For everyone who argued with me about Saddam Hussein:

[Redstone]

Well, well. It looks like ol' Hussein, NOT the Iranians, really DID kill all those Kurds with the poison gas:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/07/hussein.trial.reut/index.html

Not to say I told you so, or anything. You all know I'm not like that.

Redstone

[Lex]

1. Poison gas no doubt supplied by the US of A.

It's disgusting.

[geomon666]

2. Are you kidding me?

They can't even tell who's on the tapes.

[Redstone]

4. Uh, did you read the CNN report? They said the voices were "identified as...", NOT

"the voices could not be identified."

Redstone

[geomon666]

93. Yeah, identified by the prosecutors.

How about we get some real analysts in there to take a look? Then again why bother. He's dead now and people are free to make up whatever story they want.

[MADem]

47. I imagine they used voiceprint technology -- it would be too easy to check if there were any doubts

There's boatloads of Saddam On Tape, both video and audio, to compare these tapes with.

[Rosemary2205]

3. You know what?

The way I read that thread was that some of those against the hanging of Saddam didn't care what he did or didn't do to the Kurds or anyone else. While I personally disagree, I can respect the viewpoint of someone who is against the death penalty under ALL circumstances. No matter how heinous someone's acts may be.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. I have a hard time believing...

that anybody who was for this hanging really cared about the Kurds or anybody else.

[Redstone]

18. I didn't SAY that it was right to hang him, did I?

Redstone

[MADem]

52. I don't know if the two are inextricably tied together at all

There are people who opposed the hanging (or any other form of death penalty) who were absolutely appalled at what Saddam did to those Kurds. There are people who wanted him hanged who cared about the Kurds, or who were Kurdish themselves and had a vested interest in the judgment. And I'm sure there are people in the world who were thrilled at Saddam swinging, just because they like a good hangin', who thought Kurds was spelled Curds, and thought they went with Whey.

Plenty of folks who wanted Saddam dead had their own reasons--the Shi'a in that room screaming 'Muqtada' probably don't put the Kurds, who are a Sunni subset in terms of their religious affiliation, at the top of their prayer lists--they've got their own list of insults demanding revenge.

[Redstone]

9. I'm not sure about in ALL cases (because I'm not omniscient), but in HIS case they shouldn't have

strung him up. I think he'd have suffered MUCH more by spending the rest of his life in solitary confinement.

He deserved to suffer FAR more than the one twinge of pain he got from the rope.

Redstone

[Kelly Rupert]

5. Anyone who denies Saddam Hussein's actions is delusional.

Plain and simple.

[stillcool]

6. My argument with you about Saddam Hussein...

is that he is a creation of the CIA, and the U.S. Government. Treating the symptoms of a disease do nothing to cure the disease.

[trumad]

8. exactly---and we did a little wink wink when he did it.

[Lex]

10. Yep. We help create the monsters and then they turn on us. It's foreseeable

and it's happened time and time again.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

26. A little different twist - we created this monster ...

but then WE turned on HIM.

Just because Saddam took over the Thugdom of Kuwait.

Maybe more specifically, GHWB created this monster, then GHWB turned on him. Just like when GHWB created Noriega, then GHWB turned on him.

[Lex]

33. Agreed. That is more accurate.

nt

[timtom]

64. Weird, huh?

Just like Noriega.

[cool user name]

49. And it will happen again in the future ...

.. and we'll be told how evil they are and that we need to invade their country to remove them.

Same song and same dance. :eyes:

[Redstone]

12. That doesn't change what he did, does it?

Redstone

[stillcool]

29. what 'he' did?...

is not a known known to me. The confusion at this late date about who used what I find amazing. Saddam's fate was made at the hands of our government...not by the victims of past wars. If we as people are concerned with 'justice' we don't need to go into anyone's back yard but our own.

[Rosemary2205]

17. It would seem to me

if we created him then he was ours to destroy.

[stillcool]

36. I do not consider myself to be part...

of your 'we'. That should explain it.

[William769]

27. A noose sure did cure the disease.

[Lex]

28. No it didn't. It only cured a self-created symptom.

Not the disease of on-going f'ed up foreign policy.

That was the point of the post.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. Not really.

Not as long as Rumsfeld, Cheney, and others are still walking around freely.

[stillcool]

39. ya think? Is peace breaking out all over?

or is your idea of the 'disease' that which blocks American business interests?

[nam78_two]

59. Yup- Like Pinochet, Somoza and many other

dictators in Latin America, the Middle East and so on who have received our covert/overt support when it was expedient.

