Another European Myth Bites The Dust

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Morph

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Morph

That's right, every country in the world has the right to arm themselves with conventional weapons. I mean, you never know when the reigning superpower in going to decide to INVADE you, right?

Yeah...like rogue dictators who break cease-fire agreements and countless UN resolutions. No cause for forced disarmament there....

Ok, so you think that they should have been required to turn over not only their supposed "WMD", but also all their conventional arms? Then what happens when they do that and Bush says, nuh-uh, that's not good enough, we're taking you down anyway. Then they are forced to throw rocks at us to defend their nation.

You know what, that's a great new war tactic the US can use from now on. We can threaten a country with war unless they hand over all their weapons. Then when the country complies out of fear, we find some other reason to invade them now that they are defenseless.

Funny, that's the same reason we need to allow private ownership of firearms in the US.

So lefties such as yourself want people to have the right to defend themselves when they're a 3rd world tyrant, but not when they're a law abiding US citizen. Interesting...

 

[LunarRay]

You know what, that's a great new war tactic the US can use from now on. We can threaten a country with war unless they hand over all their weapons. Then when the country complies out of fear, we find some other reason to invade them now that they are defenseless.[/quote]

Not bad thinking on the part of Bush... and you think he's dumb... A bloodless coup! Brilliant! The Iraqis must have gotten wind of it though. We did get some of their missles and that sand storm we created was not bad either... I'm waiting for the snakes to leave before I call for sainthood... and that guy with the flute and all the rats following him about... he's just feeding the snakes... circular reasoning is the most interesting.

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: Jimbo
Comparison Graph Of Arms Sales To Iraq.

Transfers of major conventional weapons to Iraq 1973 - 2002

Well, the number for Germany seems to be way to low. We might not have sold arms, since we have extremely stricy laws on arms sales - but, german companies did contribute quite a bit to Iraqs weapons programs through shady deals/dual use tech.

 

[SuperSix]

Originally posted by: jjones
LOL, I love the notes about the UNSC members at the bottom of the graph.

Yea, we're "bloodthirsty", and France and Russia sodl them more weapons. They don't want Iraq attacked so they can get paid.

f8ckers.
:|

 

[seawolf21]

Originally posted by: Iwentsouth

Originally posted by: LH
Im confused? What exactly does this prove? Nothing. It doesnt take into account illegal arms deals from 1991-2002.

People are always claiming the US armed Iraq.

I though the claim was US armed Iraq with WMDs.

 

[seawolf21]

Originally posted by: wizardLRU

Originally posted by: Fencer128
I still think this doesn't answer a "european myth". People say that the US aided Saddam by helping him with the technology needed to develop his chemical weapons program back in the 80's. This is the "myth"/non-"myth" that needs to be explained. It doesn't concern conventional weapons sales IMHO.

Andy

My point exactly.

Ditto here. We all know that the Iraqi government is armed by Soviet equipment. What we want to them is where the WMD building blocks came from.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: tcsenter

It should be obvious... look at the colors of the "peaceful nations" on the graph. They're #1, 2, and 3 in terms of exports of arms to Iraq.

Are the colors 'maroon' and 'lime green' supposed to indicate 'good' and 'bad', or something? I don't see the significance of the colors.

No. If you look at the key at the bottom, the countries that are colored maroon are listed as "peaceful nations", yet when you look at the maroon colored bars on the graph, you see that they're the 3 biggest exporters of arms to Iraq.

Ah, well, it would have been easier to tell had they put 'peaceful' and 'bloodthirsty warmongers' <---- just like that inside those little single quote marks. With so many perverse reasonings floating around among the antiwar and anti-US crowd, it is not at all 'obvious' that this was done tongue-in-cheek.

I mean, there are people saying that kind of stuff and they mean it.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: seawolf21

Originally posted by: wizardLRU

Originally posted by: Fencer128
I still think this doesn't answer a "european myth". People say that the US aided Saddam by helping him with the technology needed to develop his chemical weapons program back in the 80's. This is the "myth"/non-"myth" that needs to be explained. It doesn't concern conventional weapons sales IMHO.

Andy

My point exactly.

Ditto here. We all know that the Iraqi government is armed by Soviet equipment. What we want to them is where the WMD building blocks came from.

rense.com
"...
German involvement outstripped that of all the other countries put together, the paper said. During the period to 1991, the German authorities permitted weapons co-operation with Iraq and in some cases "actively encouraged" it, according to the newspaper which cited German assistance allegedly given to Iraq for the development of poison gas used in the 1988 massacre of Kurds in northern Iraq. It said that after the massacre America reduced its military co-operation with Iraq but German firms continued their activities until the Gulf War.
..."

 

[sandorski]

Ho-hum, another mindless Euro bash.

Conventional weapons sales are pointless.

WMD is where it's at.

