USA companies also have a role in the smuggling if I am not wrong. Saddam could not have done it without their help.
Ah yes, sanctions. Another brilliant idea. We want to control Saddam, so we will starve a million people to death. And then, we'll claim to have the moral high ground when we invade, they'll greet us as liberators with flowers and all of that nonsense... Gee, why didn't they forget that we starved them? Until people see cause/effect, these problems will continue. Did you know that Iraq had the best medical system in the middle east under Saddam? Or that the country had the highest number of PhDs per capita? What have we given these people under the auspice of "freedom"? I still read reports of disease and a lack of sewage treatment. Food shortages, and lack of medical infrastructure. Energy rationing. Are they supposed to be happy now? Do we really think they are so stupid as to not understand that their oil resources will no longer be nationalized, but controlled by foreign corporations? Imagine if someone came to the US, to free us from Bush. I don't think Americans would stand for it (despite not liking Bush generally). If someone starved us out, would you anger be directed at Bush, or the people starving you? These are real questions we have to ask ourselves, when we think we can run other people's lives, and tell them how to live.
Guerilla and his band of ron paul supporters have cited this report to blame America first many times here. Of course, he always knew it was debunked to begin with, but that never stopped him. I've covered this before too, when you tried to blame America first. Read. I don't. I've read the quran, I know why. Besides, you've previously said it was just 19 people and we shouldn't be worried any more. He would. He won't say a bad word about saddam. saddam was a great man to him, it's the USA that is horrible. This is another lie by ping. I've corrected him on this in the past too, so I'm left with no doubt that it's a deliberate lie. Rumsfeld was sent, a private citizen, to Iraq as a special envoy to improve relations with Iraq. The gassing of kurds was done by saddam, in 1998. As d16man points out, correctly, "these people" don't care about the truth. More blame America first. This is untrue. Guerilla goes on to prove here, that he takes no issue with saddam gassing, raping, burying people in mass graves, putting people in acid baths or anything else. He just wants to blame America for it. Incorrect. saddam killed a million (actually two million) of his own people. He exploited the program for profit, lined his pockets and those of his sons, built lavish palaces, bought gold plated guns (huge stockpiles), bought expensive cars and sat by. He also took huge kickbacks, bribes, and bought off our allies, the UN and influential businessmen around the world. But guerilla would put that blame on America, again, knowing his statement is false. You've previously said only 19 people were a concern and downplayed terrorism. Now you use this, as a reason to give them legitimacy for political gain. Really sad, guerilla. That won't stop guerilla and his ron paul supporters from blaming America first. Guerilla won't say a bad word about them, or Iran, or anyone else. But he will say a bad word about the USA and give other's credit to his country (I'm really starting to wonder if he really is an American, or just pretending to be...it wouldn't be the first here.) This is the sickest example of outright lying I've seen on their part. I'd say the lying about their candidate's racist comments that Ron Paul actually admitted to writing and defended was the biggest lie yet, but I expect them to lie about that.
Not even worthy of a point by point response GTech. One moment you hide behind "blaming America" then the next moment, you don't think Americans should be accountable for what America does when they promote the policy. It's utter horsecrap, and anyone who follows your and my posts knows it. Now, I believe in free speech, and freedom of thought, even when it is intentionally retarded. I'll fight for your right to embrace so strongly, the neo-conservative daydream that you can interfere politically, militarily and economically in other people's lives, and they will never ever resent it. They will only be ambivalent or pleased. But any sane and rational person knows this not to be the case. The evidence in Iraq, Iran and with Bin Laden makes my case. You an dispute it all you want, but aggressive, interventionist American foreign policy creates blowback. If you're going to prance around these forums wearing that shield, and claiming to be Captain America, then damn well better be prepared to take responsibility for everything that has been done in the name of that flag. That includes endorsing Saddam in the 70s and 80s when he was torturing and gassing his own people. When he used chemical weapons on the Iranians. When we sold the Iranians weapons under Iran-Contra to keep the war going. By replacing Mossadeqh with the Shah. By training Bin Laden and the Mujahideen to fight Russia, equipping them with weapons and providing funding. Even now, women in Iraq have to wear the veil, when they didn't under Saddam. The government is made up of the same party that attacked our embassy in Kuwait. If you want to stake out the moral high ground, please define your morals for the rest of us, because by any conventional measure, they do not conform to what most of us would consider honest or honorable.
