Iraq threatens to use chemical weapons (the ones it "doesn't" have)
-
Baghdad has insisted repeatedly that it no longer has chemical, biological or nuclear weapons nor medium-range missiles. Speaking in an interview with al-Quds al-Arabi, a London-based Arabic newspaper, an unnamed senior Iraqi official said that Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary. :~ (oops!) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-495141,00.html[^] ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
-
Baghdad has insisted repeatedly that it no longer has chemical, biological or nuclear weapons nor medium-range missiles. Speaking in an interview with al-Quds al-Arabi, a London-based Arabic newspaper, an unnamed senior Iraqi official said that Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary. :~ (oops!) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-495141,00.html[^] ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
From Article: Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary Who provided those weapons to Iraq during war with Iran ?? Hmm, interesting to see whether Iraq will be able to use such weapons against 'the countries responsible' for providing this technology to Iraq. :wtf:
-
From Article: Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary Who provided those weapons to Iraq during war with Iran ?? Hmm, interesting to see whether Iraq will be able to use such weapons against 'the countries responsible' for providing this technology to Iraq. :wtf:
:laugh: You're so funny. You should read up a bit on your history. Saddam ordered research grade anthrax from the US (not the government, but from a research facility in the US). He spent years trying to weaponize it. He almost gave up. In light of those facts, you'd better think again if you think the US government gave Saddam weapons-grade anthrax or any other WMD. As for chemical weapons, they're not very hard to make. Even with the relatively primitive knowledge of chemical-weapons manufacture that the Germans had in 1918 (you know-- back when armies used bi-planes), they were able to make chemical weapons. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
-
:laugh: You're so funny. You should read up a bit on your history. Saddam ordered research grade anthrax from the US (not the government, but from a research facility in the US). He spent years trying to weaponize it. He almost gave up. In light of those facts, you'd better think again if you think the US government gave Saddam weapons-grade anthrax or any other WMD. As for chemical weapons, they're not very hard to make. Even with the relatively primitive knowledge of chemical-weapons manufacture that the Germans had in 1918 (you know-- back when armies used bi-planes), they were able to make chemical weapons. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
Biological warfare when (I think) Mongolians threw a black-death infected corpse over the wall of a city they beleagured but could not take. Saddam received lots of crap during the time the US tried to make him fight Iran. There was more than a single incident of transferring research grade anthrax, and IIRC there was some "better things" too. Not only from the US, but mainly. (I have a link to a list with source references at home...)
skulls don't kiss a machito [sighist]
-
From Article: Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary Who provided those weapons to Iraq during war with Iran ?? Hmm, interesting to see whether Iraq will be able to use such weapons against 'the countries responsible' for providing this technology to Iraq. :wtf:
Shamoon wrote: Who provided those weapons to Iraq during war with Iran ?? Well, from what I read, the equipment for manufacture and production came principally from France and Germany with an unknown support from the Soviet Union. The Soviets definitely had the largest weapons manufacturing facilities. "I will find a new sig someday."
-
Baghdad has insisted repeatedly that it no longer has chemical, biological or nuclear weapons nor medium-range missiles. Speaking in an interview with al-Quds al-Arabi, a London-based Arabic newspaper, an unnamed senior Iraqi official said that Iraq had used chemical weapons during the war with Iran and would use them again if necessary. :~ (oops!) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-495141,00.html[^] ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
Saddam used chemical weapons (gas) against the kurd people, killing more or less 10.000 people in Halabja and leading to even more deaths and diseases in the following months. But that happened in 1988 and in 1988 Saddam Hussein was a good guy because he was fighting against the bad guys in Teheran, few newspapers reported that event and the people working in that area were called liars and crazy when they try to report that to the media. Everybody knows that he had this kind of weapons when, in 1981, Israel destroyed his nuclear arsenal with a quick air attack. Now it seems that they have to carpet-bombing Iraq and coventryze Baghdad to reach the same goal... that's progress :~ -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
-
Shamoon wrote: Who provided those weapons to Iraq during war with Iran ?? Well, from what I read, the equipment for manufacture and production came principally from France and Germany with an unknown support from the Soviet Union. The Soviets definitely had the largest weapons manufacturing facilities. "I will find a new sig someday."
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: equipment for manufacture and production came principally from France and Germany Could you please proove your assertion ?
