"By the time of Rumsfeld's session with Saddam Hussein, the U.S. government already had intelligence information, to which Rumsfeld had access, that Iraq was using chemical weapons in the war with Iran...
And who provided Iraq those chemical weapons, as well as the greatest majority of their conventional ordnance?
Maybe it was Israel?
At the time of Rumsfeld's 1983 meeting, however, the US had other interests in the Middle East, and [Iraq's] use of chemical weapons was not viewed as something that should stand in the way of doing business with him.
And what were those interests? Possibly preventing Iran's militant leaders from winning the war and capturing the second largest oil reserves on the planet.
What was more likely to destabilize the mid-east AT THAT TIME? Saddam holding his own? Or Iran's militant shiites capturing Karbala and Najaf, and establishing their claim to be the rightful guardians of Shiism (thereby stirring up all the Shiites from Iraq to Saudi Arabia?)
Do you really have any understanding of the VERY LIMITED ROLE the US played in assisting Iraq, or the fact that Rumsfeld's trip was an attempt to wean Saddam away from his TREMENDOUS DEPENDENCE upon the Soviets, French, and Chinese??
How did Rumsfeld's trip to Iraq differ from Nixon's trip to China?.. And how was the attempted FP objectives the same?
And why, if we had such "control" over Saddam, did he even contemplate invading Kuwait (and don't repeat that well-treaded, and false, April Glaspie "invitation" for him to invade..)..
Bottom line h0db.. What countries can truly be stated as having had the most influence in Iraq over the past 30 years?
Hint.. It's not the United States. All you have to do is look at what countries received the largest disbursements of Saddam's oil allocation over the 6 year period the oil for food program was in operation.
Hawk |
