How US helped Iraq build deadly arsenal

Vector wrote in message . ..
On 8 Jan 2004 00:19:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

The statement made was that the US supported Saddam while Saddam was
gassing Kurds. Yes, I deny that.

Oh well, if denial helps you to sleep at night with those images of
the kids of Halabja running thru your mind then go for it.

In other words, you can't back up the accusation.

On 11 Jan 2004 21:30:46 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

Vector wrote in message . ..
On 8 Jan 2004 00:19:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

The statement made was that the US supported Saddam while Saddam was
gassing Kurds. Yes, I deny that.

Oh well, if denial helps you to sleep at night with those images of
the kids of Halabja running thru your mind then go for it.

In other words, you can't back up the accusation.

No - it means I can't normally be stuffed dealing with ignorant trolls
- but just for you -
" Although the U.S. government officially denounced the gassing of the
Kurds, it was business like never before with Iraq. After 1988
business with Iraq actually increased. By 1989, Iraq was given
American agricultural guarantees worth $1 billion. Iraq was the
largest importer of U.S. rice and the 2nd largest participant in the
agricultural credit program."
More on the greedy U$-Iraqi lovefest here -
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/alliance.html

Or do a Google on the Prevention of Genocide Act and see how it was
torpedoed by greedy U$ Scum who stood to lo$e out on their evil trade
wuth Saddam.

Here, try this link from The Axis of the Wilfully Obstuse which seems
fairly appropriate in your case -

http://www.afterimages.co.uk/backword/00006.html
"But, by August 1988, the war between Baghdad and Tehran was over. And
yet Saddam continued his genocidal "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds,
which by late 1988 had resulted in close to 100,000 deaths, most of
them civilian. So, in September 1988, then-Senator Claiborne Pell of
Rhode Island introduced the Prevention of Genocide Act, which would
have ended all U.S. aid to Baghdad. The bill passed the Senate, but
the Reagan administration helped scuttle it in the House. And, when
George H. W. Bush became president the following year, he doubled U.S.
agricultural loans to Iraq — money that, it would later be revealed,
Saddam was partly diverting to the military."

Or check this page on Peter Galbraith (son of JK) after his visit to
the Kurds.
" Few Americans know - or care - as much about the plight of the Kurds
as Peter Galbraith.A former ambassador to Croatia from 1993 to 1998 he
documented the Iraqi authorities' attacks against the Kurds in the
late 1980s when he served as senior advisor to the US Senate Foreign
Relations Committee (1979-1993). He was one of the first to witness
the genocide of the Kurds by the Iraqi government during a trip he
made to the region in 1987....................................

Galbraith rushed to Capital Hill to set in motion a blistering
response to the atrocity. One that he hoped would alter the course of
world events.
"I sat down and dictated, in about an hour, a bill to my
secretary. I imposed every sanction on Iraq that I could think of. The
legislation banned oil sales, required U.S. to oppose loans, cut off
$700 million in agricultural and export credits and banned any export
requiring a licence. I drafted this, and said what should we call it?

The Bill was called the Prevention of Genocide Act ..... It would have
imposed the harshest American economic sanctions against any country
in twenty years. But Galbraith had to move quickly because Congress
was about to adjourn and if he didn't get Senate and House Approval
the Bill would die.The sanctions bill won Senate approval in just 24
hours.

"For a major piece of legislation to pass the Senate in a day is
virtually without precedent. I think the Senators who looked at this,
responded from their hearts."

Barham Salih, the Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional
Government--Sulaymania was thrilled with the response.

Peter Galbraith couldn't believe his luck and hoped the Bill would
soon become law. Instead he found himself up against American
capitalism...........................

Lobbyists ............................ warned that the Bill would only
punish Americans who were doing business with Iraq. Galbraith found
himself facing farmers, bankers, exporters and oil men."
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/battle.html


"The March 1988 massacre at Halabja--where Iraq government forces
killed upwards of 5,000 civilians in that Kurdish town by gassing them
with chemical weapons--was downplayed by the Reagan administration,
even to the point of claiming that Iran, then the preferred American
enemy, was actually responsible. The Halabja tragedy was not an
isolated incident, as U.S. officials were well aware at the time. UN
reports in 1986 and 1987 documented Iraq’s use of chemical weapons,
which were confirmed both by investigations from the CIA and by U.S.
embassy staff who visited Iraqi Kurdish refugees in Turkey. However,
not only was the United States not particularly concerned about
Saddam’s ongoing repression and the use of chemical weapons, the
United States actually was supporting the Iraqi government’s
procurement effort of materials necessary for the development of such
an arsenal.