guerilla. You lied. You always lie. You always blame America first, you did it here again, knowing that you were lying. I challenge you to prove your dishonest claims. I know you will not though. You know I have corrected you many times on these false allegations, and you always run from them, like a coward. Your interest isn't in the truth, but rather consistently blaming your country and exuding a real hatred for America, by dishonestly giving "our" (I don't even believe you are an American anymore.) country credit for things, while sucking up to saddam and shielding him from what he did. You are a disgrace to America.
This is a great post. You manage to attack my character, without posting a single fact in rebuttal. But that's always been your approach. Armed with a lack of knowledge, all you have left is personal attacks.
That's incorrect. Your posts ARE the rebuttal's. They ARE the dishonesty, the ARE the lies. You have no character, nor integrity. What a disgrace to America, to knowingly lie and blame it first. That's a ron paul supporter for ya
More Ad Hominem personal attacks, still no facts or a sound rebuttal. Ho hum. Maybe you'll become informed enough on a topic to do more than character assassinate, or copy-paste, but based upon your age and post history, I don't think anyone is holding their breath for that.
More lies from guerilla. Just lie, lie, lie! Every post you make is a pathological lie. You just proved it again. Keep trying guerilla. There are not enough dishonest lying ron paul supporters here to cover up your lies. Meanwhile, would you like to blame your (oops, you're not really an America, never mind) country for something else? You stand up for yourself when someone points out your lies, but you won't stand up for your country? Selfish.
Still no facts, just more Ad Hominem attacks. And it's starting to sound like you're losing control. Relax GTech. You've made your case. I am lies, lie, lie, lie, pathological lie, dishonest lying, lies, blame, not really (sic) America, lies, selfish. I think we all get it.
facts? you want facts? how about that first post I made in this thread? you and your RP buds quickly changed the subject away from it to a blame america thread....how about lets get back on subject, which is that the liberal leftists have once again been caught fabricating information to make the bush admin look bad...but that doesn't matter to you, does it?
Yes, facts. George Soros funded the study. Got it. It's a massive conspiracy on behalf of the socialists. I've made my opinions on Soros made before. He's a small time player in MoveOn.org, and not the liberal satan you guys make him out to be. It wasn't about blame America, that's a weak charge to make. So what if the study was incorrect? We're denying the numbers, but certainly not the history of death in the region which we have had a direct or indirect part in. The Bush admin looked bad when they made the WMD charge, and Bush admitted there were no WMDs. They looked bad when Rumsfeld was caught lying about the threat in Iraq. They looked bad when the NIE came out, which debunked the Iran rhetoric. They looked bad when they outed Valerie Plame-Wilson. The Bush admin doesn't need anyones help to look bad. They are quite capable of doing that all on their own. Short of a complete fascist shift in government that allows a re-writing of the history books, Bush is going to go down as one of the worst Presidents of all time. That's not our fault. But it is reality.