Nuclear: France sold a reactor to Iraq in the 70's. Israel destroyed it early in the 80's. Iraq wanted to buy another reactor from France, France refused.
Chemical: Iraq approached a German Company with the request for a Chemical Weapons plant. The company agreed, but didn't report the sale to German trade regulators(they sold it illegaly).
Biological: US supplied Iraq with "dual-use" Biological agents. Sales continued even after Iraq used Biological weapons.

 

[etech]

Germany's leading role in arming Iraq

By Marc Erikson

Expurgated portions of Iraq's December 7 report to the UN Security Council show that German firms made up the bulk of suppliers for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. What's galling is that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and his minions have long known the facts, German intelligence services know them and have loads of information on what Saddam Hussein is hiding, and Schroeder nonetheless plays holier than thou to an easily manipulated, pacifist-inclined domestic audience.

If it's not the height of hypocrisy and opportunism, Schroeder's preemptive "no war. period" stance on Iraq and insistence on a "German Way" (Deutscher Weg) certainly come close. German Way? Haven't we heard that sort of talk before sometime, somewhere? But leave that be. It falls in the same category as Schroeder's former justice minister's comparison of US President George W Bush to Adolf Hitler in last summer's election campaign. Not only Schroeder and that unfortunate lady, but politicians elsewhere are of limited mental accountability when desperate about winning an election, and suffer lapses of speech and memory.

In 1991, Iraq fired dozens of Scud missiles at Israel and threatened to arm the missiles with poison-gas and biological warheads. Most of the contents of those warheads were made in Germany or made with the aid of German engineers and technology. In light of German history, can Herr Schroeder countenance the possibility of a future poison gas attack on Israel (or anyone else) facilitated by German know-how? Schroeder may not want to go to war. So be it. But he should regard it as his most solemn obligation to do his absolute damnedest to make sure that in the future "good Germans" don't once again stand there and say: "We didn't know."
..."

Is it mindless because it doesn't fit your political agenda sandorski? Wake up to the real world.

 

[Jimbo]

Thanks for the bump sandorski!

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: etech
Germany's leading role in arming Iraq

By Marc Erikson

Expurgated portions of Iraq's December 7 report to the UN Security Council show that German firms made up the bulk of suppliers for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. What's galling is that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and his minions have long known the facts, German intelligence services know them and have loads of information on what Saddam Hussein is hiding, and Schroeder nonetheless plays holier than thou to an easily manipulated, pacifist-inclined domestic audience.

If it's not the height of hypocrisy and opportunism, Schroeder's preemptive "no war. period" stance on Iraq and insistence on a "German Way" (Deutscher Weg) certainly come close. German Way? Haven't we heard that sort of talk before sometime, somewhere? But leave that be. It falls in the same category as Schroeder's former justice minister's comparison of US President George W Bush to Adolf Hitler in last summer's election campaign. Not only Schroeder and that unfortunate lady, but politicians elsewhere are of limited mental accountability when desperate about winning an election, and suffer lapses of speech and memory.

In 1991, Iraq fired dozens of Scud missiles at Israel and threatened to arm the missiles with poison-gas and biological warheads. Most of the contents of those warheads were made in Germany or made with the aid of German engineers and technology. In light of German history, can Herr Schroeder countenance the possibility of a future poison gas attack on Israel (or anyone else) facilitated by German know-how? Schroeder may not want to go to war. So be it. But he should regard it as his most solemn obligation to do his absolute damnedest to make sure that in the future "good Germans" don't once again stand there and say: "We didn't know."
..."

Is it mindless because it doesn't fit your political agenda sandorski? Wake up to the real world.

It's mindless cause it's just another "We(US) are better than them(Europe)" thread. Both sides are equally guilty in creating Saddam, just because they disagree on how to deal with him doesn't make one side better than the other. If we want to talk about who supplied WMD, let's do it. If you want to bash Europe

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Jimbo
Thanks for the bump sandorski!

Welcome!

 

[tcsenter]

It's mindless cause it's just another "We(US) are better than them(Europe)" thread. Both sides are equally guilty in creating Saddam, just because they disagree on how to deal with him doesn't make one side better than the other.

Disagree on 'how to deal with Saddam'? Wow, what an understatement of the century.

I suppose you could characterize it as a 'disagreement' on 'how to deal with Saddam':

US <---- depose Hussein

Europe <----- sell more stuff to Hussein

Your phrase 'how to deal with him' couldn't be more correct. Wheel and deal.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: etech
Germany's leading role in arming Iraq

By Marc Erikson

Expurgated portions of Iraq's December 7 report to the UN Security Council show that German firms made up the bulk of suppliers for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. What's galling is that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and his minions have long known the facts, German intelligence services know them and have loads of information on what Saddam Hussein is hiding, and Schroeder nonetheless plays holier than thou to an easily manipulated, pacifist-inclined domestic audience.