Furthermore, officials from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency were
stationed in Baghdad to pass on satellite imagery to the Iraqi
military in order to help them target Iranian troop concentrations, in
the full knowledge that Saddam was using chemical weapons against
Iranian forces.

During the 1980s, American companies, with U.S. government backing,
supplied Saddam Hussein’s government with much of the raw materials
for Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons programs. A Senate
committee reported in 1994 that American companies licensed by the
U.S. Commerce Department had shipped large quantities of materials
usable in weapons production in Iraq, noting that such trade continued
at least until the end of the decade, despite evidence of Iraqi
chemical warfare against Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. Much of this trade
was no oversight. It was made possible because the Reagan
administration took Iraq off of its list of countries supporting
terrorism in 1982, making the country eligible to receive such items.
This re-designation came in spite of Iraq’s ongoing support of Abu
Nidal and other terrorist groups.

As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq’s
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports. "

"As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq’s
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports."
http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc3636.html

Nice one, "Vector".

Sadly, a great number of people deliberately ignore the facts. They don't
want to know what really happened. They soak up simplistic propaganda
without questioning it. Then in any discussion they throw out ridiculous one
line inanities in response to serious analysis.

As long as the world is full of people like this, politicians who are acting
in the interests of themselves or big companies will be able to get away
with all sorts of killing and destruction.


Pete Loud
"Maps of Iraq",
http://users.powernet.co.uk/mkmarina/iraq/iraq.html




"Vector" wrote in message
...
On 11 Jan 2004 21:30:46 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

Vector wrote in message
. ..
On 8 Jan 2004 00:19:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

The statement made was that the US supported Saddam while Saddam was
gassing Kurds. Yes, I deny that.

Oh well, if denial helps you to sleep at night with those images of
the kids of Halabja running thru your mind then go for it.

In other words, you can't back up the accusation.

No - it means I can't normally be stuffed dealing with ignorant trolls
- but just for you -
" Although the U.S. government officially denounced the gassing of the
Kurds, it was business like never before with Iraq. After 1988
business with Iraq actually increased. By 1989, Iraq was given
American agricultural guarantees worth $1 billion. Iraq was the
largest importer of U.S. rice and the 2nd largest participant in the
agricultural credit program."
More on the greedy U$-Iraqi lovefest here -
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/alliance.html

Or do a Google on the Prevention of Genocide Act and see how it was
torpedoed by greedy U$ Scum who stood to lo$e out on their evil trade
wuth Saddam.

Here, try this link from The Axis of the Wilfully Obstuse which seems
fairly appropriate in your case -

http://www.afterimages.co.uk/backword/00006.html
"But, by August 1988, the war between Baghdad and Tehran was over. And
yet Saddam continued his genocidal "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds,
which by late 1988 had resulted in close to 100,000 deaths, most of
them civilian. So, in September 1988, then-Senator Claiborne Pell of
Rhode Island introduced the Prevention of Genocide Act, which would
have ended all U.S. aid to Baghdad. The bill passed the Senate, but
the Reagan administration helped scuttle it in the House. And, when
George H. W. Bush became president the following year, he doubled U.S.
agricultural loans to Iraq - money that, it would later be revealed,
Saddam was partly diverting to the military."

Or check this page on Peter Galbraith (son of JK) after his visit to
the Kurds.
" Few Americans know - or care - as much about the plight of the Kurds
as Peter Galbraith.A former ambassador to Croatia from 1993 to 1998 he
documented the Iraqi authorities' attacks against the Kurds in the
late 1980s when he served as senior advisor to the US Senate Foreign
Relations Committee (1979-1993). He was one of the first to witness
the genocide of the Kurds by the Iraqi government during a trip he
made to the region in 1987....................................

Galbraith rushed to Capital Hill to set in motion a blistering
response to the atrocity. One that he hoped would alter the course of
world events.
"I sat down and dictated, in about an hour, a bill to my
secretary. I imposed every sanction on Iraq that I could think of. The
legislation banned oil sales, required U.S. to oppose loans, cut off
$700 million in agricultural and export credits and banned any export
requiring a licence. I drafted this, and said what should we call it?

