Saddam Hussein : Our Creation..here is the proof

[MORTARDUDE]

America used to like Saddam. We loved Saddam. We funded him. We armed
him. We helped him gas Iranian troops.

But then he screwed up. He invaded the dictatorship of Kuwait and, in
doing so, did the worst thing imaginable ? he threatened an even better friend
of ours: the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia, and its vast oil reserves. The
Bushes and the Saudi royal family were and are close business partners, and Saddam,
back in 1990, committed a royal blunder by getting a little too close to
their wealthy holdings. Things went downhill for Saddam from there.

But it wasn't always that way. Saddam was our good friend and ally. We
supported his regime. It wasn't the first time we had helped a murderer. We
liked playing Dr. Frankenstein. We created a lot of monsters ? the Shah of Iran,
Somoza of Nicaragua, Pinochet of Chile ? and then we expressed ignorance or
shock when they ran amok and massacred people. We liked Saddam because he was
willing to fight the Ayatollah. So we made sure that he got billions of dollars
to purchase weapons. Weapons of mass destruction. That's right, he had them.
We should know ? we gave them to him!

We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with
Saddam in the 1980s. That's how he got chemical and biological agents so he could
use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here's the list of some of the
stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate report):

Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal
cord, and heart.
Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.
And here are some of the American corporations who helped to prop Saddam
up by doing business with him: AT&T, Bechtel, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical,
Dupont, Kodak, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM (Read a full list of companies and
descriptions of how they helped Saddam).

We were so cozy with dear old Saddam that we decided to feed him
satellite images so he could locate where the Iranian troops were. We pretty much
knew how he would use the information, and sure enough, as soon as we sent him
the spy photos, he gassed those troops. And we kept quiet. Because he was our
friend, and the Iranians were the "enemy." A year after he first gassed the
Iranians, we reestablished full diplomatic relations with him!

Later he gassed his own people, the Kurds. You would think that would
force us to disassociate ourselves from him. Congress tried to impose economic
sanctions on Saddam, but the Reagan White House quickly rejected that idea ?
they wouldn't let anything derail their good buddy Saddam. We had a virtual love
fest with this Frankenstein whom we (in part) created.

And, just like the mythical Frankenstein, Saddam eventually spun out of
control. He would no longer do what he was told by his master. Saddam had to
be caught. And now that he has been brought back from the wilderness, perhaps
he will have something to say about his creators. Maybe we can learn
something... interesting. Maybe Don Rumsfeld could smile and shake Saddam's hand again.
Just like he did when he went to see him in 1983 (Photo).

Maybe we never would have been in the situation we're in if Rumsfeld,
Bush, Sr., and company hadn't been so excited back in the 80s about their
friendly monster in the desert.

[Gimpy]

Amen! Amen!

[Keith_Hixson]

If I remember correctly.

Carter backed Saddam at one point or another. WE were having serious problems with Iran. Remember the captives? Iraq went on to attack Iran and you had the Iran/Iraq War. Iran seemed more dangerous than Iraq so we backed Iraq.

Throughout the years these situations have happened. Only thing I can say: "Ain't hind site beautiful." We can really criticiize those of the past, especially if we know the future.

Have you ever made a decision which you wish you could have made it differently?

Keith

[Seascamp]

By the way Larry, I worked some projects is Iraq. Most notably three of the base-load power plants in the Baghdad area and the petroleum pipe line going into Turkey. A business British colleague of mine was grabbed up and chained to a turbine generator set during GWI, was brutalized horribly and didn?t live to see Y2K as a result. So I suppose that makes me one of the supposed goons you reference. And by the way you missed virtually all the German and French companies operating in Iraq at the time, every one of them, especially the French National Oil company that was operating the vast majority of the oil fields. But you did hit the American outfit I was contracted to, interesting.

But to make amends and beg forgiveness I also worked on the trans Siberia to Europe petroleum pipe line and on a new industrial complex near a place called Tol?yatti, right on the Volga River. Right and proper Communist, I yam, I yam. That ought to make Gimpy squirt, LOL.