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: equipment for manufacture and production came principally from France and Germany Could you please proove your assertion ?
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
KaЯl wrote: Could you please proove your assertion ? I probably count not prove it. If I could the current theatrics would not be happening. If you take my full quote I include the word read. For example:
Wall Street Journal October 9, 2002 Germans Say Iraq Acquired Long-Range Cannon Gear Prosecutors Say Technology Could Help Make Artillery to Deliver Atomic Weapons BERLIN -- German prosecutors say Iraq has acquired technology to make a long-range cannon capable of delivering atomic, biological and chemical weapons, and that it came from Germany via Jordan. The allegation is in a report prepared by German military and police agencies for prosecutors in Mannheim, Germany. A court there is preparing to hear a case in January against two Germans who bought from German companies cannon-boring equipment that allegedly ended up in Iraq.All I am saying is that I have routinely seen this type of article about the equipment. It does not seem to me that only the US has capitalist who only want to make a buck and do not care how. I use the word principally due to very few article that I have seen naming any other countries. I am not talking about arms sales here. "I will find a new sig someday." -
:laugh: You're so funny. You should read up a bit on your history. Saddam ordered research grade anthrax from the US (not the government, but from a research facility in the US). He spent years trying to weaponize it. He almost gave up. In light of those facts, you'd better think again if you think the US government gave Saddam weapons-grade anthrax or any other WMD. As for chemical weapons, they're not very hard to make. Even with the relatively primitive knowledge of chemical-weapons manufacture that the Germans had in 1918 (you know-- back when armies used bi-planes), they were able to make chemical weapons. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
I believe you should read some newspaper from outside US. There are many links to on-line newspapers in almost all countries. If you did you would discover histories as the following: President in Argentina illegally sold army weapons to Ecuador, Arabian countries, Croatia, drug dealers in Brazil and many others. Thousand or weapons where sold this way during last decade. There are lots of pictures of children being murdered by these weapons. In Argentina a city was destroyed and a military building was blown to destroy evidence. This president spent was found guilty of this charges and spent a couple of month in prison, but was released because here in Argentina weapon dealing is a light crime.:eek: It was proven than US government knew the whole operation and not only supported it but also keeps supporting this president for the next elections. Another interesting story? During the 80's decade, Uruguay-Chile developed biological and chemical weapons, which were planned to use against Argentina. After the conflict was solved, these weapons disappeared (Anthrax can't be destroyed so somewhere they must be). The investigation carried out later showed these weapons were sold, apparently to Iraq, under the supervision of a US agent. One more story? Have you ever been to Vietnam? If you did you'll find there is still evidence of chemical weapons used there by US. Yes, I'm sorry to tell you this but US used chemical weapons in that war. This isn't shown in CNN, is it? And we'd better not talk about what happened with URSS weapons after it dissolved. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying US is responsible for this. What I'm trying to point out is weapon as well as drug dealing is an incredible markets (one of the biggest in the world), and it’s very difficult to stop or even control, even for a powerful country as US.
-
KaЯl wrote: Could you please proove your assertion ? I probably count not prove it. If I could the current theatrics would not be happening. If you take my full quote I include the word read. For example:
Wall Street Journal October 9, 2002 Germans Say Iraq Acquired Long-Range Cannon Gear Prosecutors Say Technology Could Help Make Artillery to Deliver Atomic Weapons BERLIN -- German prosecutors say Iraq has acquired technology to make a long-range cannon capable of delivering atomic, biological and chemical weapons, and that it came from Germany via Jordan. The allegation is in a report prepared by German military and police agencies for prosecutors in Mannheim, Germany. A court there is preparing to hear a case in January against two Germans who bought from German companies cannon-boring equipment that allegedly ended up in Iraq.All I am saying is that I have routinely seen this type of article about the equipment. It does not seem to me that only the US has capitalist who only want to make a buck and do not care how. I use the word principally due to very few article that I have seen naming any other countries. I am not talking about arms sales here. "I will find a new sig someday."Thanks for the info, I'm glad to see my country is not involved :-D . I know we sold some Mirage F1 to Irak, but it was when Saddam Hussein was the "Good boy" fighting against the "bad" Iranians. Because these F1 are equipped with an electronic from the 50's (radar Cyrano-II), they aren't really valuable :)
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
Thanks for the info, I'm glad to see my country is not involved :-D . I know we sold some Mirage F1 to Irak, but it was when Saddam Hussein was the "Good boy" fighting against the "bad" Iranians. Because these F1 are equipped with an electronic from the 50's (radar Cyrano-II), they aren't really valuable :)
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
Well I just deleted my first pass.:(( I really need an undo here. (or always type in word first and then copy and paste.:-O To summarize: I was not intending to point fingers. Just depending on how you viewed what is right and wrong could really change the "nations responsible" list. Just those selling weapons (or in this case research material) or those that sell the equipment to then make something of that material. To bad the world is not as black and white as those USA westerns were you could just look at the hat. "I will find a new sig someday."
