Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (15974)	10/23/2002 2:15:47 PM
From: MSI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Let's assume you're right. How different is it, tho' if one condones such use of mustard gas laced with nerve agents, even if was made by Saddam w/o US assistance. It then makes you look hypocritical to use that as an excuse to attack Iraq, doesn't it? natcath.com Covert assistance The Aug. 18 Times article reported that the United States provided critical covert assistance to Iraq during its 1980-1988 war with Iran, despite U.S. knowledge that Iraq was using chemical weapons. Frightened by the possibility of Iran exporting its brand of radical Islam to the oil-producing states of the Persian Gulf, the United States provided Iraq with intelligence assistance that showed the Iraqis how Iranian forces were deployed against them. The assistance continued at the same time that Secretary of State George Shultz, Defense Secretary Frank C. Carlucci and then-national security adviser Gen. Colin Powell were publicly condemning Iraq for its use of poison gas. According to the Times article, President Reagan, Vice President George Bush, and other senior officials never withdrew their support for the highly classified program, which had more than 60 officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency secretly giving the Iraqis detailed information on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb-damage assessments. Col. Walter P. Lang, now retired but a senior defense intelligence officer at the time covert assistance was given, is quoted by the Times as saying, “The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern.” Eventually, chemical weapons were integrated throughout the Iraqi arsenal and were added to strike plans that American advisers prepared or suggested, the article said. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has been one of the chief advocates of an American invasion of Iraq. But in an article headlined, “The Saddam in Rumsfeld’s Closet,” published by Common Dreams News Center, a non-profit news service, Scahill points out that Rumsfeld played a key role in 1983 and 1984 in the resumption of diplomatic relations between Washington and Iraq. As Reagan’s envoy to the Middle East, Rumsfeld met with Hussein in December 1983. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad for meetings with then-Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz. That same day UPI reported from the United Nations that Iraq was employing mustard gas laced with a nerve agent against Iranian soldiers. The State Department had earlier that month issued its own report that Iraq was using lethal chemical weapons. Despite the U.N. report and the State Department report, Rumsfeld does not appear to have made any public statements about Iraq’s use of poison gas until the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. “Donald Rumsfeld, when there was a threat, according to the U.S. State Department, actually said nothing. The American people should have that information when they hear him go on and on about Iraq’s possession of chemical weapons. It goes right to his credibility,” Scahill said in an interview with NCR. Scahill said his article was based on widely available information and had received scant attention until the Times piece was published. Since then he has been deluged with requests for interviews. Much of the information in the Times article was already known to the national security community. But the Times’ examination of U.S. aid to Iraq during the period Iraq was using poison gas disseminates that information in the mainstream press as well. “This was an important development just because of the high profile of the story,” said Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. Peña said the Times article underscores the weakness in the administration’s effort to paint going to war with Iraq as a moral cause. “It runs counter to everything the United States stands for to preemptively attack another country unprovoked. That’s the part the president is having a hard time selling.”