HUSSEIN is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.

How many Iraqis has the US killed in the last 13 years? Why do you think it okay for the US to kill people but not Saddam?

So you are saying it was okay for Saddam to kill hundreds of thousands?



 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.

How many Iraqis has the US killed in the last 13 years? Why do you think it okay for the US to kill people but not Saddam?

US didn't kill them. Saddam did. Instead of aiding his people, he was building dozens of palaces that cost up to $100 million each.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War,
US supported
the invasion of Kuwait,
US supported
the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia
US supported
, and the current war
US supported,

Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
You forgot the Bush's involvement with the Nazis.
 

Conky

Lifer
May 9, 2001
10,709
0
0
I think people need to remember that Saddam directly supported terrorist Palestinian suicide bombers by rewarding their families with $25K per successful suicide attempt. This is not even disputed.

This is not something a peaceful person would do.

I am glad that President Bush is ridding the world of terrorist sponsors at a high level. I just wish he could bring me Osama's head on a stick.

:D
 

Phuz

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2000
4,349
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.

How many Iraqis has the US killed in the last 13 years? Why do you think it okay for the US to kill people but not Saddam?

So you are saying it was okay for Saddam to kill hundreds of thousands?

So you are saying it was okay for America to kill hundreds of thousands? It works both ways.
 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War,
US supported
the invasion of Kuwait,
US supported
the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia
US supported
, and the current war
US supported,

Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
You forgot the Bush's involvement with the Nazis.

US supported the invasion of Kuwait? You need to lay off the crack. The only one you are correct on is the Iran-Iraq war and that's cuz Iran pissed us off. The world has changed since, get over it. Saddam targets civilians and uses them as sheilds. US targets military. You have no perspective.
 

styrafoam

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2002
2,684
0
0
America supported Iraq because of the history we had with Iran. How was anyone to know that in 1990 Saddam would stop taking his lithium?
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War,
US supported LIE
the invasion of Kuwait,
US supported LIE
the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia
US supported LIE
, and the current war
US supported, LIE - caused by Saddam's failure to disarm

Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
You forgot the Bush's involvement with the Nazis.

rolleye.gif
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,755
6,766
126
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
--------------------------
What does it mean to hold somebody responsible? Everything depends on how you imagine this. It means different things to different people and opens the door to interpretation, judgment and valuation.

 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
--------------------------
What does it mean to hold somebody responsible? Everything depends on how you imagine this. It means different things to different people and opens the door to interpretation, judgment and valuation.

How about we put him in a sealed chamber and pump a low amount of mustard gas into it constantly until he's a bubbling mess on the floor?

Or, is that too harsh?
 

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
Please tell me how he should be held accountable for the people killed in the Iran Iraq war when his country was at war. Were they supposed to fight with sticks and rubber bullets? We are at war now...by your logic we should post about all of the Iraqi's killed by GW in this war. People die in war, don't make it out like he was out there killing people for the hell of it right and left. That being said, the second two you mentioned are valid points.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
AndrewR - and the current war
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US supported, <<LIE - caused by Saddam's failure to disarm>>


Excuse me? Are you saying we don't support this war? You aren't thinking that 'support' and 'cause' are the same thing, are you? If you think support=cause, then maybe you should rethink your response. Just a thought. ;)
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,978
0
0
That number is a bit low, between the Iran/Iraq war and UN sanctions alone over 3 million have died...

Yes we supported the invasion of Kuwait, then built a coalition to drive him out, please share those good drugs with the rest of the class now.
 

DaiShan

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2001
9,617
1
0
Originally posted by: Phuz
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.

How many Iraqis has the US killed in the last 13 years? Why do you think it okay for the US to kill people but not Saddam?

So you are saying it was okay for Saddam to kill hundreds of thousands?

So you are saying it was okay for America to kill hundreds of thousands? It works both ways.

No it doesn't, you are not comparing apples to apples, we fight against armed personell, saddam gasses his own people, we have killed FAR FAR fewer civilians through accidents than Saddam has on purpose.
 

Phuz

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2000
4,349
0
0
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: Phuz
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia, and the current war, Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.

But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.

How many Iraqis has the US killed in the last 13 years? Why do you think it okay for the US to kill people but not Saddam?

So you are saying it was okay for Saddam to kill hundreds of thousands?

So you are saying it was okay for America to kill hundreds of thousands? It works both ways.

No it doesn't, you are not comparing apples to apples, we fight against armed personell, saddam gasses his own people, we have killed FAR FAR fewer civilians through accidents than Saddam has on purpose.

How do you decide who deserves life and who doesn't?
Is Saddam killing his own people any worse than the USA killing over half a million civs in Japan? Or the hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese? That democide.
The bombing of non-combatant populations violates international and humanitarian laws. I suppose thats acceptable.... it was a necessary evil, right... right?
At least the people of Iraq are aware of the potential dangers they're exposed to by living in a dictatorship.
Utilitarianism is ideal, but rarely achieved.

