But yes the more i read & watch docs etc., the more i see whats happening. Iraq losing fight vs Iran, Rumsfield goes over & gives Saddam the famous handshake & US supplies them with arms. Then Iraq uses these same weapons against them several years later. U.S. trains & gives arms to Bin Laden & co. to fight Soviets, then later the U.S. are fighting the same group they trained. Its quite disgusting to see the lost of so many different countries arming Iraq with those inhumane chemicals, i never knew that.

Seems these sorts of things in middle east come to bite the West in ass. Wonder how long until President of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai starts aiming missles at us?

~toonces

“”The Prevention Of Genocide Act which called for the termination of Iraqi oil imports to the US and assistance to Iraq.” {credit (mg_)}

^I would think the above looks as though a false dichotomy, no? As we already know Saddam “bought” the chemicals. I use the quotation marks upon which, conceptually speaking, the US essentially has played devil’s advocate role as historically Saddam was prepared to use those chemicals. It was a purchase (My Thoughts are that the sale of those chemicals whether intended or not, I ask. . . when the US sold the chemicals did they implicate themselves in the process?) Therefore, that points us to a contradiction which leads me to believe your arguments which I quoted is a false dichotomy. You must seriously consider the fallacy as you commited it. The validity of your entire argument: is burning a candle from both ends.”

First, accrediting me the with auspices of The Prevention of Genocide Act is a little weird - it was passed by both House of Congress. In it, it called for the termination of financial aid to the Hussein regime, funds, in the billions, that were used to purchase a myriad of things, among them the components used for Iraq’s chemical weapons. It was written after Halabja, as a response to that massacre. The Reagan White House squashed the legislation.

The United States did not play devil’s advocate at all. The Central Intelligence Agency knew full well that Hussein was using chemical weapons and helped him target Iranian forces…

“The US conducted a covert military campaign to help Iraq during its war with Iran, despite knowing that Baghdad intended to use chemical weapons in a number of battles, according to a report in the New York Times.

The report says the programme was carried out during the Reagan administration, at a time when the White House was publicly condemning Iraq for its use of lethal gas.” - The Guardian, August 19, 2002.

The foreign lobby in the United States works a specific way, not unlike taking a loan out from a bank (and the use of the IMF and World Bank in the same fashion is very common). The US, who have policy goals in a region, fund those they feel will benefit them. In turn, those that receive funding agree to basically pump that money back into the US defense sector (privatization rights are also a common term, which has occurred throughout Africa).

Beyond that I fail to see the relevance of your argument. The CDC sent Hussein biological agents, they also sold them to him. If we’re to talk of complicity, that seems rather obvious to me. If your suggesting that the United States unknowingly aided his regime then, well, I don’t know what to say. That’s a rather uneducated view considering the mountain of evidence to the contrary. As for playing both sides, and of agencies operating beyond Congressional oversight, it’s been happening for quite some time now, sorry to be the one to tell you.

(Stephen K: luckily the paperback was released recently, the hardcover is not exactly ideal for traveling).

^I would think the above looks as though a false dichotomy, no? As we already know Saddam “bought” the chemicals. I use the quotation marks upon which, conceptually speaking, the US essentially has played devil’s advocate role as historically Saddam was prepared to use those chemicals. It was a purchase (My Thoughts are that the sale of those chemicals whether intended or not, I ask. . . when the US sold the chemicals did they implicate themselves in the process?) Therefore, that points us to a contradiction which leads me to believe your arguments which I quoted is a false dichotomy. You must seriously consider the fallacy as you commited it. The validity of your entire argument: is burning a candle from both ends.

IGNORANCE

I am only 36 years old but as I am getting older and experiencing more, I can’t help but to see how ignorant people are.

If the government told them to jump off a cliff because “you are helping your country”, they probably would. Just because you are being told one thing, it doesn’t make it true. I think people need to step up and ask questions and demand answers.

I think its great that this student is asking a very important question. He obviously has his own opinions and wants answers. I would say he is not a follower. But because his family is a “very conservative family that supports US efforts in Iraq and the Bush administration”, he may feel he should be too. Why?, because everyone else is? That is not a good excuse. I hope that by reading your entry, it will help him to realize what is really going on with his country. Its not a good thing!

That’s why I love the Internet as the same time as it drives me insane. People who might otherwise never connect — actually or ideologically — find some common ground, or at least a bit of rapport.