The Bill was called the Prevention of Genocide Act ..... It would have
imposed the harshest American economic sanctions against any country
in twenty years. But Galbraith had to move quickly because Congress
was about to adjourn and if he didn't get Senate and House Approval
the Bill would die.The sanctions bill won Senate approval in just 24
hours.

"For a major piece of legislation to pass the Senate in a day is
virtually without precedent. I think the Senators who looked at this,
responded from their hearts."

Barham Salih, the Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional
Government--Sulaymania was thrilled with the response.

Peter Galbraith couldn't believe his luck and hoped the Bill would
soon become law. Instead he found himself up against American
capitalism...........................

Lobbyists ............................ warned that the Bill would only
punish Americans who were doing business with Iraq. Galbraith found
himself facing farmers, bankers, exporters and oil men."
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/battle.html


"The March 1988 massacre at Halabja--where Iraq government forces
killed upwards of 5,000 civilians in that Kurdish town by gassing them
with chemical weapons--was downplayed by the Reagan administration,
even to the point of claiming that Iran, then the preferred American
enemy, was actually responsible. The Halabja tragedy was not an
isolated incident, as U.S. officials were well aware at the time. UN
reports in 1986 and 1987 documented Iraq's use of chemical weapons,
which were confirmed both by investigations from the CIA and by U.S.
embassy staff who visited Iraqi Kurdish refugees in Turkey. However,
not only was the United States not particularly concerned about
Saddam's ongoing repression and the use of chemical weapons, the
United States actually was supporting the Iraqi government's
procurement effort of materials necessary for the development of such
an arsenal.

Furthermore, officials from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency were
stationed in Baghdad to pass on satellite imagery to the Iraqi
military in order to help them target Iranian troop concentrations, in
the full knowledge that Saddam was using chemical weapons against
Iranian forces.

During the 1980s, American companies, with U.S. government backing,
supplied Saddam Hussein's government with much of the raw materials
for Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs. A Senate
committee reported in 1994 that American companies licensed by the
U.S. Commerce Department had shipped large quantities of materials
usable in weapons production in Iraq, noting that such trade continued
at least until the end of the decade, despite evidence of Iraqi
chemical warfare against Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. Much of this trade
was no oversight. It was made possible because the Reagan
administration took Iraq off of its list of countries supporting
terrorism in 1982, making the country eligible to receive such items.
This re-designation came in spite of Iraq's ongoing support of Abu
Nidal and other terrorist groups.

As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq's
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports. "

"As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq's
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports."
http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc3636.html

Congratulations, you've just summed up "Tchiowa" perfectly.

John L.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:39:20 -0000, "Pete Loud"
wrote:

Nice one, "Vector".

Sadly, a great number of people deliberately ignore the facts. They don't
want to know what really happened. They soak up simplistic propaganda
without questioning it. Then in any discussion they throw out ridiculous one
line inanities in response to serious analysis.

As long as the world is full of people like this, politicians who are acting
in the interests of themselves or big companies will be able to get away
with all sorts of killing and destruction.


Pete Loud
"Maps of Iraq",
http://users.powernet.co.uk/mkmarina/iraq/iraq.html




"Vector" wrote in message
.. .
On 11 Jan 2004 21:30:46 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

Vector wrote in message
...
On 8 Jan 2004 00:19:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

The statement made was that the US supported Saddam while Saddam was
gassing Kurds. Yes, I deny that.

Oh well, if denial helps you to sleep at night with those images of
the kids of Halabja running thru your mind then go for it.

In other words, you can't back up the accusation.

No - it means I can't normally be stuffed dealing with ignorant trolls
- but just for you -
" Although the U.S. government officially denounced the gassing of the
Kurds, it was business like never before with Iraq. After 1988
business with Iraq actually increased. By 1989, Iraq was given
American agricultural guarantees worth $1 billion. Iraq was the
largest importer of U.S. rice and the 2nd largest participant in the
agricultural credit program."
More on the greedy U$-Iraqi lovefest here -
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/alliance.html

Or do a Google on the Prevention of Genocide Act and see how it was
torpedoed by greedy U$ Scum who stood to lo$e out on their evil trade
wuth Saddam.