Seems like everyone has been desensitized of terms like 'collateral damage'... its just become a buzzword with little meaning.
I'm not anti-american. EVERY country has made terrible mistakes while intending good, and you should recognize that it applies to your country too.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,755
6,766
126
Or, is that too harsh?
------------------
Not too harsh, too ineffectual. Much better, in my opinion, that he have a jail cell wherein the people of Iraq could file through and share their feelings.
 

Phuz

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2000
4,349
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Or, is that too harsh?
------------------
Not too harsh, too ineffectual. Much better, in my opinion, that he have a jail cell wherein the people of Iraq could file through and share their feelings.

I don't understand why people favour capital punishment/execution, etc.
I think the worst possible punishment is sitting in a small cell, rotting away in a cold, concrete, hell... for the rest of his natural life.

 

BaDaBooM

Golden Member
May 3, 2000
1,077
1
0
Originally posted by: Phuz
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Or, is that too harsh?
------------------
Not too harsh, too ineffectual. Much better, in my opinion, that he have a jail cell wherein the people of Iraq could file through and share their feelings.

I don't understand why people favour capital punishment/execution, etc.
I think the worst possible punishment is sitting in a small cell, rotting away in a cold, concrete, hell... for the rest of his natural life.

You're right, but that's pretty expensive.
 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,330
1
81
Originally posted by: BaDaBooM
Originally posted by: Phuz
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Or, is that too harsh?
------------------
Not too harsh, too ineffectual. Much better, in my opinion, that he have a jail cell wherein the people of Iraq could file through and share their feelings.

I don't understand why people favour capital punishment/execution, etc.
I think the worst possible punishment is sitting in a small cell, rotting away in a cold, concrete, hell... for the rest of his natural life.

You're right, but that's pretty expensive.

From a religious standpoint, I'd rather have the eternal damnation start as soon as possible for them.

But from a non-religious standpoint, let 'em rot. Too bad it costs so damn much.
 

Mookow

Lifer
Apr 24, 2001
10,162
0
0
"HUSSEIN is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands"

WTF? I thought he was nice guy!
 

Jani

Senior member
Dec 24, 1999
405
0
0
Originally posted by: AndrewR
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: AndrewR
This is in response to another thread with a similar title.

Between the Iran-Iraq War,
US supported LIE
the invasion of Kuwait,
US supported LIE
the repression of his people particularly the Kurds and Shia
US supported LIE
, and the current war
US supported, LIE - caused by Saddam's failure to disarm

Saddam bears more responsibility than any other single person in the Gulf region for the deaths of many, including his own soldiers.
But, we shouldn't hold him responsible. He's only human.
You forgot the Bush's involvement with the Nazis.

rolleye.gif


:Q

In case you have missed something

http://www.unobserver.com/index.php?pagina=layout5.php&id=815&blz=1

Arming Iraq and the Path to War, by John King

2003-03-31 | This is an accurate chronology of United States' involvement in the arming of Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war. It is a powerful indictment of the current bush administration attempt to sell war as a component of his war on terrorism. It reveals our ambitions in Iraq to be just another chapter in the attempt to regain a foothold in the Mideast following the fall of the Shah of Iran.

A crisis always has a history, and the current crisis with Iraq is no exception. Below are some relevant dates.

September 1980. Iraq invades Iran. The beginning of the Iraq-Iran war. (8)

February 1982. Despite objections from Congress, President Reagan removes Iraq from its list of known terrorist countries. (1)

December 1982. Hughes Aircraft ships 60 Defender helicopters to Iraq. (9)

1982-1988. Defense Intelligence Agency provides detailed information for Iraq on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb damage assessments. (4)

November 1983. A National Security Directive states that the U.S would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran. (1) (15)

November 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the U.S. government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other
industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. (14)

October 1983. The Reagan Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act. (16)

November 1983. George Schultz, the Secretary of State, is given intelligence reports showing that Iraqi troops are daily using chemical weapons against the Iranians. (1)

December 20 1983. Donald Rumsfeld, then a civilian and now Defense Secretary, meets with Saddam Hussein to assure him of US friendship and materials support. (1) (15)

July 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. (19)

January 14 1984. State Department memo acknowledges United States shipment of "dual-use" export hardware and technology. Dual use items are civilian items such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances and communications gear as well as industrial technology that can have a military application. (2)

March 1986. The United States with Great Britain block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the U.S. becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons. (10)

May 1986. The U.S. Department of Commerce licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. (3)

May 1986. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq. (7)

March 1987. President Reagan bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. (17)

Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq. (1)

February 1988. Saddam Hussein begins the "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds of northern Iraq. The Iraq regime used chemical weapons against the Kurds killing over 100,000 civilians and destroying over 1,200 Kurdish villages. (8)

April 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. (7)

August 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925. (6) (13)

August 1988. Iraq and Iran declare a cease fire. (8)

August 1988. Five days after the cease fire Saddam Hussein sends his planes and helicopters to northern Iraq to begin massive chemical attacks against the Kurds. (8)

September 1988. U.S. Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade anthrax and botulinum to Iraq. (7)

