My point however is that while everyone bitches and moans about the fact that some US companies did sell to Iraq for example, the total amount made up less than 1% of the conventional weapons and less than 3.5 percent of the missile, nuclear and chemical stuff and most of this latter part was computers that were approved by the US government. So yes, I am aware that American companies have sold weapons and such to these countries but most did so legally AND those that did not were punished AND those sales amounted to very insignificant amounts of the totals. That is my point.
My point however is that while everyone bitches and moans about the fact that some US companies did sell to Iraq for example, the total amount made up less than 1% of the conventional weapons and less than 3.5 percent of the missile, nuclear and chemical stuff and most of this latter part was computers that were approved by the US government. So yes, I am aware that American companies have sold weapons and such to these countries but most did so legally AND those that did not were punished AND those sales amounted to very insignificant amounts of the totals. That is my point.
As tu feu?
Love Fred[/quote]
Yes, but countries like Russia don’t go around holding themselves as upright, democratic, righteous, holier-than-thou, superior-in-every-way nations. If you’re going to spout standards and principles and then invade countries because they lack them, you should stick to them yourselves and not be hypocritical. Who cares if it’s 1% or 5%? Sales to Iran, Libya, and Iraq are a fact. Whether it’s 1% or 51% is irrelevant.
Ah my little friend but many Germans and French certainly hold themselves to much hypocritical standards. A certain poster on this forum was quite adamant about America and its evil ways until it was pointed out that Germany was responsible for 50 percent of Saddams nuclear, chemical and missile technology and supplies.
I see your point but you have to look at the context this stuff was and is being sold. America has one of the most rigid procedures of any nation. We should be proud of that.
If I lie to you and you steal from someone and someone else murders someone, we are NOT all morally equal. Amounts and intent makes a big difference.
[quote=“fred smith”]Ah my little friend but many Germans and French certainly hold themselves to much hypocritical standards. A certain poster on this forum was quite adamant about America and its evil ways until it was pointed out that Germany was responsible for 50 percent of Saddams nuclear, chemical and missile technology and supplies.
I see your point but you have to look at the context this stuff was and is being sold. America has one of the most rigid procedures of any nation. We should be proud of that.
If I lie to you and you steal from someone and someone else murders someone, we are NOT all morally equal. Amounts and intent makes a big difference.[/quote]
No, I see your point. Forget what other people said about so and so. I personally never held up Germany and France to different standards. I cannot be held accountable for other statements of other peoples (I feel like I must re-iterate this everytime).
And analogising lying and murder to small sales of biochemicals and large sales of biochemicals to Iran or whatever is WRONG. You must have done poorly in those standardized tests. To use your context, it’s more like a regular murderer, and a serial killer. They both have committed murder.
Fair enough but you have to remember why we sold what we did to Saddam even though we did so in small amounts.
We wanted to gain influence with him. We failed. The sales ended.
We were worried about stopping the Iranian invasion of Iraq when Iran looked set to take Basra in 1982-3. Would the Iranians have stopped in Iraq or would they have kept going to Saudi Arabia and the oil fields. We will never know. BUT we do know that the Revolutionary Guard in Iran was talking about this. I think that we were wise to take them at their word.
So this is a big difference to me. The US was responsible for Persian Gulf security. Tell me what business Germany, France and Russia had selling such weapons in such large quantities to Iraq? The only reason corruption and to make money. Disgusting. You would think the Germans at least would have learned. What is it with that nation and its obsession with poisonous gas. This is why the Iranians are suing only one government in the world and that is not even the hated US, they are suing Germany. Good on them.
Very very funny. Nothing of value to add to that? Anything to say on the subject at hand? No? Okay, bye bye then. And do let the door hit you on your way out. haha
[quote]Overbilling for postwar fuel imports to Iraq by the Halliburton Company totaled more than $108 million, according to a report by Pentagon auditors that was completed last fall but has not been officially released to the public or to Congress.
In one case, according to the auditing report, the company claimed that it had paid more than $27 million to transport liquified petroleum gas it had purchased in Kuwait for just $82,000, a charge the auditors dismissed as “illogical.”
The fuels report, by the Defense Contract Audit Agency, was one of nine involving Halliburton that were completed in October 2004, in the month before the American presidential elections. But the Bush administration has kept all of them confidential despite repeated requests from both Republican and Democratic members of Congress. . .
Allegations of overcharging for the fuel imports have swirled from the initial days of the occupation, but this latest audit suggests that that the scale of disputed charges was higher than previously known. . .
The newly released audit described “unreasonable” and “questionable” billing of $108 million out of an initial fuels importing “task order” of $875 million.[/quote]
But in addition to that interesting bit of information on Halliburton can I just ask one question? We already know that the governmetn was being overcharged but was this money also going to the same Kuwaiti middleman that the US embassy insisted Halliburton hire? He was charging premiums on everything because of the war, limited supplies, rush orders, etc. etc. Is this part of that whole business or is this something different? If it is, then I think Halliburton should be punished but I have this oh I don’t know little feeling that causes me to doubt NY Times headlines alleging Halliburton did this, that and the other, when that fine newspaper makes a point of burying any vindications or explanations on page 10, column 23. Sign me unconvinced without more evidence and sign me tired of the NY Times and its endless drumbeat of allegations regarding the Bush administration.