Sir, I beg to differ with you on many of your conclusions but on the other hand there is a grain of truth in some of your findings and this is a debate forum not a history class. Long and short of all that experience was that Iraq was a scary- ass place to work and your assertion that ?We loved? Saddam and his minions is a real nasty slap in the face to us American ex pats out working the world infrastructure and making a living. And I assert that Saddam was a well entrenched totalitarian dictator before we became fellow travelers on a similar path. I further assert that Iraqi forces were about to be routed with absolutely nothing standing between the Islamic Shiite fanatical hordes and the Port of Aden but distance, period. I don?t know that is a reason to introduce WMD, but it was the apparent reason at the time. Oh what a wonderful world.

Keith,
I believe that 20/20 hind sight has a lot of potential for an individual as there is opportunity for a sharp focus and a wide field of vision. However, in terms shuffling things around for the sake of political leveraging or the current hate agenda, it?s more like kids on an Easter egg hunt or burning ants with a magnifying glass. Sure, specific episodes can be taken out of the whole of a story and virtually anything can be made of it. And sure there can be an exercise in connecting the dots to reach some conclusion, whatever that might be. But for my part, I?ll only study the History works of a research scholar that is not directly associated with a US University and preferably not a US Citizen. I think our academic institutions have really screwed the pooch in terms of academic credibility and accuracy when it comes to contemporary US History. Too many cooks with multiple loyalties make for really crummy soup.

Scamp

[Keith_Hixson]

Ditto,

Now they are trying remake the history of United States. Some correction need to be made but for the most part lets be logical and look at the past with an open mind and try to understand why those decision were made at the time.

Well said, Scamp.

Keith

[MORTARDUDE]

Scamp :

I did not mean any disrespect to you or those that made an honest living. I sure as hell wasn't defending anything Saddam has done. I was just showing the hypocrisy of the "WMD" question, that when it was "in our best interest", it was quite all right to unleash the WMDs. Now they are a pretext ( apparently false ) to, in my mind, gain control of the oil pipelines. Your points are right on target. Thanks.

Larry

[Andy]

The U.S. gave huge amounts of money and equipment to China, one of our largest and most powerful potential enemies to fight Japan, one of our best friends. The U.S. government gave even larger amounts of money and supplies to the Soviet Union, the leader of that odious movement known as communism to kill German?s, who are usually our friends. 10?s of thousands of good red blooded American boys died while making France free so that the French could bad mouth the U.S. whenever the occasion arises Americans shed blood and spent money to help free Cuba so that Castro could rule that bastion of communism.

There is a 2,000 year old saying in the middle east, ?My enemies enemy is my friend?. It applies today just as it did then.

Stay healthy,
Andy

[Seascamp]

Thanks for the comments Larry, I appreciate that. For the most part I think we are on the same page with regard to the Iraq situation. However, I for one will not buy into the bleating, hateful and accusatory mouths during this political season. When the Dems and or Liberals get settled into to a more defined platform perhaps there may be some substance and reality to be put on the plate. But that time is not at hand presently and I pay them little mind except to see what the latest accusation or totally spiteful comment is all about.

As to WMD, I?m not at all ready to even begin to think there isn?t a stockpile of Iraqi killer bugs and chems around, probably and most likely in Syria or Jordan. In my mind, way to many scientists, production resources and associated paraphernalia has been rounded up to dismiss the issue as a ruse or some supposed concoction. That is real dangerous thinking as the odds-on probability are that we just could have a real sad day and the ?Oh shit? thoughts then become useless mumblings of the previous spitefully erroneous idiots. I base this opinion on a couple of things. First and foremost, it is pure idiocy to ever think Saddam or anyone like Saddam in the mid east is ever going to give up any positioning, leverage or intimidation rights. That would be diametrically opposed to the Arab mindset and centuries of cultural history and their perpetual desire to rule, subjugate and dominate and/ or eradicate anyone they can get their hands on. For exactly the same reasons it is highly unlikely Saddam or anyone like Saddam would hand killer bugs or chems over to regional revolutionary or terrorist outfits. If that happened, there is a 100% probability that the WMD would be used on the benefactor, post haste, especially if Al Qaeda got the hands on a sufficient supply.

So I?d say Saddam had every reason and motivation to eradicate a US City and had every intention of doing so given half a chance of getting away with it. To pull this off he could only trust his closest inner circle and to our good fortune he was slow and clumsy at developing Iraqi only international terrorist assets.

