Saddam offered to go into exile 1 month before Iraq war

[Raineyrocks]

As far as the picture mvpel has pasted it is very bothersome as for the question of who should have protected him, my answer is his fellow countrymen.

Bingo. Have you been watching Myanmar Burma over the past couple days? The U.S. has done nothing over the history of the military régime running that country to help those people, besides a few limp-wristed attempts at asset seizure and half-assed sanctions. And now, the Burmese are finally rising up and taking the situation into their own hands.

I have been watching it and I put a couple links regarding their situation at the bottom of this post.  From what I read in these articles it's not looking to good for the protesters    You know I wonder if enough American citizens started protesting if it is too late for us to do this too, what do you think?  I just wonder if the US govt. has enough militants, (right word?), in place to stop the protesters here like what seems to be going on there now.

I briefly read something about 1000 US citizens tried to arrest Bush, here's the link:http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20070926091533497

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=484903&in_page_id=1811&ct=5

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7022437.stm

[mvpel]

I have been watching it and I put a couple links regarding their situation at the bottom of this post.  From what I read in these articles it's not looking to good for the protesters

Of course it's not, what made you think it would ever look good for the protesters?  When you're dealing with ruthless, soulless, bloodthirsty tyrants and their thugs, carping about the indecency of it all will simply get you killed after torture, instead of before.

That's why interim Prime Minister of Iraq Ayad Allawi brought a message of deep gratitude to the joint session of Congress which he addressed on September 23, 2004, and why America, as a nation, owes a debt of gratitude to France to this day regardless of what motivated their foreign interventionism during the Revolutionary War.

[Raineyrocks]

I have been watching it and I put a couple links regarding their situation at the bottom of this post.  From what I read in these articles it's not looking to good for the protesters

Of course it's not, what made you think it would ever look good for the protesters?  When you're dealing with ruthless, soulless, bloodthirsty tyrants and their thugs, carping about the indecency of it all will simply get you killed after torture, instead of before.

That's why interim Prime Minister of Iraq Ayad Allawi brought a message of deep gratitude to the joint session of Congress which he addressed on September 23, 2004, and why America, as a nation, owes a debt of gratitude to France to this day regardless of what motivated their foreign interventionism during the Revolutionary War.

I don't know what made me think it would ever look good for the protesters, gosh if only I was as smart as you with all your foresight!   I guess everyone in the world should just give up, right?    Can't you just try to be a little nicer and less ridiculing? 

[alohamonkey]

Was France engaging in imperialism when they aided the US in the Revolutionary War?

There was no war going on in Iraq before we entered.  The US was already fighting the British in the Revolutionary War when France decided to help.  The US initiated the war in Iraq against a sovereign nation without any direct harm done to us first.  So . . . France in Revolutionary War . . . no.  US . . . exploiting Iraq for oil . . . yes, that's imperialism.

[alohamonkey]

It's just guilt-by-association flailing against Cheney and Bush.

I think it's just too much of a coincidence that, out of all the countries with terrorist connections, we chose to invade the one sitting on the second largest oil reserve in the world.  Can you at least admit that Cheney and Bush are making quite a bit of money off of this war?

Stick it to the MAN - make BIODIESEL.

Just got a Prius . . . learning about biodiesel now.  Want to have a biodiesel pickup within one year

[J’raxis 270145]

Was France engaging in imperialism when they aided the US in the Revolutionary War?

There was no war going on in Iraq before we entered.  The US was already fighting the British in the Revolutionary War when France decided to help.  The US initiated the war in Iraq against a sovereign nation without any direct harm done to us first.  So . . . France in Revolutionary War . . . no.  US . . . exploiting Iraq for oil . . . yes, that's imperialism.

Not only that, but the French went right home after the war ended. They didn't turn Philadelphia into a French fortress like the U.S. has done with Baghdad.

[alohamonkey]

Not only that, but the French went right home after the war ended. They didn't turn Philadelphia into a French fortress like the U.S. has done with Baghdad.