Here, try this link from The Axis of the Wilfully Obstuse which seems
fairly appropriate in your case -

http://www.afterimages.co.uk/backword/00006.html
"But, by August 1988, the war between Baghdad and Tehran was over. And
yet Saddam continued his genocidal "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds,
which by late 1988 had resulted in close to 100,000 deaths, most of
them civilian. So, in September 1988, then-Senator Claiborne Pell of
Rhode Island introduced the Prevention of Genocide Act, which would
have ended all U.S. aid to Baghdad. The bill passed the Senate, but
the Reagan administration helped scuttle it in the House. And, when
George H. W. Bush became president the following year, he doubled U.S.
agricultural loans to Iraq - money that, it would later be revealed,
Saddam was partly diverting to the military."

Or check this page on Peter Galbraith (son of JK) after his visit to
the Kurds.
" Few Americans know - or care - as much about the plight of the Kurds
as Peter Galbraith.A former ambassador to Croatia from 1993 to 1998 he
documented the Iraqi authorities' attacks against the Kurds in the
late 1980s when he served as senior advisor to the US Senate Foreign
Relations Committee (1979-1993). He was one of the first to witness
the genocide of the Kurds by the Iraqi government during a trip he
made to the region in 1987....................................

Galbraith rushed to Capital Hill to set in motion a blistering
response to the atrocity. One that he hoped would alter the course of
world events.
"I sat down and dictated, in about an hour, a bill to my
secretary. I imposed every sanction on Iraq that I could think of. The
legislation banned oil sales, required U.S. to oppose loans, cut off
$700 million in agricultural and export credits and banned any export
requiring a licence. I drafted this, and said what should we call it?

The Bill was called the Prevention of Genocide Act ..... It would have
imposed the harshest American economic sanctions against any country
in twenty years. But Galbraith had to move quickly because Congress
was about to adjourn and if he didn't get Senate and House Approval
the Bill would die.The sanctions bill won Senate approval in just 24
hours.

"For a major piece of legislation to pass the Senate in a day is
virtually without precedent. I think the Senators who looked at this,
responded from their hearts."

Barham Salih, the Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional
Government--Sulaymania was thrilled with the response.

Peter Galbraith couldn't believe his luck and hoped the Bill would
soon become law. Instead he found himself up against American
capitalism...........................

Lobbyists ............................ warned that the Bill would only
punish Americans who were doing business with Iraq. Galbraith found
himself facing farmers, bankers, exporters and oil men."
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/battle.html


"The March 1988 massacre at Halabja--where Iraq government forces
killed upwards of 5,000 civilians in that Kurdish town by gassing them
with chemical weapons--was downplayed by the Reagan administration,
even to the point of claiming that Iran, then the preferred American
enemy, was actually responsible. The Halabja tragedy was not an
isolated incident, as U.S. officials were well aware at the time. UN
reports in 1986 and 1987 documented Iraq's use of chemical weapons,
which were confirmed both by investigations from the CIA and by U.S.
embassy staff who visited Iraqi Kurdish refugees in Turkey. However,
not only was the United States not particularly concerned about
Saddam's ongoing repression and the use of chemical weapons, the
United States actually was supporting the Iraqi government's
procurement effort of materials necessary for the development of such
an arsenal.

Furthermore, officials from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency were
stationed in Baghdad to pass on satellite imagery to the Iraqi
military in order to help them target Iranian troop concentrations, in
the full knowledge that Saddam was using chemical weapons against
Iranian forces.

During the 1980s, American companies, with U.S. government backing,
supplied Saddam Hussein's government with much of the raw materials
for Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs. A Senate
committee reported in 1994 that American companies licensed by the
U.S. Commerce Department had shipped large quantities of materials
usable in weapons production in Iraq, noting that such trade continued
at least until the end of the decade, despite evidence of Iraqi
chemical warfare against Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. Much of this trade
was no oversight. It was made possible because the Reagan
administration took Iraq off of its list of countries supporting
terrorism in 1982, making the country eligible to receive such items.
This re-designation came in spite of Iraq's ongoing support of Abu
Nidal and other terrorist groups.