Anyone who is huffing about that evil Saddam better remember just how much support our govt offered him when it served our purpose. Thats a good book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Spiders-Web-Secret-History-Illegally/dp/0553096508

He was a dictator and a war criminal. No wonder he was once an ally. We don't seem to have had much use for democratically elected leaders-at least in the past.

[MADem]

11. Amazing how cousins can look a lot like brothers....

[The Magistrate]

13. The 'Iran Did It' Claim, Sir

Was never anything more than Reagan-era whitewash of their ally Hussein, once one particular incident made into the focus of the news industry. Even if true in a particular incident, that is meaningless, because that was only one of many incidents, and these incidents were merely a part of a genuinely genocidal campaign against a rebellious population.

[MADem]

20. Were not US manufactured Bell Helicopter, International, Inc (HQ'd in TX)

Cobra helos used to disperse the stuff?

[The Magistrate]

40. No Idea, Ma'am

The fellow bought stuff from everywhere, the Soviets, the U.S., various European manufacturers.

[oblivious]

67. Yes! The US sold Iraq Bell helicopters knowing they were to be used for chemical spraying.

1983

* Iraq reportedly began using chemical weapons (CW) against Iranian troops in 1982, and significantly increased CW use in 1983. Reagan's Secretary of State, George Shultz, said that reports of Iraq using CWs on Iranian military personnel "drifted in" at the year's end.<6> A declassified CIA report, probably written in late 1987, notes Iraq's use of mustard gas in August 1983, giving further credence to the suggestion that the SD and/or National Security Council (NSC) was well aware of Iraq's use of CW at this time.<7>

* Analysts recognized that "civilian" helicopters can be weaponized in a matter of hours and selling a civilian kit can be a way of giving military aid under the guise of civilian assistance.<8> Shortly after removing Iraq from the terrorism sponsorship list, the Reagan administration approved the sale of 60 Hughes helicopters.<9> Later, and despite some objections from the National Security Council (NSC), the Secretaries of Commerce and State (George Baldridge and George Shultz) lobbied the NSC advisor into agreeing to the sale to Iraq of 10 Bell helicopters,<10> officially for crop spraying. See "1988" for note on Iraq using U.S. Helicopters to spray Kurds with chemical weapons.

* Later in the year the Reagan Administration secretly began to allow Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt to transfer to Iraq U.S. howitzers, helicopters, bombs and other weapons.<11> Reagan personally asked Italy's Prime Minister Guilio Andreotti to channel arms to Iraq.<12>

1988
* According to a 15 September news report, Reagan Administration officials stated that the U.S. intercepted Iraqi military communications marking Iraq's CW attacks on Kurds.<36>

* U.S. intelligence reported in 1991 that the U.S. helicopters sold to Iraq in 1983 were used in 1988 to spray Kurds with chemicals.<37>

* "Reagan administration records show that between September and December 1988, 65 licenses were granted for dual-use technology exports. This averages out as an annual rate of 260 licenses, more than double the rate for January through August 1988."<38>

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/usiraq80s90s.html

[MADem]

80. Actually, my query was a bit rhetorical. See, BHI was in IRAN in a big way.

They got booted out shortly after/virtually concurrently with Sikorsky and E-Systems (H. Ross Perot's crew) after Khomeini arrived from Paris.

Those helos that eventually went to Saddam were in the pipeline for the Shah, originally. Had to do something with them, eh? Had to keep the military-industrial-Congressional beast fed, didn't we?

The Cobras were actually gunships, but they were small, reasonably easy to fly, and could be modified for all sorts of purposes. That said, if you look at THIS document, the only helos mentioned are the Bell 214, which would also fill the bill quite nicely: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq55.pdf
Of course, paragraph three and part of paragraph four of that message ARE redacted. Here's an additional request for both helos and fixed wing aircraft for the (plausibly deniable) agriculture industry, to include a request to train the pilots: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq15.pdf

[Redstone]

22. Yes, Mr M, that's exactly what I said. Though not as elegantly as you just said it.

Redstone

[originalpckelly]

55. I know, and Redstone knew. The only shred of evidence these idiots...

denying Saddam's gassing of the Kurds had was a DIA report made during the time when we still supported Saddam. It was produced to pin the tail on Iran, and not Saddam.

[reprehensor]

14. Good thing the US didn't sell him any chemicals... uhm...

http://www.progressive.org/node/1866

"According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989...

The report noted further that U.S. exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical-warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare production facilities, and chemical-warhead filling equipment.

The exports continued to at least November 28, 1989, despite evidence that Iraq was engaging in chemical and biological warfare against Iranians and Kurds since as early as 1984."