"Giant U.S. embassy rising in Baghdad"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-04-19-us-embassy_x.htm

"...The 104-acre complex — the size of about 80 football fields — will include two office buildings, one of them designed for future use as a school, six apartment buildings, a gym, a pool, a food court and its own power generation and water-treatment plants. The average Baghdad home has electricity only four hours a day, according to Bowen's office.

The current U.S. Embassy in Iraq has nearly 1,000 Americans working there, more than at any other U.S. embassy..."

[EthanAllen]

Not only that, but the French went right home after the war ended. They didn't turn Philadelphia into a French fortress like the U.S. has done with Baghdad.

"Giant U.S. embassy rising in Baghdad"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-04-19-us-embassy_x.htm

"...The 104-acre complex — the size of about 80 football fields — will include two office buildings, one of them designed for future use as a school, six apartment buildings, a gym, a pool, a food court and its own power generation and water-treatment plants. The average Baghdad home has electricity only four hours a day, according to Bowen's office.

The current U.S. Embassy in Iraq has nearly 1,000 Americans working there, more than at any other U.S. embassy..."

The reason we have not removed any troops is because we had no intention of EVER leaving Iraq once we invaded.

[Insurgent]

For those who want to know where we are and how we arrived there. Want to take the "red pill"?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4046564743329239954&q=mike+ruppert&total=132&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6

[mvpel]

There was no war going on in Iraq before we entered.

There was a hot war being waged by the Iraqi government against innocent Iraqis for decades:



And there was a shooting war being waged between Iraqi anti-aircraft gunners and US, French, and British aircraft for essentially the entire duration - th first Gulf War was in a state of conditional armistice, not concluded.

And Iraq continued to be in material breach of those conditions by continuing to fire upon coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones imposed by the US, France, and Britain following the liberation of Kuwait in order to protect humanitarian efforts for rebellious minorities in Iraq who had been subjected to repeated attempts at genocide by the Ba'athist regime over the years.

Indeed, Saddam offered a $14,000 reward to any Iraqi soldier who could shoot down a US or British aircraft patrolling the zones after 1998, and air strikes and shoot-down attempts continued basically every week until the liberation of Iraq.

Saddam protested that the no-fly-zones were illegal, but that's like a murderous home invasion robber complaining that bars on the windows violate the fire code.

[JustUs]

And the victims of Halabja bear witness to the fact that Iraq had obtained WMD

It is hard to believe anyone is still repeating this propaganda tripe! This was exposed long ago as part of the demonizing process of "manufacturing consent" among the American population for an invasion of Iraq.

The US Army War College concludes (re Halabja): "Having looked at all of 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."

cite: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/helms.html , summary re Halabja with cite from the War College report.

[David]

<Was France engaging in imperialism when they aided the US in the Revolutionary War?>
Actually, yes they were.  France and England both had empires around the world, and were both using the americas as a proxy war zone, much as the usa does in much of S. america and Africa, today. 
Is worth being repeated again. 

Apparently the U.S. doesn't have a problem rewarding North Korea even after their repeated defiance.  They even tested nuclear bombs after we told them not to!!  They were way more advanced in WMD-making than Saddam and Iraq ever were.  And, they've got a looooong list of human rights violations.  It doesn't keep us from paying them off . . . . Do you know why we didn't go to war there?  North Korea isn't sitting on the world's 2nd largest oil reserve. 

Ding-ding-ding--we have a winner!

[mvpel]

The US Army War College concludes (re Halabja): "Having looked at all of 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."

cite: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/helms.html , summary re Halabja with cite from the War College report.

There's quite a gaping caveat - "available to us," "impossible to confirm."

What about the reports of the eyewitnesses and survivors?

I find it staggering that you're actually casting doubt on the use of chemical weapons in the Halabja massacre.  The only thing that is open to any real question at this point is whether it was Iraq or Iran that did it.

