin idiot !

wow

posted 04-03-2003 09:15 AM            

If that's all Russians have to offer, then I pity the trops protecting Russia.

Mech: Do you think it's ok for people who get shot with a weapon of any kind to turn around a sue the manufacturer of the weapon?
That's the sort of mentality I'm picking up from you. Your blaming the government for selling the WMD to Iraq. You can sell a product to someone, but you can't tell them how to use it. What they do with it is their own business. saddam dicided to use it against his own people. What does that tell you about his mentality? ( If he's still alive )

posted 04-03-2003 10:30 AM            

I've also seen evidence that shows that the US did not openly sell these WMD agents to Iraq. We offered some conventional military support to Iraq to fight Iran, which seemed like the greater evil at the time . (It is always a legitimate strategy to help enemies of freedom and good in the world, destroy each other)...

And contrary to Mech's lies, we (the US) did not place Saddam in power. Saddam placed himself in power by brutal assassination of his political opponents, and has kept power by the same methods ever since.

Here's an interesting note; Iraq is only around 70 years old, and was a country artificially created by the British.

It's about time the people of that country, elected their own representatives in a free government modeled in some semblance of the constitution of the greatest nation the world has ever known (the US constitution)...don't you think?

posted 04-03-2003 11:29 AM            

The IRAQWAR.RU analytical center was created recently by a group of journalists and military experts from Russia to provide accurate and up-to-date news and analysis of the war against Iraq. The following is the English translation of the IRAQWAR.RU report based on the Russian military intelligence reports.

April 2, 2003, 1335hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - Exceptionally difficult and unstable situation has developed on the US-Iraqi front by the morning of April 1. The coalition troops are persistently trying to take control of the strategic "triangle" Karabela - Al-Khindiya - Al-Iskanderiya. At the same time the coalition units are continuing their advance toward Al-Kut and An-nu-Manyah, but so far the US forces were unable to take any of these towns. To move forward the US units are forced to leave behind large numbers of troops needed to blockade the towns remaining under Iraqi control. The An-Najaf and An-Nasiriya garrisons are still involved in active combat deep behind the coalition forward lines.

The coalition command had to deploy two brigades from the 101st Airborne Division to blockade and to storm An-Najaf and An-Nasiriya. These two brigades will replace elements of the US 1st Marine Division (the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit under the command of Col. John Waldhauser) that has been fighting in this area for the past six days. These "heavy" attack brigades are currently being deployed to the area of intense fighting near Al-Hillah.

... http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/news087.htm

posted 04-03-2003 08:46 PM            

But then, in a few threads later, Mech will say....I"raq doesn't have any WMDs and is not a threat..."

posted 04-03-2003 08:55 PM            

So did many UN inspectors over the years.

That's why they can't find any WMD in Iraq.

The result of the WMD cache destruction?

posted 04-03-2003 10:03 PM            

quote:

---

That's becaue BUSH SR. had most of the weapons caches BLOWN UP to hide the evidence during Gulf War #1.

---

Bush had WMD caches blown up? That's called bombing during the war Mech! How do you know the were all destroyed? They certainly are not accounted for.

quote:

---

So did many UN inspectors over the years.

---

So you are saying that 300 or so UN inspectors found all of Saddam's WMDs in a country the size of California, when Saddam's chief bomb maker, Dr. Kadhir Hamza has testified as to Saddam's vast underground system of hiding WMD's ahead of inspectors? Are you sure you are not attempting to rationalize to support your belief system Mech?

quote:

---

That's why they can't find any WMD in Iraq. The result of the WMD cache destruction?

---

Who can't find them? You may not have noticed this, but our "inspectors (US troops)" have been a tad busy trying to stay alive. I doubt they've had much time to look. There's a little thing called a WAR going on that may be distracting them a bit.

quote:

---

Lots of US servicemen coming home sicker than sick from huffing the clouds after the explosions...along with DU dust.

---

Yes...but this is NOT a sign that Saddam doesn't have WMD's. On the contrary. Today they have found dead Republican guard troops (killed by our artillery) who were already wearing full chemical suits....a strong sign that not only do they have chemical weapons, but that they are currently trying to use them.

posted 04-04-2003 12:26 AM            

quote:

---

The time was around 1984 through 1988 and as you know most any conventional weapon that has chemicals and gases have a limited shelf life and it is unlikely that they still have any of these weapons now, much less during the first gulf war.

---

posted 04-04-2003 04:29 PM            

Yup! that's why i posted it, because it was interesting.

fastwalker - 'Please don't take this as a leading question, or one designed to be provocative, but I'm wondering how much credibility you give to Russian and Iraqi sources of information? '

about as much as I give US sources. I like to take in media from many varied sources. i just wish i could understand other languages besides english. i figure the truth lies somewhere in the mire.

fastwalker - 'Consider for a moment that Russia has great strategic and economic interest in Iraq, and that they have supplied Iraq with virtually all of their weapons (with French and Chinese help).'

sure, and the US too

fastwalker - 'Do you think for a moment, that Russian ministries of propaganda might have some interest in underplaying US success in order to encourage Iraqis to keep fighting for a lost regime? Do you think Russia, France and China have any interest in seeing Iraq win this war....Maybe?'

Absolutely!

hmmm, you're not suggesting the possibility of that rag tag third world army of Iraqis can defeat the MIGHTY US EMPIRE, are you? oh yeah, sorry the russians, chinese, other arabs and any other enemy of the US is scrambling to help. Really, if you think about it who can blame 'em. With the US being the biggest, baddest, bully on the planet currently it's only natural to meet fierce resistance, not only from peasant farmers but other super-power wanna be's.

I believe no matter how it turns out WE ALL LOSE. some just sooner than others.

'War doesn't decide who's right, only who's left.' - anonymous sticker sighted on the subway