Saddam-Rumsfeld pic (how to throw down the argument that Reagan helped Saddam)

Yours Truly | December 17, 2003 | Yours Truly

[joesbucks]

Campaign Finance Reform was the worst thing that we could have let happen. In effect our leaders are telling us to shut up.

There seems to be a pretty good trail of us not giving them much in the way of weapons, but it is possible we gave them technical help, and chemical weapons may have been part of that assistance. Especially early on in the Iran/Iraq war.

[serurier]

Saddam is a nuclear weapons in fact!

[joesbucks]

That chart would be much more helpful if it was limited to 1980-1990 and 1980-1985. Twenty plus years and a lot of things can change.

[Aeronaut]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Iran was a greater threat at the time, so we aligned with Iraq.

[sawyer]

On the top one. We three countries fought WW2 together. In fact I hate to tell you this but the Russians lost more of its army than we did. Hitler really pushed to take over Russia.One must divide up the spoils. As for the rest we do seem to tie up with some really interesting people. It is sort of a thing one hates to keep in a resume.If we do not know how to act when we get out in company maybe we should just stay at home?Seems our own stone walls need repairs as people are walking right over the wall to get at us.

[serurier]

I see Iraq army use T-72,AK-47,RPG,MIG-25/29,BMP,which is made in U.S.A?

[Moonman62]

Oh sure, we can rely on the spin from Reuters, the NYTimes, and the Miami Herald. Factually, they aren't saying anything different than the people on this thread who are stating that our help was minimal.

[Maelstrom]

Post 32 answers your question, but you must also include the fact that Carter turned his back on our ally, the Shaw, in Iran firat.

[MeekOneGOP]

[freedumb2003]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Sadly, this was our foreign policy through the entire cold war. That is why we were aligned with the Taliban and UBL for a while when they were fighting the Ruskies.

The Shah of Iran was only a few steps down from Saddam in terms of despotism. Noriega, Marcos the list goes on and on.

I would like to think we learned that it not a good guiding principle, but look at our "friendship" with the Kingdom of Saud.

[jpl]

Yeah, and we also helped supply the Afghanistan mujahedeen with Stinger missiles and other stuff to help repel the Soviet invasion, etc. etc. We were right to do so, and it has absolutely no relavance to what's happening now. George Washington knew over 200 years ago that there are no such thing as permanent alliances.

[Ditto]

Take this link for a good, concise history of The Iran - Iraq War

As for arms suppliers, the French and Soviets helped Saddam with the Chinese helping the Iranians.

[OXENinFLA]

That chart is Great!

[vbmoneyspender]

That is why we were aligned with the Taliban and UBL for a while when they were fighting the Ruskies.

This is simply false. The Taliban didn't come into existence until 1994, which was 5 years after the Soviets had pulled out of Afghanistan. As far as bin Laden is concerned, we were never aligned with him in Afghanistan. We didn't provide him with any monies, weapons or intelligence.

[Frapster]

Ask if it is better that we continued in that mistake, something along those lines, that what we did in the past does not justify future actions or inaction. Exactly - one is entitled to make mistakes (even horrendous ones). What is truly foolish is being unwilling to learn from them. At the same time don't fall into the trap of trying to defend with 'should've, would've, could've' type arguments. HIndsight is always 20/20.

[freedumb2003]

This is simply false. The Taliban didn't come into existence until 1994

I stand corrected -- it was the Taliban precursor. The point is that blowback frequently happens when we do Foreign Policy By Enemies of My Friends.

[Belial]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Iran was a greater threat at the time, so we aligned with Iraq.

The logic of this policy is sadly lacking. I don't have to reach very far to come up with an example.

[Aeronaut]

The logic of this policy is sadly lacking.

Didn't say it was a good policy. There's too many examples to say it doesn't happen, however.

[vbmoneyspender]

The point is that blowback frequently happens when we do Foreign Policy By Enemies of My Friends.

Could you point out an example? Your example of helping the Moujahadeen certainly doesn't qualify. We are much better off for having helped the Moujahadeen defeat the Soviets which, in turn, helped to bring down the Soviet Empire.

[swilhelm73]

Sadly, this was our foreign policy through the entire cold war. That is why we were aligned with the Taliban and UBL for a while when they were fighting the Ruskies.

Surprised to see this bit of leftist revionism on FR.

We never "aligned with UBL and the Taliban". During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan we supplied the native Mujahadeen with weapons and intelligence.

Osama recruited, essentially, an Arab foriegn legion to fight the Soviets too. So, while we were on the same side we never helped Osama in any way. The Taliban would be over a decade away from forming, as would Al Qaeda.

After the Soviets and their local communist allies were crushed, we left the country, and the the Mujahadeen broke down into effectively nothing more then petty tribal government for the most part, unable to maintain law and order.

In 1994 a group of religious students formed, calling themselves the Taliban, meaning religous students. At first they focused on bringing order and peace, and were therefore welcomed by most of the populace.

After seizing power, however, the Taliban became ever more extreme.

In 2001, Osama's AQ assassinatied Ahmad Shah Massoud, leader of the Northern Alliance, and probably greatest of the former Mujahadeen leaders mere days before the 9/11 attacks, hoping to break the Northern Alliance with one quick strike. Interestingly the AQ assassins here pretended to be reporters.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/11/wmass11.xml