--------------

Bad business.

[tyedyeto]

30. Hmm... wonder why there has been no response to this from the OP?

Could it be that... what you said is the truth and they are in denial?

[Redstone]

34. Because it's a separate issue. We've given weapons to lots of monsters.

And no, I'm not in denial. I don't doubt we gave him the stuff. It's just not germane to my subject.

Redstone

[originalpckelly]

56. Yes, we know that, but I can't tell you how many times...

Redstone, I and a few other sane DUers had to argue with people about actually whether Saddam actually gassed the Kurds.

[geek tragedy]

69. Word. Every few months, some gullible DU'er would

read this bullshit from the Reagan flunkies on some crank website and think they had discovered some great truth.

Informed people have known better for quite some time.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

15. Right You Were. Course, Some Of Us New That Readily.

Though the trial was probably a farce, though the entire process was for political maneuvering, though the administration probably had secrets go with him to the grave and had roles in assisting him back then to begin with, none of it changes the fact that an evil, brutal, heartless, heinous and piece of shit dictator has been eradicated and we should be thankful. Good riddance to the evil fucker.

[CatWoman]

38. LOL

This thread was like the bat signal for you, wasn't it?

[cool user name]

51. LMAO ...

Nice ... :D

[CatWoman]

89. !!

:hi:

[alstephenson]

16. Guess who supplied the poisonous gas??? Bingo - the U.S. of A. (see link)

This video puts it all together very nicely...

http://www.ericblumrich.com/thanks.html

[ripple]

19. I thought that was common knowledge.

This is the first I've heard of any speculation about Iran being responsible.

In fact, Rummy and HW continued to do business with Hussein after he gassed the Kurds. That's what pisses me off so much when the neocons point to Hussein's atrocities. They fail to mention that some of the very same architects for the Iraq war share complicity for Hussein's crimes.

[Redstone]

23. Read my original post on the subject and you'll find a dozen people who said it.

Redstone

[NNN0LHI]

21. When it was to Americas benefit the US said it was the Iranians who did it

Now that it is to Americas benefit to say it was Iraq the US says it was the Iraqis who did it.

You don't notice something very odious with these "stories" per chance?

Don

[Lex]

25. True.

We are being lied to and manipulated by our government for propaganda purposes. No doubt in my mind about that.

[Redstone]

31. And who was in charge in both cases? Yes, you're right: REPUBLICANS!

Redstone

[NNN0LHI]

46. You know I am one of the most militant anti-Republican Dems on this board

But I still can't agree this was all the Republicans fault with a straight face because it wasn't. I do have some amount of intrinsic fairness that I unable to ignore. There was enough bad faith decisions on this one to go around to both parties.

Just because most Republicans are hypocrites doesn't mean I have to be one too.

Don

[MADem]

44. Well, and then there's the THIRD scenario, less often posed!

After the "Iranians did it firing chemweaps at the Iraqis," and the "Iraqis did it firing at the Kurds" scenarios, there's "The Iraqis did it, but they were actually AIMING at the Iranians, not the Kurds! See, it was just, uh, a huge accident...a TARGETING error, if you will..." Of course, they may have wanted to kill two birds with one stone--"Say, wipe out these Kurdish rebels helping the Iranians, and make a pass over the Zagros to the Iranian side, if you have any 'juice' left over!"

I've heard all three from assorted sources. Some, of course, are historically more reliable than others.

There are only a few who really know, with every possible degree of certainty, the precise details--one's in the dock right now, another was hanged on Sunni Eid.

[NNN0LHI]

48. But we can't forget it was the US who was supplying the targeting info to Iraq

And that the US was supplying missiles to Iran at pretty much the same time.

The whole story needs to be told to understand what was happening during that time period.

Don

[MADem]

54. Oh, hell, don't think I am averring any truth to that scenario, I was just tossing it out

as yet another line of reasoning that occasionally pops up in these discussions...

[NNN0LHI]

68. Oh no, I hope it didn't appear that I was implying that because I wasn't

I was just trying to add some background info. Take care.

Don

[geek tragedy]

62. Iraqi warplanes dropped chemical munitions directly on top

of Halabja.

This was no accident.

[NNN0LHI]

66. I don't doubt that. I am just saying after it happened the US swore it was Iranians

Probably because the US supplied the targeting info to the Iraqis for maximum effect. That is what our government was doing back then.

Don

[geek tragedy]

71. I don't think they needed our help targeting Halabja--Iraqi

pilots could find it on their own.