September 1988. Richard Murphy, Assistant Secretary of State: "The US-Iraqi relationship is... important to our long-term political and economic objectives." (15)

December 1988. Dow chemical sells $1.5 million in pesticides to Iraq despite knowledge that these would be used in chemical weapons. (1)

July 25, 1990. U.S. Ambassador to Baghdad meets with Hussein to assure him that President Bush "wanted better and deeper relations." Many believe this visit was a trap set for Hussein. A month later Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking the U.S. would not respond. (12)

August 1990. Iraq invades Kuwait. The precursor to the Gulf War. (8)

July 1991. The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. (11)

August 1991. Christopher Droguol of Atlanta's branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro is arrested for his role in supplying loans to Iraq for the purchase of military supplies. He is charged with 347 counts of felony. Droguol is found guilty, but U.S. officials plead innocent of any knowledge of his crime. (14)

June 1992. Ted Koppel of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush, Sr., operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]." (5)

July 1992. "The Bush administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. technology to be shipped to Iraqi military and to Iraqi defense factories... Throughout the course of the Bush administration, U.S. and foreign firms were granted export licenses to ship U.S. technology directly to Iraqi weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories were producing weapons." Representative Henry Gonzalez, Texas, testimony before the House. (18)

February 1994. Senator Riegle from Michigan, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, testifies before the senate revealing large U.S. shipments of dual-use biological and chemical agents to Iraq that may have been used against U.S. troops in the Gulf War and probably was the cause of the illness known as Gulf War Syndrome. (7)

August 2002. "The use of gas [during the Iran-Iraq war] on the battle field by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern... We were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose." Colonel Walter Lang, former senior U.S. Defense Intelligence officer tells the New York Times. (4)

This chronology of the United States' sordid involvement in the arming of Iraq can be summarized in this way: the United States used methods both legal and illegal to help build Saddam's army into the most powerful army in the Mideast outside of Israel. The U.S. supplied chemical and biological agents and technology to Iraq when it knew Iraq was using chemical weapons against the Iranians. The U.S. supplied the materials and technology for these weapons of mass destruction to Iraq at a time when it was known that Saddam was using this technology to kill his Kurdish citizens. The United States supplied intelligence and battle planning information to Iraq when those battle plans included the use of cyanide, mustard gas and nerve agents. The United States blocked U.N. censure of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The United States did not act alone in this effort. The Soviet Union was the largest weapons supplier, but England, France and Germany were also involved in the shipment of arms and technology.

So what do these events have to do with the current conflict?

Just this: If we do go to war with Iraq, it is important to know why! War will not really be about terrorism! Twenty years ago the United States threw its support behind Saddam Hussein in a geopolitical bid for enhanced access to oil. The trajectory given him by our support lead directly to the Gulf War and to the current crises. War, after all, will be about a history of misdeeds and miscalculations. And war will not be about morality. War will be about cynicism, deceit and a thirst for oil that knows no boundaries.
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
What? You didn't list the sources for that supposed "truthful" report?

Sources

1. Washingtonpost.com. December 30, 2002
2. Jonathan Broder. Nuclear times, Winter 1990-91
3. Kurt Nimno. AlterNet. September 23, 2002
4. Newyorktimes.com. August 29, 2002
5. ABC Nightline. June 9, 1992
6. Counter Punch, October 10, 2002
7. Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
8. Timeline: A walk Through Iraq's History. U.S. Department of State
9. Doing Business: The Arming of Iraq. Daniel Robichear
10. Glen Rangwala. Labor Left Briefing, 16 September, 2002
11. Financial Times of London. July 3, 1991
12. Elson E. Boles. Counter Punch. October 10, 2002
13. Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988. Iranchamber.com
14. Columbia Journalism Review. March/April 1993. Iraqgate
15. Times Online. December 31, 2002. How U.S. Helped Iraq Build Deadly Arsenal
16. Bush's Secret Mission. The New Yorker Magazine. November 2, 1992
17. Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia: Iran-Contra Affair
18. Congressional Record. July 27, 1992. Representative Henry B. Gonzalez
19. Bob Woodward. CIA Aiding Iraq in Gulf War. Washington Post.
15 December, 1986
20. WWW.gendercide.com
http://www.gendercide.com
http://www.gendercide.com
http://www.gendercide.com/ Case Study: The Anfal Campaign

Yes, all unbiased sources with well supported assertions without any trace of bias whatsoever (iranchamber.com, gendercide.com, NY Times, Nightline). Oh, and I almost forgot this one:

Strategic Pastoral Action
PO Box 3272
Holland, MI, 49422-3272 USA
http://www.spanweb.org
mailto:humanrights@spanweb.org
Nonviolence Advocacy Project:
http://www.rehberg.net/nonviolence.html

I've bolded one part in particular.

Yes, the U.S. sold arms to Iraq because their war come on the heels of the Iranian hostage taking. Answer this question: How many U.S. weapons were used by the Iraqis in their invasion of Kuwait? How about this one: How much control did the U.S. have over Iraqi operations?