format_quote Originally Posted by
MTAFFI
So by this logic I guess Iraq and Afghan is Irans fault since their hands are so dirty, and lets not forget S.A. and whoever else. This sort of logic is nonsense, just because the US supplied weapons to one side or the other doesnt make the US responsible for the war or the deaths of that war. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
In the early 1950s, oil was used as a political weapon for the first time -- _by_ the United States and Britain and _against_ Iran. Iran had nationalized its British-owned oil company which had refused to share its astronomical profits with the host government. In response, Washington and London organized a boycott of Iranian oil which brought Iran's economy to the brink of collapse. The CIA then instigated a coup, entrenching the Shah in power and effectively un-nationalizing the oil company, with U.S. firms getting 40 percent of the formerly 100 percent British-owned company. This was, in the view of the _New York Times_, an "object lesson in the heavy cost that must be paid" when an oil-rich Third World nation "goes berserk with fanatical nationalism."
Source
The CIA did a coup, put shah in power in Iran as a puppet regime to protection corporation greed and stealing of Iranian oil. Th e1979 revolution was against the oppressive shah who was 100 times worst then Saddam. And to payback Iran for the revolution, US supported Iraq in the 10yr war against Iran as a punishment for the people to stand up for their rights and freedom.
The United States
implemented a policy of support for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War as a counterbalance to
post-revolutionary Iran. At various times, the support took the form of technological aid,
intelligence, the sale of dual-use and military equipment, and direct involvement and warfare against Iran.
After the
Iranian Revolution, enmity between Iran and the U.S. ran high.
Realpolitikers in Washington concluded that Saddam was the "
lesser of the two evils", support for Iraq gradually became the order of the day.
"In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to this effect in June, 1982," said the "Teicher Affidavit," submitted on 31 January 1995 by former
NSC official Howard Teicher to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.
[3] Source
What?! Kuwait has been its own country since the 18th century
There was never an actual "OK" given, the words were "we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts" and that the U.S. did not intend "to start an economic war against Iraq". No one ever specifically state to Iraq that it was "OK" to attack Kuwait.
According to the book Unholy Babylon by Adel Darwish and Gregory Alexander (Gollancz Paperback 1991):
The US before the first Gulf War gave Saddam to understand that it would not interfere in its quarrel with Kuwait. US Ambassador April Glaspie conveyed the message to Saddam that the US 'had no opinion' on Iraq's future intentions with regard to Kuwait. (
Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests.) The book makes the situation painfully clear: Washington sent many messages to the Iraqi leader, all of them with the same theme. 'We won't interfere. We apologise for anything the nasty journalists have written about you, we prefer you to those fanatic Iranians.' This is the 'how' of American diplomacy.
Source
Kuwait it’s own country sine 18th century, HAHAHAHA wonder what hat you pulled that out of with all the other lies you opinionate here without any evidence to back them up. Go to the source above and see how Saddam was tricked into attacking Kuwait and the lies and deceptions of US involved in it. Oh btw, Kuwait was a state created to PROTECT British oil interests, Saddam had every right to invade it and take it back as I stated before!
Below you will find actual copies of the UN sanctions against Iraq, you will find that no one stopped the flow of food, medical or humanitarian aid from coming into Iraq except Saddam Hussein who refused it until he was able to trade freely (obtain materials needed for war). It is no one elses fault that these people were starving and dying except Saddams and that in part is the reason he was removed by the war we are in now. He was commiting a genocide by starving his people to death, he was a weak and stubborn mule and now he is dead because of it. To think that the US anticipated a ruler of a country refusing food and medicine for his people shows your bias. As far as the invasion on the basis of WMD, perhaps you forget that WMD arent necessarily nuclear, they can be the same WMD that Saddam used against his own people, why would we leave someone in power who we know had this technology that could easily convey it to the terrorist who are in Iraq today?
Untrue, please provide reliable proof for this as the audits have not been made public. Also remember that not all of the money went straight to food, much of it went into reparations
UNITED NATIONS -- In a scathing final report documenting massive corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program, investigators Thursday accused more than 2,200 companies, and prominent politicians, of colluding with Saddam Hussein's regime to bilk the humanitarian operation of $1.8 billion.
It meticulously detailed how the $64 billion program became a cash cow for Saddam and more than half the companies participating in oil-for-food _ at the expense of Iraqis suffering under U.N. sanctions.
It blamed shoddy U.N. management and the world's most powerful nations for allowing the corruption to go on for years.
All those corrupt companies and gov’ts paid Saddam dirt cheap to buy his oil, taking advantage of the nation being under sanctions for 10yrs. Only people to benefit from the program were the corrupt companies and gov’ts and sadddam. The Iraqi people starved to death, including over 1 million children, and that is all for the “national security” of the US. Only national security US has is its national interest in the Middle East oil, and it will destroy those nations, regime change, and oppress the people thru illegal wars and sanctions to have it its way. There is no stinken WMD invasion thread or crap like that. It’s all for US and it’s allies greed and plundering of Muslim resources. If these kuffars weren’t as powerful like before then they would’ve made proper deals and treaties and paid the price the owners of oil demanded like other nations do.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...7/213527.shtml
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middl...food_12-3.html
http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomli...ew_details.htm
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/...C?OpenDocument
Complete and total lunacy, the destruction of Iraq is on the former dictator and the guys (al-Qaeda) running around blowing up infrastructure everyday, just like yesterday there were 2 bridges blown up that provided the in's and out's of baghdad. You may wish to pin this on the west, but taking an unbiased approach to the history of it, it is very evident that Saddam made his bed and now he is hanging in it.
That’s complete ignorance your part. Destruction of Iraq began during the Gulf War when Saddam stopped listening to the West and doing it’s bidding, the sanctions were to weaken it by daddy so retard son could invade it today. It was all planned out. Saddam and al-qaed don’t even get along to be in the same country. Today the chaos in Iraq is because of US being there on faulty intelligence waging illegal wars and illegal occupation of that land to put another puppet regime there as it did with Iran. You can continue to deny the facts all you want, we don’t really care as this is what we believe and we continue to hate the west more and more and a war with Iran will only make your life living hell outside out of the US for the atrocities your gov’t does in the name of “national security” when all it wants is more oil and puppet regimes to please it.
I guess we will never know, since saddam wasnt permitted to continue producing his chemical and nuclear weapons will we? It is sad 1 million children died and regretable, but how many would have died had he been allowed to continue? How many were brutally killed in Iran, Iraq, where would it have stopped? The man was attacking everyone around him
Saddam had always been in power and he had is goods and his bad. So does every other leader. And for your information Saddam allegedly killed around 250,000 people in 20yrs where as your retard president killed 700,000 in 3yrs! Now who has killed more Iraqis? Oil greed daddy kills 1million child then georgy the retard son comes and kills close to a million more Iraqis. Like father like son huh, both devils of the west.