-
Well I just deleted my first pass.:(( I really need an undo here. (or always type in word first and then copy and paste.:-O To summarize: I was not intending to point fingers. Just depending on how you viewed what is right and wrong could really change the "nations responsible" list. Just those selling weapons (or in this case research material) or those that sell the equipment to then make something of that material. To bad the world is not as black and white as those USA westerns were you could just look at the hat. "I will find a new sig someday."
"To bad the world is not as black and white as those USA westerns were you could just look at the hat." It's what I appreciate with Americans, they are generally very open-minded :cool: (unless for those conservative extremists, nobody's perfect :))
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
I believe you should read some newspaper from outside US. There are many links to on-line newspapers in almost all countries. If you did you would discover histories as the following: President in Argentina illegally sold army weapons to Ecuador, Arabian countries, Croatia, drug dealers in Brazil and many others. Thousand or weapons where sold this way during last decade. There are lots of pictures of children being murdered by these weapons. In Argentina a city was destroyed and a military building was blown to destroy evidence. This president spent was found guilty of this charges and spent a couple of month in prison, but was released because here in Argentina weapon dealing is a light crime.:eek: It was proven than US government knew the whole operation and not only supported it but also keeps supporting this president for the next elections. Another interesting story? During the 80's decade, Uruguay-Chile developed biological and chemical weapons, which were planned to use against Argentina. After the conflict was solved, these weapons disappeared (Anthrax can't be destroyed so somewhere they must be). The investigation carried out later showed these weapons were sold, apparently to Iraq, under the supervision of a US agent. One more story? Have you ever been to Vietnam? If you did you'll find there is still evidence of chemical weapons used there by US. Yes, I'm sorry to tell you this but US used chemical weapons in that war. This isn't shown in CNN, is it? And we'd better not talk about what happened with URSS weapons after it dissolved. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying US is responsible for this. What I'm trying to point out is weapon as well as drug dealing is an incredible markets (one of the biggest in the world), and it’s very difficult to stop or even control, even for a powerful country as US.
I believe you should read some newspaper from outside US. Acutally, I don't get news from the US. I don't have a TV. I don't get a newspaper. I get my news from the web. And I haven't gone to ABC news, CNN news, FOX news, ... for a long long time. You'd better think again if you think I'm somehow surrounded by exclusively American news. There was a great deal of debate about Argentina within the US administration at the time. If you look at the records, some people said we should sever all ties with Argentina. Other people said we would lose any and all influence on Argentina if we did that. In any case, you've never even attempted to make any sort of chemical/biological weapons link between Iraq and the US. The investigation carried out later showed these weapons were sold, apparently to Iraq, under the supervision of a US agent. Back it up. Yes, I'm sorry to tell you this but US used chemical weapons in that war. Back it up. Sorry. All you've offered are allegations. And with the possible exception of the second one, you never even attempted to claim that the US sold chemical/biological weapons to Iraq. I don't deny that the US has done some rather shady things in the past, but everyone assumes the US is guilty until proven innocent. The allegation that the US sold chemical/biological weapons to Iraq almost seems to be assumed by everyone, but no one can offer anything in the way of evidence. Why do you think that is? I have a reason: kneejerk anti-americanism. Everyone always assumes the worst because that's what they want to believe. If you do that, then you'd better examine your bias. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
-
Saddam used chemical weapons (gas) against the kurd people, killing more or less 10.000 people in Halabja and leading to even more deaths and diseases in the following months. But that happened in 1988 and in 1988 Saddam Hussein was a good guy because he was fighting against the bad guys in Teheran, few newspapers reported that event and the people working in that area were called liars and crazy when they try to report that to the media. Everybody knows that he had this kind of weapons when, in 1981, Israel destroyed his nuclear arsenal with a quick air attack. Now it seems that they have to carpet-bombing Iraq and coventryze Baghdad to reach the same goal... that's progress :~ -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