If it's not the height of hypocrisy and opportunism, Schroeder's preemptive "no war. period" stance on Iraq and insistence on a "German Way" (Deutscher Weg) certainly come close. German Way? Haven't we heard that sort of talk before sometime, somewhere? But leave that be. It falls in the same category as Schroeder's former justice minister's comparison of US President George W Bush to Adolf Hitler in last summer's election campaign. Not only Schroeder and that unfortunate lady, but politicians elsewhere are of limited mental accountability when desperate about winning an election, and suffer lapses of speech and memory.

In 1991, Iraq fired dozens of Scud missiles at Israel and threatened to arm the missiles with poison-gas and biological warheads. Most of the contents of those warheads were made in Germany or made with the aid of German engineers and technology. In light of German history, can Herr Schroeder countenance the possibility of a future poison gas attack on Israel (or anyone else) facilitated by German know-how? Schroeder may not want to go to war. So be it. But he should regard it as his most solemn obligation to do his absolute damnedest to make sure that in the future "good Germans" don't once again stand there and say: "We didn't know."
..."

Is it mindless because it doesn't fit your political agenda sandorski? Wake up to the real world.

It's mindless cause it's just another "We(US) are better than them(Europe)" thread. Both sides are equally guilty in creating Saddam, just because they disagree on how to deal with him doesn't make one side better than the other. If we want to talk about who supplied WMD, let's do it. If you want to bash Europe

sandorski, that was an equal time anouncement to equal out in some small way all of the American bashing that goes on. It doesn't begin to equal it but even you must admit that the amount of propaganda against and outright misinformation about the US on this board is sometimes overwhelming.

I see no need to bash Europe, I just want people to also be aware that the US did not supply Saddam with all of his weapons and in fact supplied a much smaller percentage than the European countries. That is not bashing, that is just stating the facts.

 

[HappyGamer2]

that's right The USA gave iraq very very little in the way of arms of any type,
and most of the little american equipment they ever had was either captured from iran or sold to them buy somebody else

 

[KenGr]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Ho-hum, another mindless Euro bash.

Conventional weapons sales are pointless.

WMD is where it's at.

Nuclear: France sold a reactor to Iraq in the 70's. Israel destroyed it early in the 80's. Iraq wanted to buy another reactor from France, France refused.
Chemical: Iraq approached a German Company with the request for a Chemical Weapons plant. The company agreed, but didn't report the sale to German trade regulators(they sold it illegaly).
Biological: US supplied Iraq with "dual-use" Biological agents. Sales continued even after Iraq used Biological weapons.

Conventional weapons sales are not pointless. It's been clear that Iraq was a concern for years. It's clear Iraq has continued to get military supplies to support the Russian, French, and Chinese weapons systems even after the 1991 war settlement supposedly stopped those shipments. It appears this had government support.

The US supplied Anthrax cultures to Iraq. We supply this to virtually every country in the world for the production of medicine to prevent spread of cattle anthrax. This available from multiple sources around the world and is not considered weapons system support.

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Morph

That's right, every country in the world has the right to arm themselves with conventional weapons. I mean, you never know when the reigning superpower in going to decide to INVADE you, right?

Yeah...like rogue dictators who break cease-fire agreements and countless UN resolutions. No cause for forced disarmament there....

Breaking countless UN resolutions??? :Q

Do you mean is the turn of Sharon???

(UN agreements violated:
Iraq: 18
You know who.... over 50)

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Ho-hum, another mindless Euro bash.

Conventional weapons sales are pointless.

WMD is where it's at.

Nuclear: France sold a reactor to Iraq in the 70's. Israel destroyed it early in the 80's. Iraq wanted to buy another reactor from France, France refused.
Chemical: Iraq approached a German Company with the request for a Chemical Weapons plant. The company agreed, but didn't report the sale to German trade regulators(they sold it illegaly).
Biological: US supplied Iraq with "dual-use" Biological agents. Sales continued even after Iraq used Biological weapons.

Iraq has never used a biological weapon. In fact the only usage AFAIK of biological weapons was the mailed Anthrax in the US. Saddam is guilty of the use of chemical weapons (blister and nerve agents).

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Morph

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Morph

That's right, every country in the world has the right to arm themselves with conventional weapons. I mean, you never know when the reigning superpower in going to decide to INVADE you, right?

Yeah...like rogue dictators who break cease-fire agreements and countless UN resolutions. No cause for forced disarmament there....

Ok, so you think that they should have been required to turn over not only their supposed "WMD", but also all their conventional arms? Then what happens when they do that and Bush says, nuh-uh, that's not good enough, we're taking you down anyway. Then they are forced to throw rocks at us to defend their nation.

You know what, that's a great new war tactic the US can use from now on. We can threaten a country with war unless they hand over all their weapons. Then when the country complies out of fear, we find some other reason to invade them now that they are defenseless.

see your problem is you cant do anything but blame the US.

It was the UN, your beloved UN, that set forth which weapons were allowed, not the US. Sorry, once I see that even the facts can't alter your bias, I don't even pay attention to what you had to say.... was the rest as bad everyone?