Excerpts from an article on the new study of civilian deaths in Iraq. My take on this is entirely different from d16's description which includes the following highly partisan comments..... Just to get the information straight. 1. Nobody fabricated information as d16 commented. The first report was a study done using the same methodology as the second study. It was done with a smaller group of researchers and under more severe conditions. It extracted information from a far smaller sample. The methodologies were entirely consistent.....as the leader of the first study referenced above...while praising the second study. 2. In the original link provided by d16, the publisher of the first study admitted his mistake in not referencing Soros. It wasn't Soros' responsibility but that of the head of the study to reference any unusual financing of the study. It was well within Soros' right to have a study done to ascertain civilian deaths in Iraq. It was appropriate in light of consistently biased reports by the Bush administration on all aspects of the war effort. In referencing the first report...the 600,000 estimate was as much as 10 times higher than administration reports. This 2nd report still shows higher deaths than administration reports. Both studies used accepted scientific methods to estimate civilian death totals, which they admit are extremely difficult to measure. The second report also comes with a very significant level of possible variance...suggesting the real numbers could fall between 100,000 and 200,000. That is an enormous level of variance for a statistical report...further demonstrating how difficult it is to ascertain numbers of deaths. In light of that fact it is extraordinary that these reports became political fodder in either case. The level of accuracy is remarkably weak. In that the author of the first report accepted responsibility for not acknowledging that Soros paid for 1/2 of the cost of the study...... it follows that describing the funding as a conspiracy by the "anti-war fringe left" and that "liberal leftists have been caught fabricating information" are the comments of a partisan issue inflaming individual who has twisted the results of a scientific study into an attack on the party we all know he doesn't like. From a perspective on the impacts of this war.....Americans often focus on the approximately 4,000 American soldiers who have died in Iraq. Approximately 150,000 deaths of civilians puts an amazingly different light on the circumstances. Had Saddam not been attacked, I assume some significant number of Iraqi's would have been killed over the last few years. I doubt it would have been 150,000....and in any case none of the blood would have been directly attributable to Americans.
I cut out the other dishonesty, as I've already corrected you on it. This one though, this sure doesn't sound "republican" to me. Standing up for the man that funds moveon.org. Yep, that's sure the "republican party" right there
Whatever floats your goat buddy. He's not even the biggest donor. I think you need to read up on the history of MoveOn before you claim to know something about it. Oh btw, Republicans stand for intellectual honesty. That immediately disqualifies you. I'm getting lectured by a Clinton voter on what is Republican, someone who admits going through his adult life without knowing what the right/left paradigm is about, and now endorses a candidate who is an economic and social liberal.
Dishonesty doesn't float my boat. And you believe that matters? Which is why the poll, regarding who you would vote for, when RP doesn't get the republican nomination, shows virtually all, but one ron paul supporter (the one's that had the huevos to actually vote) selected a democrat candidate. Thank you for proving my point. What's even worse is, I'm entertaining a notorious liberal who has spent the vast majority of his time on this forum, blaming America first, defending liberals like George Soros and attacking republicans in virtually every post since arriving here, pretend that he's a republican. You can't imagine how much laughter that brings! And no, I do not support Ron Paul. I support a real conservative, who doesn't bash Reagan when politically convenient, and then try to portray himself as such other times. I might also point out that President Reagan's former campaign manager is now on our campaign, as is Jim Pinkerton, who worked under Rollins during the Reagan administration. Try harder. Read more books, learn more history, and all that stuff.
It wasn't the US who gave him the weapons but it was the US that allowed him to keep him. All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin. Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was French. About 100 tons of mustard gas also came from Brazil. The United Kingdom paid for a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, 16% of the international sales. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gasses to Iraq. The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gasses to Iraq. Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gasses. Luxemburg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors. Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales. China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Program_development_1960s_-_1980s
Yeah, your candidate is a real libertarian. He's the antithesis of what Reagan ran on. What Reagan said, and what Reagan did are two different things. Big deal. Bruce Fein, Barry Goldwater Jr. and Drew Ivers are part of the Paul campaign. Yeah, gotta get more edjimicated than you. Keep pissing the country away by supporting another neo-conservative tax and spend liberal GTech. Your grandchildren will thank you when they are working in Chinese sweatshops.
Could Bush have implemented the Iraq War if Congress hadn't back him by voting for it? Even then it was known that Saddam had nothing to with 9-11, but Bush managed to conflate Saddam with Bin Laden in the minds of Americans so that any member of Congress who was opposed to the war was just about considered a traitor if he/she had voted against it. As a result, thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians have lost their lives, and for what? Yet there were a few brave members of both houses (see http://usliberals.about.com/b/2005/...f-congress-who-voted-against-the-iraq-war.htm and http://www.democrats.com/node/6890 who dared to buck the concensus. Notably absent from that list is Sen. Hillary Clinton who has yet to apologize for her vote for the war. For this reason, I'm having difficulty fully supporting her presidential candidacy. But if push comes to shove, I will cast my ballot for her over the Republican religious zealots.