They blamed it on the Iranians because (A) Iran was our enemy and (B) Saddam was our proxy there, and used chemical precursors we helped him get.

[MADem]

70. I am not suggesting that it was accidental at all.

Two theories were postulated, to which I added a third. I added this theory solely because it got a lot of play in some agenda-laden quarters in years past.

I didn't, and don't, endorse these alternative theories, nor did I dispute the veracity of the first assessment posted by the OP. I posted them simply for the sake of subject matter edification.

[geek tragedy]

72. Okay. Peace. eom

[originalpckelly]

58. The Defense Intel. Agency report was produced to make Iran look bad...

and help out Saddam, because they were all worried about Iran endangering the oil supply. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, the danger of his regime because apparent to the oil-Nazis, so they started going after him.

That doesn't change the fact that Saddam was a fuck head, they should never have dealt with Saddam in the first place, but that doesn't mean he didn't commit those crimes.

People need to stop negating his guilt. We know our country did something wrong, and it's not surprising because Republicans were in control at the time.

[geek tragedy]

65. Iraq was our ally against Iran when the Halabja

attack occurred. Reagan and then Poppy Bush deliberately lied about the attack to put the blame on the Iranians, who were considered Public Enemy #1 in the United States.

[oblivious]

86. ...no explanation when, how tapes were made ... voices SAID to be...

Anyone who accepts the prosecutor's evidence in this trial without a bit of scepticism wins the gullibility prize of the new year.

[geek tragedy]

92. Delete, never mind.

[Joe for Clark]

24. State executions - maybe especially that one - were just plain

murder.

That one, in particular, has the capacity to rile people up enough to kill OUR KIDS.

Maybe Saddam really did all those things, assume he did - did not give anyone the right to kill him.

What was the harm in just keeping him in prison??

It was just wrong, as all executions are.

Joe

[Redstone]

37. I agree. See #9 above. and ESPECIALLY because, as you said,

"That one, in particular, has the capacity to rile people up enough to kill OUR KIDS."

Yes, you're right, indeed.

Redstone

[Joe for Clark]

50. I know you do.

I know it is true - there is a very powerful christian left - dormant for years - but awoken now.

We will protect any religion, right to belief or non belief - but we do believe that the right to life is given by a creator and anything less than self defense is murder.

I don't know when life happens, conception or later - do not know. I give much leeway to that view. But to kill a grown being is murder - pure and simple.

I can look at things different ways - from a US point of view, an economic point of view, etc..

But not that -

There really is a christian left Redstone - That - "what ever you do to the least of my brothers" thing - holds us together. It is the concept.

Joe

[Redstone]

53. Yes, I know that there's a "Christian Left." Do you want my opinion on the subject?

Even though I'm as non-religious as they come (though I will NEVER describe myself as an athiest), if the "Christian Left" is as you described, then I'd say they're likely the TRUE followers of Christ's teachings.

Yes, though I'm not religious, I have read the Bible numerous times, and other books about Christianity. And my conclusion is that there were three core concepts that Christ sought to instill in people: Faith, tolerance, and charity.

The faith part is where I fall short, but other than that, I do try to order my life around the concepts that He encouraged people to adopt.

Redstone

[Joe for Clark]

57. You got it right, I think.

Some of the best "christians" I ever met were not religious at all.

Christian is just a word, you know.

Good post Redstone - really good.

Joe

[CatWoman]

35. dead horse

meet whip.

[Redstone]

41. Hey, at least I can raise some dust from the horse's hide.

Redstone

[CatWoman]

43. it's your horse, and your whip

rock on, Hon.

[Redstone]

45. Good exercise, though.

Redstone

[CatWoman]

83. is that how you stay so cute?

}(

[Redstone]

88. Nah, that's the alcohol. It's a great preservative, after all.

Redstone

[Disturbed]

42. Three more Hangings are scheduled.

I bet there won't be any Videos of those circulating.

[Uncle Joe]

60. Justice was never carried out because Saddam was never tried for this. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

61. Whether it was Saddam or not

Reasonable people raise an eyebrow when "evidence" like this is released immediately after one of the taped parties is killed under dubious circumstances.

Just sayin'...

If this were Debate 101, I'd give ya a B-. Interesting evidence, but highly questionable. :-)

[geek tragedy]

63. Overwhelming evidence has existed for the better part

of a decade, collected by various scientists, physicians, and human rights investigators.

Amongst sane, honest, and informed people this debate was over before aWol ever stole Florida.

[alcibiades_mystery]

76. That may be true

I was referring to this evidence in particular, however. The OP seems to think it is a trump. It is not.