As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq's
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports. "

"As late as December 1989, just eight months prior to Iraq's
designation as an enemy for having invaded Kuwait, the Bush
administration pushed through new loans to the Iraqi government in
order to facilitate U.S.-Iraqi trade. Meanwhile, according to a 1992
Senate investigation, the Commerce Department repeatedly deleted and
altered information on export licenses for trade with Iraq in order to
hide potential military uses of American exports."
http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc3636.html

Vector wrote in message . ..
On 11 Jan 2004 21:30:46 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

Vector wrote in message . ..
On 8 Jan 2004 00:19:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:

The statement made was that the US supported Saddam while Saddam was
gassing Kurds. Yes, I deny that.

Oh well, if denial helps you to sleep at night with those images of
the kids of Halabja running thru your mind then go for it.

In other words, you can't back up the accusation.

No - it means I can't normally be stuffed dealing with ignorant trolls
- but just for you -

Now read what you are citing:

" Although the U.S. government officially denounced the gassing of the
Kurds, it was business like never before with Iraq. After 1988
business with Iraq actually increased. By 1989, Iraq was given
American agricultural guarantees worth $1 billion. Iraq was the
largest importer of U.S. rice and the 2nd largest participant in the
agricultural credit program."
More on the greedy U$-Iraqi lovefest here -
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/alliance.html

That does *NOT*, repeat *NOT* say that the US supported Saddam.
American imports and exports from all kinds of countries. It has
nothing to do with whether or not we support their leader.

Or do a Google on the Prevention of Genocide Act and see how it was
torpedoed by greedy U$ Scum who stood to lo$e out on their evil trade
wuth Saddam.

Here, try this link from The Axis of the Wilfully Obstuse which seems
fairly appropriate in your case -

http://www.afterimages.co.uk/backword/00006.html
"But, by August 1988, the war between Baghdad and Tehran was over. And
yet Saddam continued his genocidal "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds,
which by late 1988 had resulted in close to 100,000 deaths, most of
them civilian. So, in September 1988, then-Senator Claiborne Pell of
Rhode Island introduced the Prevention of Genocide Act, which would
have ended all U.S. aid to Baghdad. The bill passed the Senate, but
the Reagan administration helped scuttle it in the House. And, when
George H. W. Bush became president the following year, he doubled U.S.
agricultural loans to Iraq ? money that, it would later be revealed,
Saddam was partly diverting to the military."

Again, read what you quoted. It does not support the statement that I
challenged.

I snipped the rest because it's more of the same.

You need to work on reading comprehension.

Again, the statement made was the the US supported Saddam while he was
gassing Kurds. The statement was not "US businesses imported or
exported to Iraq after the attack" or anything like that. A very
specific statement. And it simply isn't true. And nothing you posted
contradicts that.

But don't let that stop you.........

(Tchiowa) wrote:

That does *NOT*, repeat *NOT* say that the US supported Saddam.
American imports and exports from all kinds of countries. It has
nothing to do with whether or not we support their leader.

[snipped]

Again, read what you quoted. It does not support the statement that I
challenged.

I snipped the rest because it's more of the same.

You need to work on reading comprehension.

Again, the statement made was the the US supported Saddam while he was
gassing Kurds. The statement was not "US businesses imported or
exported to Iraq after the attack" or anything like that. A very
specific statement. And it simply isn't true. And nothing you posted
contradicts that.

But the things it *does* say are quite shocking, don't you think?

Anyway.. the topic of this thread doesn't make sense, because Iraq
does not have a deadly arsenal, nor did it have in the past decade.

On 13 Jan 2004 18:35:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:
Again, the statement made was the the US supported Saddam while he was
gassing Kurds.

And yes, the US clearly did as I will now demonstrate, ignore or deny
it as you will - from the US President, US Government, US Citizens
from the coalmines of Kentucky to the California sun,to American Moms
Dads and US Taxpayers one and all in there boots and all feeding
greenbacks as fast as they could to their old mate Uncle Saddam in
various forms of financial assistance from subsdidies to loan
guarantees.

I guess that includes you too Tchiowa - hence your dumb-ox denial of
incontrovertible facts, presumably to salve your own teenage
conscience or the guilt of your parents.

See here -

"The loan guarantees amounted to a massive US subsidy that allowed
Hussein to launch his overt and covert arms buildup, one result being
that the Iran-Iraq war entered a bloody five-year stalemate.

