Therein is the problem.
You’ve taken crticism of US involvment to the enth degree and all in your own sweet mind. No one is saying these disgusting thugs were in any way justified in their attrocious crime.
HG
I’ve got outrage fatigue.
That, in itself, is outrageous.
No, seriously.
Technological progress is fairly simple to chart; anyone care to have a go at moral progress?
I’ve got faux outrage fatigue.
Oh oh. Some one does not have a clue about how we “supported” Saddam. This should be fun. Okay, how did we (the US) support Saddam? What did we supply him with in terms of weapons? loans? Be sure and show all the sources of support that we gave him… haha You are fighting a losing battle on this one. Even Rascal gave up on this little “argument.” Quit while you are ahead… I know all about the “support” that we gave Saddam and I have the sites and facts to back it up. Do you?
fred smith wrote:
So please, let’s get a bit more knowledge about the subject before making such ridiculous statements. Just because YOU did not know about it does not mean that it was not happening.
I repeat. If you don’t know anything about this, you should find out first before shooting your mouth off, but go ahead, get yourself in deeper. Please do. It will help in making an example of you for the others who still insist on all of this nonsense…
I disagree. I think that some posters seem to be suggesting that this woman was killed because the US got involved in Iraq and hence there is a civil war and hence those forces that were unleashed created these roaming bands of bandits which in turn killed this woman for expressing an independent view hence all of this should be blamed on the Americans since they started the ball rolling. I naturally disagree with this on two counts: a. that someone else can be primarily responsible for someone else’s behavior and b. because the forces that were supposedly unleashed by the Americans were there pretty much in full force under Saddam. We merely saw different groups of people dying…
Oh oh. Some one does not have a clue about how we “supported” Saddam. This should be fun. Okay, how did we (the US) support Saddam? What did we supply him with in terms of weapons? loans? Be sure and show all the sources of support that we gave him… haha You are fighting a losing battle on this one. Even Rascal gave up on this little “argument.” Quit while you are ahead… I know all about the “support” that we gave Saddam and I have the sites and facts to back it up. Do you?
fred smith wrote:
So please, let’s get a bit more knowledge about the subject before making such ridiculous statements. Just because YOU did not know about it does not mean that it was not happening.
I repeat. If you don’t know anything about this, you should find out first before shooting your mouth off, but go ahead, get yourself in deeper. Please do. It will help in making an example of you for the others who still insist on all of this nonsense…[/quote]
Some of you guys obviously like being belittled by fred smith. :s
I was just wondering who and what gave him permission to talk to people like this.
God’s gift to the IP forum.
A fine politician he will make. Right there with the big boyz…
Jeesh! :loco:
[quote]Some of you guys obviously like being belittled by fred smith.
I was just wondering who and what gave him permission to talk to people like this.
God’s gift to the IP forum.
A fine politician he will make. Right there with the big boyz…
Jeesh! [/quote]
This little “myth” of US support for Saddam has been around for years. Yet, each and every month like clockwork, someone new comes along making the same assertions and unproved allegations. I believe that no fewer than 15 to 20 times has this been proved to be false on the various threads that have been discussed here ad naseum since 2001. You do the math. Apologies then if my impatience with this continued insistence on US support of Saddam is palpable. But then, hey, I guess there is always a chance that this time, unlike the other 15 to 20, I may be proved wrong. Are you a betting man? Want to take the odds?
Point of clarification. The US did sell weapons to Saddam in 1982-85 mostly from 1982-3, but in very limited amounts. Also, for such a good ally of the US, why is it that we did not have a fully accredited embassy in Baghdad from 1968 to 2003? And if we want to see who fully supported Saddam, let’s go to www.iraqwatch.org where we will discover that in terms of conventional weapons, the Russians sold 59 percent of Saddam’s arsenal, the French 13 percent, Chinese 12 percent. The US and UK were each at under 1 percent and all sold in one year 1982-3. Then for nuclear, chemical and missile technology and equipment prior to Gulf War I, the number one supplier was Germany at 50 percent followed by Switzerland 8 percent, and 5 percent each for Austria, Croatia, Brazil, Argentina, France, Italy and others. The US and UK were under 3.5 percent and in the case of the US, it included supercomputers which “could” be used for military purposes. But that was not the same as the very direct sales of chemical, missile and nuclear equipment sold by the Germans. So let’s continue talking about US support for Saddam or have we all had enough of this?
I’ve got faux outrage fatigue.[/quote]
Touch
[quote=“fred smith”][quote]Some of you guys obviously like being belittled by fred smith.
I was just wondering who and what gave him permission to talk to people like this.
God’s gift to the IP forum.
A fine politician he will make. Right there with the big boyz…
Jeesh! [/quote]
This little “myth” of US support for Saddam has been around for years. Yet, each and every month like clockwork, someone new comes along making the same assertions and unproved allegations. I believe that no fewer than 15 to 20 times has this been proved to be false on the various threads that have been discussed here ad naseum since 2001. You do the math. Apologies then if my impatience with this continued insistence on US support of Saddam is palpable. But then, hey, I guess there is always a chance that this time, unlike the other 15 to 20, I may be proved wrong. Are you a betting man? Want to take the odds?[/quote]
Are you stating that the United States had no idea Saddam was using chemical weapons against Iraq Kurdish insurgents in the early 1980s, while Reagan was providing intelligence and military assistance to Iraq?