Saddam used chemical weapons (gas) against the kurd people, killing more or less 10.000 people in Halabja and leading to even more deaths and diseases in the following months. But that happened in 1988 and in 1988 Saddam Hussein was a good guy because he was fighting against the bad guys in Teheran The Iraq-Iran war officially ended August 20 1988. (Although most of the fighting was ended in 1987.) Saddam didn't begin his attacks on his own population until the war was over: Eyewitnesses have said that Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the village of Birjinni on August 25, 1988. In August 1988, shortly after the ceasefire that ended the Iran-Iraq war, the government of Saddam Hussein launched a major military offensive against the Kurds in northern Iraq... http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemiraqgas2.html[^] It's also worth noting that the US didn't get involved in this war until 1984, when the tide of the war began to shift towards Iran. The US didn't want Iraqi oil fields taken by Iran. The US and Iraq had no diplomatic relations between 1967 and 1984 - which should show what the US thought of Iraq. Even more interesting is the list of countries that took sides in the war: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/iraniraq.htm ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
-
I believe you should read some newspaper from outside US. Acutally, I don't get news from the US. I don't have a TV. I don't get a newspaper. I get my news from the web. And I haven't gone to ABC news, CNN news, FOX news, ... for a long long time. You'd better think again if you think I'm somehow surrounded by exclusively American news. There was a great deal of debate about Argentina within the US administration at the time. If you look at the records, some people said we should sever all ties with Argentina. Other people said we would lose any and all influence on Argentina if we did that. In any case, you've never even attempted to make any sort of chemical/biological weapons link between Iraq and the US. The investigation carried out later showed these weapons were sold, apparently to Iraq, under the supervision of a US agent. Back it up. Yes, I'm sorry to tell you this but US used chemical weapons in that war. Back it up. Sorry. All you've offered are allegations. And with the possible exception of the second one, you never even attempted to claim that the US sold chemical/biological weapons to Iraq. I don't deny that the US has done some rather shady things in the past, but everyone assumes the US is guilty until proven innocent. The allegation that the US sold chemical/biological weapons to Iraq almost seems to be assumed by everyone, but no one can offer anything in the way of evidence. Why do you think that is? I have a reason: kneejerk anti-americanism. Everyone always assumes the worst because that's what they want to believe. If you do that, then you'd better examine your bias. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
I don't deny that the US has done some rather shady things in the past, but everyone assumes the US is guilty until proven innocent. As I said before, don't get me wrong I'm not saying US is responsible for this. I'm not talking about US, but weapon dealing. This great market has been out of control for long time, and little restrictions were applied to avoid guys like Saddam getting terrible weapons. Who do you think sold weapons to Iraq? I don't think US government sold them. On the other hand there are many companies all around the World ready to sell them for money, paying to attention on who was buying them. And I don't believe US companies didn't sell them too, as well as many companies all around the world. For example, it was discovered that some European (I can't remember but I think it were French) companies had been selling weapons to Iraq even after the Gulf War. I believe before Gulf War, with enough money, Saddam must had had little trouble to find someone FROM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD ready to exchange it for anthrax or whatever he wants. The main point here is not US, is weapon dealing. This as well as drug dealing this is great market. I believe there's no doubt all countries are having problems to control drug dealing. Why do you think weapon dealing is easier to control?
-
Biological warfare when (I think) Mongolians threw a black-death infected corpse over the wall of a city they beleagured but could not take. Saddam received lots of crap during the time the US tried to make him fight Iran. There was more than a single incident of transferring research grade anthrax, and IIRC there was some "better things" too. Not only from the US, but mainly. (I have a link to a list with source references at home...)
skulls don't kiss a machito [sighist]
peterchen wrote: Biological warfare when (I think) Mongolians threw a black-death infected corpse over the wall of a city they beleagured but could not take. Those were the Turks I believe.