By the end of 1983, US$402 million in agriculture department loan
guarantees for Iraq were approved. In 1984, this increased to $503
million and reached $1.1 billion in 1988. Between 1983 and 1990, CCC
loan guarantees freed up more than $5 billion. Some $2 billion in bad
loans, plus interest, ended up having to be covered by US taxpayers.

A similar taxpayer-funded, though smaller scale, scam operated under
the auspices of the federal Export-Import Bank. In 1984,
vice-president George Bush senior personally intervened to ensure that
the bank guaranteed loans to Iraq of $500 million to build an oil
pipeline. Export-Import Bank loan guarantees grew from $35 million in
1985 to $267 million by 1990."

Unless you have some interplanetary method of measuring time this DOES
span the entire period both before, during and after that US
Americans financially (and morally - remember they had Intel)
supported Saddam while he merrily gassed the Kurds, and I might add
from US supplied helos.

The statement was not "US businesses imported or
exported to Iraq after the attack" or anything like that. A very
specific statement. And it simply isn't true. And nothing you posted
contradicts that.

See above!

Furthermore what was posted previously certainly does contradict your
ridiculous denial - FYI all of those trade deals required State
Department approval - which was willingly given.

And don't bother asking for a reference to the quote above - locate it
yourself - if you can - mindless trolling idiot.

Vector wrote in message . ..
On 13 Jan 2004 18:35:27 -0800, (Tchiowa) wrote:
Again, the statement made was the the US supported Saddam while he was
gassing Kurds.

And yes, the US clearly did as I will now demonstrate, ignore or deny
it as you will - from the US President, US Government, US Citizens
from the coalmines of Kentucky to the California sun,to American Moms
Dads and US Taxpayers one and all in there boots and all feeding
greenbacks as fast as they could to their old mate Uncle Saddam in
various forms of financial assistance from subsdidies to loan
guarantees.

Perhaps it would be easier if you learned proper English first so that
you wouldn't write unintelligible sentences like the one above.

I guess that includes you too Tchiowa - hence your dumb-ox denial of
incontrovertible facts, presumably to salve your own teenage
conscience or the guilt of your parents.

Thank you for admitting that you lost the argument. Ad hominem attacks
like the one you just pulled are an admission that you have no logical
argument left.


See here -

"The loan guarantees amounted to a massive US subsidy that allowed
Hussein to launch his overt and covert arms buildup, one result being
that the Iran-Iraq war entered a bloody five-year stalemate.

Yes, I saw. Not news or facts. Someone's opinion. Does not even begin
to prove the accuracy of the statement under discussion.

Unless you have some interplanetary method of measuring time this DOES
span the entire period both before, during and after that US
Americans financially (and morally - remember they had Intel)
supported Saddam while he merrily gassed the Kurds, and I might add
from US supplied helos.

It proves nothing of the sort. It proves that the US did business with
Iraq. The US and France do business with each other. Does that mean
that the French support Bush or that America supports Chirac?

Your argument is nonsensical in relation to the statement under
discussion.

The statement was not "US businesses imported or
exported to Iraq after the attack" or anything like that. A very
specific statement. And it simply isn't true. And nothing you posted
contradicts that.

See above!

I did.. Again, you posted nothing that supported the statement under
discussion.

Furthermore what was posted previously certainly does contradict your
ridiculous denial - FYI all of those trade deals required State
Department approval - which was willingly given.

Which still does not support the specific statement.

And don't bother asking for a reference to the quote above - locate it
yourself - if you can - mindless trolling idiot.

Again, thank you for admitting you have no logical argument left.

This was too easy.

55555.

Oh, and posting crap from "GreenLeft.org", an *EXTREME* left wing
Aussie group that openly advocates socialism simply proves how far out
in space you are.

"Tchiowa" wrote in message
om...

SNIP


Oh, and posting crap from "GreenLeft.org", an *EXTREME* left wing
Aussie group that openly advocates socialism simply proves how far out
in space you are.

Hang on a minute sport.

Socialism ?

Since when is this name tag so bad?

Enlighten me/us on the merits of *your preferred system* and its historical
record.

Thank you in anticipation

DN

(Emma Knaps) wrote in message . com...

Anyway.. the topic of this thread doesn't make sense, because Iraq
does not have a deadly arsenal, nor did it have in the past decade.

Who says? Do you know something no one else does? Inside info?
Do tell, I'm genuinely curious.

CY