OUT OF RESPECT TO THE MURDERED JOURNALIST, MAYBE THIS THREAD COULD BE SPLIT AND PRUNED?
We knew that Saddam was using chemical weapons. I believe that the US submitted a report on this to the UN calling for him to cease and desist. BUT those chemical weapons were primarily supplied by which nation: Germany. That is why the Iranian government is suing only one nation for deaths caused by use of chemical weapons and that is Germany. Did you know that?
We were providing intelligence to Saddam for a very very limited time and that was when the Iranians looked set to take Basra during the Gulf War. That was in 1982-3. After that, despite overtures, we never got very far with Saddam. Now, are you saying we should not have made any overtures at all? You are fully entitled to that view but given the geostrategic importance of the Gulf region, if you think that the US was going to stand by and do nothing while Iran swept through southern Iraq and maybe kept going to the Saudi oil fields…
But what is the real point of all this discussion? The nations primarily involved in all of this were surprise surprise France, Russia, Germany and China. Yet, who do you target for your criticisms? The US which did not have a fully accredited embassy in Baghdad from 1968 to 2003. To a nation that supplied less than 1 percent of his conventional weapons and some supercomputers and all mostly in one year 1982-3? That is like holding up the Netherlands as the worst example and cause of global warming in the world. Do you get that?
Again, I do not mean to be rude, no actually, I do, but so many of you do not even know even the most basic, pardon my redundancy, rudimentary, elemetary facts about this conflict. Your outrage is based not on any objective standard for determining who was most egregiously guilty but in finding anything at all no matter how relatively unimportant to bash the US. And on that score, I do not see how your views are any different from racism, do you? sexism? et al?
Oh, I see you’ve backtracked again, so end of discussion. 
I don’t agree. It was started as “one of the reasons this war is fought”. That should be discussed.
Wanna buy some WMD?
Oh oh. Some one does not have a clue about how we “supported” Saddam. This should be fun. Okay, how did we (the US) support Saddam? What did we supply him with in terms of weapons? loans? Be sure and show all the sources of support that we gave him… haha You are fighting a losing battle on this one. Even Rascal gave up on this little “argument.” Quit while you are ahead… I know all about the “support” that we gave Saddam and I have the sites and facts to back it up. Do you?
fred smith wrote:
So please, let’s get a bit more knowledge about the subject before making such ridiculous statements. Just because YOU did not know about it does not mean that it was not happening.
I repeat. If you don’t know anything about this, you should find out first before shooting your mouth off, but go ahead, get yourself in deeper. Please do. It will help in making an example of you for the others who still insist on all of this nonsense…[/quote]
You seem to have been arguing with yourself, Fred:
Genius! This way, you get to win a losing argument at the same time you lose it! :bravo: 
Yes, Richardm. We all KNOW that Rumsfeld met with Saddam during the years in question 1982-85. That lovely photo has become an easily latched upon icon to “prove” the evil nature of the American regime and its nefarious activities, but BUT BUT does that change the fact that we only sold 1 percent or LESS of his conventional weapons and 3.5 percent of his nuclear, missile, chemical weapons, equipment and technology? Mostly computers that COULD be used for dual purposes? how would that compare with the 59 percent of his conventional weapons that came from Russia? The 13 percent from France? the 12 percent from China?
How would it compare with the two deals that the French and Russians had that were worth billions and billions to develop oil fields? Gosh cannot even think of ONE American company that has any of those despite our takeover of the country? how about the 50 percent of nuclear, chemical and missile equipment, technology etc. sold by Germany, the 8 percent by Switzerland, the 5 percent by France, and by Croatia and by Italy and by Brazil and by Argentina? Hmmm?
So you have a photo of Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam. Would you like me to get all the photos of all the French, Russian, German, Chinese officials that had contact with Saddam? How about those from the Arab world? What about the UN?
Simple ideas for simple minds…
WMD, Liberation of the Iraqi, 9/11, cutting heads off women, any other reasons?
Political Advantage. Is that a good reason?
Shock and Awe. Where did they learn that?
Tic tac toe. The only way to win is not to play. (War Games)
Have to agree TC, I found myself particularly moved and angered by that article. Murderously so. Maybe we have to read of the horror in a dose we can almost comprehend. Big figures like xx dead in a car bomb are just too insane to even attempt grasping.
Additionally Iraq has been particularly horrific for reporters.
HG
Actually, I am not sure that this is true. My understanding is that around 250 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq and that of these around 35 have been killed. Of those, perhaps a handful have been journalists or camera people.
I do not believe that the Iraqi press has been subjected to a far greater degree of violence than the population at large and certainly not more than the politicians, police, military, etc.