According to scores of Kurdish eyewitnesses, the bombings of Halabja on March 16 and 17, 1988, were not Iraq's first use of chemical weapons on Kurdish targets. One commander with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) saw Iraqi warplanes drop poison gas "five or six months" earlier.

It was in the Bargloo area, 20-30 kilometers from the Iranian border, where the PUK had its headquarters at the time. Two or three commanders died five minutes later without injury. I was only about 20 yards away. I had a mask and protective clothing on.

There are other, unconfirmed reports of chemical bombings as early as April, 1987. Credence that they took place is lent by the fact that the PUK commander in Bargloo says he was already wearing protective clothing -- and therefore knew to expect a chemical attack -- when his headquarters was hit. In another example, a Kurdish medic treated dozens of chemical weapons victims from Saosenan, a Kurdish village near the Iranian border, shortly before the attack on Halabja:

In this village, 300 or the 400 inhabitants died. They brought the injured to us. They had blisters and burns on their bodies and some had lost their eyesight. Our medical supplies were hopelessly inadequate.

Besides the fact that the victims had no shrapnel or bullet wounds, the medic says, it was easy to rule out conventional weapons:

I saw aircraft dropping something. The sound was different. In the aftermath, some people lost sight and had problems breathing. It was obvious these were not ordinary weapons.

The use of chemical weapons is obvious to anyone familiar with their effects on the human body, and the carnage in Halabja was photographed and documented in detail.

[JustUs]

Take up your beef with the US Army War College, and when you prove them wrong, please inform this list. Then you can shed the mantle of being a propaganda shill.

I find it staggering that you're actually casting doubt on the people who actually researched this situation, rather than the people that have an incentive to use propaganda for their nefarious purposes.

The US Army War College concludes (re Halabja): "Having looked at all of 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."

cite: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/helms.html , summary re Halabja with cite from the War College report.

There's quite a gaping caveat - "available to us," "impossible to confirm."

What about the reports of the eyewitnesses and survivors?

I find it staggering that you're actually casting doubt on the use of chemical weapons in the Halabja massacre.  The only thing that is open to any real question at this point is whether it was Iraq or Iran that did it.

According to scores of Kurdish eyewitnesses, the bombings of Halabja on March 16 and 17, 1988, were not Iraq's first use of chemical weapons on Kurdish targets. One commander with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) saw Iraqi warplanes drop poison gas "five or six months" earlier.

It was in the Bargloo area, 20-30 kilometers from the Iranian border, where the PUK had its headquarters at the time. Two or three commanders died five minutes later without injury. I was only about 20 yards away. I had a mask and protective clothing on.

There are other, unconfirmed reports of chemical bombings as early as April, 1987. Credence that they took place is lent by the fact that the PUK commander in Bargloo says he was already wearing protective clothing -- and therefore knew to expect a chemical attack -- when his headquarters was hit. In another example, a Kurdish medic treated dozens of chemical weapons victims from Saosenan, a Kurdish village near the Iranian border, shortly before the attack on Halabja:

In this village, 300 or the 400 inhabitants died. They brought the injured to us. They had blisters and burns on their bodies and some had lost their eyesight. Our medical supplies were hopelessly inadequate.

Besides the fact that the victims had no shrapnel or bullet wounds, the medic says, it was easy to rule out conventional weapons:

I saw aircraft dropping something. The sound was different. In the aftermath, some people lost sight and had problems breathing. It was obvious these were not ordinary weapons.

The use of chemical weapons is obvious to anyone familiar with their effects on the human body, and the carnage in Halabja was photographed and documented in detail.

[mvpel]

I find it staggering that you're actually casting doubt on the people who actually researched this situation, rather than the people that have an incentive to use propaganda for their nefarious purposes.

So you're taking the hedged "impossible to confirm" and "all the evidence available to us" (which is not "all the evidence") non-conclusion of the AWC over the testimony of eyewitnesses and researchers and doctors who have confirmed the use of chemical weapons.

If not by chemical weapons, how did all those thousands of people die, anyway?  The attack was confirmed and acknowledged by the Iraqis, even.