Posted on 11/23/2005 7:08:24 AM PST by Valin
That's true. And I understand. But I wish they'd never backed off an inch and never let this "well, maybe we didn't have the greatest intelligence about WMDs" message come out. I guess from their point of view it only shows how incompetent their enemies over in the CIA are, but to the average DUmmie, it's an admission that "we made a mistake," which we did NOT.
Urban Legend: The United States Armed Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
Reality: 1968, July 17. A group of Ba'athists and military elements overthrow the Arif regime. Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr re-emerges as the President of Iraq and Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC). Ba'ath party seeks U.S. help in re-arming Iraqi military but is turned down.
In 1972, Saddam (Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, Deputy to the President, and Deputy Secretary General of the Regional Command of the Ba'ath, then knowing that the Soviet Union will re-equip the Iraqi Army, travels to Moscow. Iraq and the Soviet Union sign a treaty of “Friendship and Cooperation.” Another reason Saddam signs the treaty is because it obligated the local communist party, which is very strong, to co-operate with the Ba'ath Party, which is not so strong at that time.
At the time of Operation Desert Storm, 80% of Iraq military equipment was of Soviet manufacture. The bulk of the remainder is manufactured in France.
Urban Legend:The United States "Gave" chemical weapons to Saddam.
Reality: On November 25, 1969 Nixon renounced U.S. use of chemical weapons and promulgated the first international bans on chemical weapons.
In 1971 Iraq begins chemical warfare research at Rashad to the north east of Baghdad. Research is conducted on a number of chemical agents including Mustard gas, CS (tear gas) and Tabun. Iraq starts biological warfare research in the mid-1970s. After small-scale research, a purpose-built research and development facility was authorized at al-Salman, also known as Salman Pak. This is an indigenous program assisted by the Soviet union. A chemical weapons programs requires no more than a group of competent chemists and the money to operate.
Urban Legend: The united States gave Saddam his biological weapons.
Reality: Saddam received no help from the United States to develope Biological weapons. In the 80's the Iraqi government made two purchases of seed germs from the American Type Culture Institute which provides them for legitimate medical research. The cultures were ordered by the University of Bahgdad, but later used for their bio-weapons program which was developed with the help of the Soviets. When it was confirmed during the course of the Iran/Iraq war that Iraq was engaged in the development and use of chemical and biological weapons, their access to the Type Culture Institute was cut off, as was access by several other contries.
Urban Legend: The United States enabled Iraqi nuclear programs>
Reality: In 1959 Iraq's nuclear program was established under the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission. Under a nuclear co-operation agreement signed with the Soviet Union in 1959, a nuclear research center, equipped with a research reactor, was built at Tuwaitha, the main Iraqi nuclear research center. In 1981, a French built nuclear reactor was destroyed by the Isrealis before going online. The United States played no part in Iraq obtaining nuclear capability.
BUT BUT...Don Rumsfeld shook Saddams hand and was smiling!
Doesn't that mean we were allies?
(I've actully had someone say that to me.)
bump
Well that's interesting since the needle didn't move until I happened upon your bit of moonbattitude....so it ain't me, bud, it be you.
Oil is the only strategic interest that we have in the Gulf region.
BS. A stable middle east is a strategic interest for us - democracy in the middle east is also of great strategic interest for us in that demcracies tend to not to harbor or support terrorism.
If it wasn't for oil, we'd ignore the feuding Islamic tribes just like we ignore the Hutu and Tutsis.
Who was president in 1994 again? Sounds like a case could be made for incompetence for not intervening.
Question: why should it be of any more importance to us than the conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi???
Answer: Oil.
"Question: why should it be of any more importance to us than the conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi??? Answer: Oil."
Why did you simply ignore the fact that I pointed out to you who was president during the Rwanda massacre? Why did you just assume that I and the rest of America wouldn't have supported full-blown military action in Rwanda to stop the killing (as I did, in fact, at the time) if we'd had a competent commander in chief? Why do you ignore the fact that Slick Willie, your namesake, is on record for apologizing for NOT going into Rwanda? Why are ignoring the fact that we did go into oil-less Kosovo to stop similar massacres? Answer: You're a moonbat.
You've been owned. Back in your closet, troll.
bump
Well when you take a position such as that,
I see no reason to comment further.
As far as I'm concerned, you've sufficiently displayed that you're a interventionist boob,
and there's nothing that I can add to it.
These are more like Turban legends.
The war in Kosovo was about oil.
Can anyone tell me how much enriched uranium is needed to produce fission bombs? How many kilotons of boom could Saddam get out of 1.77 tons of enriched uranium?
Definitely bookmarked.
"The war in Kosovo was about oil."
Bwaaaaahaaaaaaa......good one!
Translation - you realize you've been owned and you're too intellctually bankrupt to come up with an intelligent response. Don't feel bad, slick - you're not the first, and you won't be the last.
Ooooooooo....
I've been "OWNED".....
and I'm "intellctually bankrupt" too???
I don't know how I can live with the shame -- it's making me die of laughter!!!
We got into a discussion at Thanksgiving with our twentysomething #1 son and one of his friends. They've heard nothing but the leftist view since the beginning, unless they've been at our house. They were talking about "Bush Lied", and I simply told them not to listen to what someone SAID about what the President said, but to go back and READ HIS WORDS!
Yes.
The thrust of this article is misleading and flat out wrong.
There are no urban legands related to the war in Iraq.
What has been mistaken for urban legend is outright antiwar propaganda. If you tell a lie often enough and loud enough it achieves believeability.
The enemy is within. The enemy is the DNC.
bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.