That's all I was saying, chief.

[geek tragedy]

78. It's surplusage. Like audio of Hitler admitting

he took part in the final solution.

[alcibiades_mystery]

84. Oh, I see

:rofl:

[geek tragedy]

91. Genocide is funny to you?

Or are you one of those who choose to pretend that there's reasonable doubt here?

[alcibiades_mystery]

95. Er...um...er...

:rofl:

:rofl:

Easy, boy.

[oblivious]

73. The US was complicit in gassing the Kurds. The US provided the means.

The US sold Iraq helicopters knowing Iraq was committing war crimes by using helicopters to kill people with chemicals.

http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=en&q=bell+helicopters+sprayed+the+kurds&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

[MichiganVote]

85. And the Soviets had provided much more in materials/munitions

to SH than the US ever had. Yet no one seems to recall that fact. Funny.

[oblivious]

87. OK. The Soviets were complicit in Saddam's war crimes.

[Roland99]

74. Interesting how evidence changes over time, eh?

[geek tragedy]

75. No. The evidence has always pointed overwhelmingly

towards Saddam and Iraq. The DIA report had been discredited long before Saddam went on trial.

[Roland99]

77. This US Army War College report that concluded it was Iran?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/THO209A.html

In the first report they wrote: “In September 1988 — a month after the war had ended...the state department abruptly, and in what many viewed as sensational manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemical weapons against its Kurdish population...with the result that numerous Kurdish civilians were killed. The Iraqi government denied that any such gassing had occurred...Having looked at all the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the state department’s claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organisations who examined the Kurds — in Turkey where they had gone for asylum — failed to discover any. Nor were there any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

Regarding the Halabjah incident where Iraqi soldiers were reported to have gassed their own Kurdish citizens, the USAWC investigators observed: “It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, Congress was influenced by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another Iraq-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemical weapons in this operation, and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.”

In March 1991 as the massive US-led attack on Iraq ended, I was visiting the USAWC to give a lecture on South Asian security and discussed this problem with professor Pelletiere at lunch. I recall Pelletiere telling me that the USAWC investigation showed that in the Iranian mass human wave battlefield strategy, Teheran used non-persistent poison gas against Iraqi soldiers so as to be able to attack and advance into the areas vacated by Iraqis. On the other hand, Baghdad used persistent gas to halt the Iranian human wave attacks. There was a certain consistency to this pattern. However, in the Halabjah incident, the USAWC investigators discovered that the gas used that killed hundreds of Kurds was the non-persistent gas, the chemical weapon of choice of the Iranians. Note it was the Iranians who arrived at the scene first, who reported the incident to UN observers, and who took pictures of the gassed Kurdish civilians. However, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait in August and the truth of the Halabjah incident became inconvenient.

Don't surprised to see that dredged back up as a justification for going after Iran.

[geek tragedy]

79. The DIA report was a bunch of crap, to be kind.

The agent used was nerve gas, and witnesses saw Iraqi warplanes dropping the stuff on Iran.

DIA report=Powell presentation to the UN.

[Roland99]

81. Where is the support of your refutations? I'm to merely take your rhetorical word?

Here's an updated article from one of the authors of the USAWC report.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0131-08.htm

[geek tragedy]

82. Check out the wikipedia article for starters.

Then check out the reports from PHRUSA, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Dr. Christine Godsen, Joost Hiltermann, and Dr. Jean Pascal Zanders.

[mdmc]

90. yeah, he was bad

:kick:

[JNelson6563]

94. Oh wow.

Feeling rather smart are we? Maybe even superior?

Well get over it. Have you looked into what sparked that little debacle you cite? Perhaps a promise of support from the US to those who did the uprising, only to have them be deserted by us and left to slaughter. Yeah, feeling as proud as you were a moment ago? Probably since your post does reveal a bit of a slowness. Ok, try this: Have you looked into where Saddam got those weapons?

Let me save you some steps there, see Saddam was our good friend as he was standing between us and the boogey-man we call Iran. We sent him lots and lots of horrible weapons and we didn't much care who he used them on. Until he was no longer our good friend. Then it was time to prosecute.

I marvel at the special kind of ignorance I see here at DU on a daily basis.

Julie

[leesa]

96. Sheesh. Do you have a better source than propaganda central?

Most reports from the area said it was likely Iranian gas and at any rate, both sides were using gas in a war arena.

[geek tragedy]

97. You are wrong. ALL sources EXCEPT the DIA say

that only Iraq gassed the Kurds.

Try Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Drs. Godsen and Zanders, PHRUSA, etc.