So all in all, my concern is exactly who is guarding and securing that stockpile, not if it exists or not.

And sure Larry, control of the Iraqi energy resources is a factor in the equation, that?s a given. All rolled into one big ball there are strategic and economic interests of a big bunch of countries, including the US. And if those mid east resources fall into the hands of the Islamic terrorists/radical fundamentalists, then start filling sand bags and digging in because mega thunder is coming, big time.

Salute!

Scamp

P.S.
Andy, Ya skiped one. While Imperial Japan was ripping pre Communist, pre WWII China to shreads it was the US that was suppling a large portion of the raw materials and fuel resorces that kept the IJA in the field and the IJN at sea. Thus the seeds of Pearl Harbor were planted, there and then........

[Gimpy]

Weapons Of Mass Stupidity

It's the inviolable first rule of democracy that all politicians will praise the wisdom of the people -- an effusive flattery that intensifies when they ask "the people" to swallow something exceptionally inedible. What the people never hear from anyone, or from anyone with further ambitions, is the truth.

It is and has always been true, in Samuel Johnson's famous words, that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" -- by which, of course, Dr. Johnson meant patriotism as a political and rhetorical weapon, not as a private emotion. Belittling other people's patriotism to achieve political leverage is the lowest road a public scoundrel can travel, the road where neo-conservative meets neo-fascist.

In flag-frenzied attacks, an unscrupulous administration found a blunt object ready-made to hammer its critics. IT'S UNPATRIOTIC TO OPPOSE THE ADMINISTRATIONS ACTIONS AT THIS TIME!....................Horse$hit!

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public," said President Theodore Roosevelt.


The invasion of Iraq was in no way what it seemed to be, either. Saddam Hussein was never a threat to the United States. His "weapons of mass destruction" remain invisible, his terrorist connections remain unproven, and he had absolutely nothing to do with the destruction of the World Trade Center. Most cynical of all was the "liberation" lie, the administration's sudden concern for the helpless citizens of Iraq. Saddam, as grotesque as he was, wasn't getting any meaner, and "liberators" like Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were doing brisk business with him when he was in his murderous, citizen-eating prime (and in Cheney's case, as recently as 1999 when he was at Halliburton). It would take half a page to list all the US-sanctioned dictators, killers of their people, who will be sharing hell's hottest corner with Saddam Hussein.


They don't make Republicans like they used to. The troop-support doctrine, so universally and smugly conceded (as is the arguement about WMD), is logic for the intellectually disabled, for people who've been hit in the head repeatedly with a heavy shovel. The stupidity of those who buy it is no more astonishing than the hypocrisy of those who sell it -- Republicans (not all, but especially the radical neo-cons) who preach our sacred duty to the army's morale and simultaneously cancel $15 billion in veteran's benefits and 60 percent of federal education subsidies for servicemen's children, along with all the unmentioned inadequacies being instituted against veterans and their families, are just that........HYPOCRITES! If you can't believe that, look it up, it IS in the public record!

PS............Scamp................No that does NOT make me "squirt". We all have things in our past we "regret" we may have had to do in order to make a living! Your post was.......as Larry said.......straightforward and too the point! Your statement, and I quote."I further assert that Iraqi forces were about to be routed with absolutely nothing standing between the Islamic Shiite fanatical hordes and the Port of Aden but distance, period. I don?t know that is a reason to introduce WMD, but it was the apparent reason at the time. Oh what a wonderful world. " End quote!

This was NO reason ...........as the Geneva convention has proclaimed BTW....for US (the United States of America under the leadership of of Ronnie Reagen, George the First, then VP , Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld) to offer up these weapons or the means and methods to procure them, manufacture them and ESPECIALLY use them! Just as the original post states.....this administration and members of the current "leadership" within the party of Lincoln are guilty of at best ...Hypocrisy.........and at WORST.......untold, lies and deception to advance their 'agenda"!

[Keith_Hixson]

So . . . . If I am patriotic I am a scroundrel? Just because evil folks can use patriotism for their own selfishness doesn't mean that patriotism is wrong.

You are spinning again.


Keith