Jason Henderson
start page ; articles henderson is coming henderson is an opponent's worst nightmare * googlism * -
Saddam used chemical weapons (gas) against the kurd people, killing more or less 10.000 people in Halabja and leading to even more deaths and diseases in the following months. But that happened in 1988 and in 1988 Saddam Hussein was a good guy because he was fighting against the bad guys in Teheran The Iraq-Iran war officially ended August 20 1988. (Although most of the fighting was ended in 1987.) Saddam didn't begin his attacks on his own population until the war was over: Eyewitnesses have said that Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the village of Birjinni on August 25, 1988. In August 1988, shortly after the ceasefire that ended the Iran-Iraq war, the government of Saddam Hussein launched a major military offensive against the Kurds in northern Iraq... http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemiraqgas2.html[^] It's also worth noting that the US didn't get involved in this war until 1984, when the tide of the war began to shift towards Iran. The US didn't want Iraqi oil fields taken by Iran. The US and Iraq had no diplomatic relations between 1967 and 1984 - which should show what the US thought of Iraq. Even more interesting is the list of countries that took sides in the war: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/iraniraq.htm ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
The Iraq-Iran war officially ended August 20 1988. (Although most of the fighting was ended in 1987.) Saddam didn't begin his attacks on his own population until the war was over Ok, it completed his duty against Iran and then dedicated himself to the pleasure of killing his own people. But he was not blamed for his "creative" use of chemistry at that time. _Even more interesting is the list of countries that took sides in the war: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/iraniraq.htm_ US supported both countries? Saddam Hussein tried to get an advantage of the khomeinist revolution in Iran and he knowed that nobody would try to stop him. HE thought that a quick blitz should grant him control over the oil field on the border, but he made a big mistake understimating the forces of Iran (this was the first mistake of a long list...) I'm not only talking about the US. All western countries (Italy, France, Germany) gave him weapons (through not-so clear financial operations) and didn't use their power inside the UN to stop the aggression. Sometimes you don't need to be involved directly. The US and Iraq had no diplomatic relations between 1967 and 1984 - which should show what the US thought of Iraq. The US had no public relations also with the talibans or with the mujaiddins during the war against USSR. But now mr. Kissinger will explain us the truth :~ -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
-
peterchen wrote: Biological warfare when (I think) Mongolians threw a black-death infected corpse over the wall of a city they beleagured but could not take. Those were the Turks I believe.
Jason Henderson
start page ; articles henderson is coming henderson is an opponent's worst nightmare * googlism *The crusaders did also the same during Crusades, and probably also Romans centuries before
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
The Iraq-Iran war officially ended August 20 1988. (Although most of the fighting was ended in 1987.) Saddam didn't begin his attacks on his own population until the war was over Ok, it completed his duty against Iran and then dedicated himself to the pleasure of killing his own people. But he was not blamed for his "creative" use of chemistry at that time. _Even more interesting is the list of countries that took sides in the war: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/iraniraq.htm_ US supported both countries? Saddam Hussein tried to get an advantage of the khomeinist revolution in Iran and he knowed that nobody would try to stop him. HE thought that a quick blitz should grant him control over the oil field on the border, but he made a big mistake understimating the forces of Iran (this was the first mistake of a long list...) I'm not only talking about the US. All western countries (Italy, France, Germany) gave him weapons (through not-so clear financial operations) and didn't use their power inside the UN to stop the aggression. Sometimes you don't need to be involved directly. The US and Iraq had no diplomatic relations between 1967 and 1984 - which should show what the US thought of Iraq. The US had no public relations also with the talibans or with the mujaiddins during the war against USSR. But now mr. Kissinger will explain us the truth :~ -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
US supported both countries? Yes, I think that is refering to the Iran-Contra affair. In 1985, Ronald Reagan was selling weapons to Iran (at extremely overinflated prices) - while the US had an embargo on Iran. At the same time, Reagan was also trying to tell other countries not to sell weapons to Iran. The money from the sales went to the Contras in Central America (congress had prohibited giving money to the Contras). All of this was done secretly - by "secretly" I mean that it was hidden even from other people in the US government, including congress. One of the things he was trying to get in return for weapon sales was release of American hostages in Lebanon (who were being held by pro-Iranian militia groups). http://www.bartleby.com/65/ir/Irancont.html[^] I think that's what they mean when they say the US supported both sides. ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion