As America awoke yesterday to the grim New Year milestone of 3,000 military deaths in Iraq since 2003, a Pentagon study shows the majority of those killed were young, white and from rural backgrounds.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/01/young_white_cou.php

Hmm. This isn't what the media has been telling us. Why?

White country boys have always predominated in the U.S. military.

The policymakers sure aren't gonna send their kids to die in wars based on lies. Same deal with Vietnam. The rich make war and the working class fight it for them while their own kids go to Yale. With a draft the pain can be spread to the parasitic layer that ignites military adventurism based on profit and lies.

Genji, do you realize that the US military is an all-volunteer force? Do you know what "volunteer" means?

No one, rich or poor, forced any of our men to fight in the war. They all volunteered, to a man and woman, to fight in the US military. And I'm damned proud of every single one of them.

Baron Max

Genji, do you realize that the US military is an all-volunteer force? Do you know what "volunteer" means?

No one, rich or poor, forced any of our men to fight in the war. They all volunteered, to a man and woman, to fight in the US military. And I'm damned proud of every single one of them.

Baron Max

john kerry too?

john kerry too?

I was proud of him ....before he started using his war service to denigrate the very nation and the men who fought in the war.

I know the concept is difficult for you, Spurious, but people change. They can be good and honorable, then change and become mean and nasty. Think about it some, okay?

Baron Max

I was proud of him ....before he started using his war service to denigrate the very nation and the men who fought in the war.

I know the concept is difficult for you, Spurious, but people change. They can be good and honorable, then change and become mean and nasty. Think about it some, okay?

Baron Max

Yes, I am sure G W Bush was a good baby and maybe a good toddler. But soon after that he went the wrong way. You are absolutely right.

Kerry's war record, wow, I wonder why he never sued the Swift Boat guys? Apparently, because he didn't have a case against them.

Yes, I am sure G W Bush was a good baby and maybe a good toddler. But soon after that he went the wrong way. You are absolutely right.

Apparently the congress, both Republicans and Democrats, didn't feel the same way when they gave him overwhelming right to invade Iraq.

Also it seems that the general public didn't think so either when they re-elected him to a second term as President. And I'd like to point out that there are still many Americans who don't feel that way about him. Unless I'm mistaken, the recent vote was very, very damned close ...wasn't it?? And yet people and the media are claiming that it proves that the American people are all against the Republicans and President Bush.

Baron Max

Apparently the congress, both Republicans and Democrats, didn't feel the same way when they gave him overwhelming right to invade Iraq.

Unfortunately most the rest of the world thinks he is a ****. I'm really not going to base my judgement on who is a good person on the views of a few American politicians. And I am surprised YOU suddenly look up to them for moral guidance. I thought better of you.

Unfortunately most the rest of the world thinks he is a ****.

So ...the United States of America should do what other people of the world think we should do? Should we ask permission, too?

I'm really not going to base my judgement on who is a good person on the views of a few American politicians.

Why stop now? You've been doing that very thing since I arrived at this site. Why the sudden change?

And I am surprised YOU suddenly look up to them for moral guidance. I thought better of you.

Where did I say or imply that? I didn't, Spurious, and you know it. What I did say is that the American voters selected their leaders according to elections ....and it's not saying what most of media and you are saying.

Baron Max

So ...the United States of America should do what other people of the world think we should do? Should we ask permission, too?

Definitely. And you didn't get permission to invade Iraq and still you did. And now you complain about it. Should I feel sorry about that?



Why stop now? You've been doing that very thing since I arrived at this site. Why the sudden change?
really? I based my opinions on the views of a few american politicians? I don't even know any? How do you suggest I do this? telepathy?



Where did I say or imply that? I didn't, Spurious, and you know it. What I did say is that the American voters selected their leaders according to elections ....and it's not saying what most of media and you are saying.

Am I saying something on American elections?

spuriousmonkey, most of the time it is very difficult to know what you are saying because you ignore the FACTS, you ignore the election, you ignore the Authorization of Military Force, you ignore the Cease Fire, and failure of Saddam to follow the Treaty that he signed to stop the U.N. Forces from dismantling his government, The facts are that they have found WMD, the fact is that there is enough proof available to believe that the Russian help Saddam to move his WMD to Syria, you ignore the Fact that the Iraqi's are the main target of the Terrorist, you ignore the fact that as the Common Iraqi is lining up to support his government by volunteering to join the Police Forces, Military, running for Government Office, and Voting in there elections, even though the act get them killed daily by the terrorist, would you have the intestinal fortitude to line back up to be a police cadet?, after a bomb had just turned the registration line into hamburger, or the bus taking people to training is hijacked, and all the trainees are beheaded? Yes it is hard to know what you are saying with all the information you ignore in your pontification.

spuriousmonkey, most of the time it is very difficult to know what you are saying because you ignore the FACTS, you ignore the election, you ignore the Authorization of Military Force, you ignore the Cease Fire, and failure of Saddam to follow the Treaty that he signed to stop the U.N. Forces from dismantling his government, The facts are that they have found WMD, the fact is that there is enough proof available to believe that the Russian help Saddam to move his WMD to Syria, you ignore the Fact that the Iraqi's are the main target of the Terrorist, you ignore the fact that as the Common Iraqi is lining up to support his government by volunteering to join the Police Forces, Military, running for Government Office, and Voting in there elections, even though the act get them killed daily by the terrorist, would you have the intestinal fortitude to line back up to be a police cadet?, after a bomb had just turned the registration line into hamburger, or the bus taking people to training is hijacked, and all the trainees are beheaded? Yes it is hard to know what you are saying with all the information you ignore in your pontification.


It's not difficult to say you are lying.

? Spurious, where's the lying in the above?

GeoffP, spuriousmonkey just showed his intelligence level, I challenge him to provide the proof of my being a liar with facts not his most humble opinion, I do really begin to doubt that he has any cognitive ability at all.

Where didn't he lie?

Iraqis are not targeted by terrorists. There is a civil war.

No WMDs were found.


And 'is enough proof available to believe that the Russian help Saddam to move his WMD to Syria'

What did they expect, black and city livin'?

Russian help Saddam to move his WMD to Syria
Where the fuck did you concoct this bullshit from?

Where didn't he lie?

Iraqis are not targeted by terrorists. There is a civil war.

No WMDs were found.


And 'is enough proof available to believe that the Russian help Saddam to move his WMD to Syria'

Well, I don't know about the Syrian WMD argument. But the terrorist/civil war thing is kind of similar.

Here are stories from recognized News Agencies, that have a lot of information on the what happened to the WMD's, again I can provide supporting documentation, and what does spurious offer his opinion?

FrontPage magazine.com :: Iraqi WMD Mystery Solved by Jamie Glazov
On the tapes, you hear Saddam discussing the assistance of Russia and Brazil ... media that Russian Spetsnaz units moved Iraqi WMD into Syria and Lebanon . ...
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21489


Ex-Official: Russia Moved Saddam's WMD
"They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, ... The evacuation of Saddam's WMD to Syria and Lebanon "was an entirely ...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/2/18/233023.shtml?s=lh

Russia Moved Iraqi WMD
"I am absolutely sure that Russian Spetsnatz units moved WMD out of Iraq ... According to Shaw, Russian units hid Saddam's arsenal inside Syria and in ...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/2/230625.shtml

Russia Moved Some Iraq WMD To Syria & Lebanon » Netscape.com
(www.intelligencesummit.org) ,"WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went to Syria and Lebanon... They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz ...
http://news.netscape.com/story/2006/10/16/russia-moved-some-iraq-wmd-to-syria-and-lebanon

Amazon.com: Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied ...
General Sada shows us how Syria went from being an enemy of Iraq to a an ... and Russian intelligence and others could have been wrong regarding the WMD and ...
http://www.amazon.com/Saddams-Secrets-General-Survived-Hussein/dp/1591454042

Jack Kelly: A Syrian sidestep?
"Saddam realized this time the Americans are coming," Mr. Sada told The New ... said Russian Spetsnaz units moved WMD to Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. ...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06036/649858.stm

- toledoblade.com -
Article published Saturday, February 4, 2006 Saddam's WMD ... said Russian Spetsnaz units moved WMD to Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. ...
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060204/COLUMNIST14/602040352/-1/COLUMNIST

WorldNetDaily: Surprise, surprise! Saddam had WMDs after all
That Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units evidently helped Saddam's military in secreting away – mostly into Syria – WMD that had first been purchased ...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49221

Interesting.

It seems speculation is enough to make something a fact. Just like the pre-war hype. I noticed there was no actual visible evidence, just "oh it might have been WMD" so they assert it was WMD. It doesn't sound any different to most of the "evidence" we were told before the war, plenty of speculation with all the caveats removed.

Syria and Saddam may have shared common interest but they distrusted each other deeply.

So you automatically dismiss all this information out of hand? Interesting, why don't you dismiss all the information that says there were no WMD in Iraq, there are enough report like those I posted to raise doubt as to the non-existence of WMD's, We know that Saddam still had WMD's after the First Gulf War, why? because he used them, on the Kurds, the Marsh Arabs, and in a lot of small operations to punish any one who his paranoia he thought might be a threat. Please refute the first article, I don't think you can, provide site information to prove you opinion.

were saddams WMD any more dangerous than yours? is the average iraqi better off now that you have taken away the (somewhat insane, bit still stable) government and left them in a civil war? did anyone except wealthy americans benefit from this war?

why don't you dismiss all the information that says there were no WMD in Iraq
Becasue you bombed a country and invaded it on the basis that you knew that there were WMD, that you knew where it was, that it was incontravertable. Any articles saying there were no WMD may have been wrong too, but you went to war on a "certainty".

We know that Saddam still had WMD's after the First Gulf War, why? because he used them, on the Kurds
How did Saddam use WMD on the Kurds after the First Gulf War? With a no-fly zone? Which particular events are you referring to?

Please refute the first article, I don't think you can, provide site information to prove you opinion.
Refute what? An opinion? There was no evidence in that article. Just speculation.

How does 'Iraq victims' become limited to the 3000 US soldiers who've died there when hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed? I don't think most of them are 'white'...

i'm calling bush an asshole,
since he can do way better things than
dealing with terrorism in absolute.
fuck that noise.
like actually saving the world.

ah im being a hippy,
someone could easily tear me apart in politics.
i'll go, i'm just giddy right now. :p

Q: Why was the US certain Saddam had WMDs?

A: Because they gave them to him.:rolleyes:

samcdkey, sorry to burst you bubble, but most of the WMD's Saddam had came from Russia, or the old Soviet Union, Saddam was armed by the Soviet Union in his war with Iran, all of his equipment was Soviet Arsenal, and do you think we would give him weapons that would end up in Soviet Intelligence Laboratories? If you can post site proof of your allegations please do, this is one big myth that we supplied Saddam with chemical weapons.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm

Key

A = nuclear weapon program
B = biological weapon program
C = chemical weapon program
R = rocket program
K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, and building of military plants



USA

1. Honeywell (R, K)

2. Spectra Physics (K)

3. Semetex (R)

4. TI Coating (A, K)

5. Unisys (A, K)

6. Sperry Corp. (R, K)

7. Tektronix (R, A)

8. Rockwell (K)

9. Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)

10. Finnigan-MAT-US (A)

11. Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K)

12. Dupont (A)

13. Eastman Kodak (R)

14. American Type Culture Collection (B)

15. Alcolac International (C)

16. Consarc (A)

17. Carl Zeiss - U.S (K)

18. Cerberus (LTD) (A)

19. Electronic Associates (R)

20. International Computer Systems (A, R, K)

21. Bechtel (K)

22. EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R)

23. Canberra Industries Inc. (A)

24. Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

"In addition to these 24 companies home-based in the USA are 50 subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business with Iraq from within the US. Also designated as suppliers for Iraq's arms programs (A, B, C & R) are the US Ministries of Defense, Energy, Trade and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories."

Why wasn't Saddam convicted of using or even possessing WMD's? I guess they didn't have a case.

Why wasn't Saddam convicted of using or even possessing WMD's?
Because when they ask him in court where he got those WMD from.....

Why wasn't Saddam convicted of using or even possessing WMD's? I guess they didn't have a case.

In legal circles, and known to most anyone with a clue, the courts will often go for the sure, the certain conviction instead of the more dicey one that they might not win. Besides, Spider, wasn't death by hanging good enough for you???

Baron Max

Interesting, Sam as when I look up the weapons systems that were in Saddams Army and Air Force, the systems were mostly Soviet, Chinese, and French, so where were the American systems, and you quote a blog, quoting a left wing source, (The leftist German daily newspaper Die Tageszeitung ), with a unnamed source? As a unnamed source I can present any facts I want and would be able to find a liberal Paper to publish the most blatant bull shit I could think of. yes it is true that many of these companies did business with Saddam, but can you prove that they were providing chemical weapons, I can provide information that Saddam weapons systems were Soviet, Chinese, and French, and from what I have done already you know that I can do it, Most chemicals need delivery system tailored to the chemicals that are delivered, to use them effectively, Saddam used soviet delivery system, so for the best results he would need to use Soviet Chemicals.

ps: Left wing in Germany usually mean Communist.

No, Baron it was not. We invaded for WMD's, the least that we could expect is a court case where all the information on that subject was finally made clear. In fact, this trial could have happened. Now we might never know what really happened. I can only conclude that this was a deliberate political move.

Saddam's execution meant there would be no accounting for his other crimes: the destruction of the marshes and the Marsh Arabs in the 1990s, the murder of tens of thousands of Shiites in the aftermath of the 1991 uprising, the killing of 8,000 members of the Barzani clan in 1983, the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and the murder of tens of thousands in various purges over his decades in power.

Obviously, it was never practical to try Saddam Hussein for every crime he committed. But the rush to execution actually interrupted Saddam's ongoing trial on genocide charges (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=78223) in connection with the 1987-1988 Anfal campaign against Iraq's Kurdish minority. That trial was scheduled to resume January 8 and would have concluded in a matter of months.

Interesting, Sam as when I look up the weapons systems that were in Saddams Army and Air Force, the systems were mostly Soviet, Chinese, and French, so where were the American systems, and you quote a blog, quoting a left wing source, (The leftist German daily newspaper Die Tageszeitung ), with a unnamed source? As a unnamed source I can present any facts I want and would be able to find a liberal Paper to publish the most blatant bull shit I could think of. yes it is true that many of these companies did business with Saddam, but can you prove that they were providing chemical weapons, I can provide information that Saddam weapons systems were Soviet, Chinese, and French, and from what I have done already you know that I can do it, Most chemicals need delivery system tailored to the chemicals that are delivered, to use them effectively, Saddam used soviet delivery system, so for the best results he would need to use Soviet Chemicals.

ps: Left wing in Germany usually mean Communist.

Have you heard of punctuation? paragraphs?

Blah blah blah.

Report: U.S. supplied the kinds of germs Iraq later used for biological weapons
WASHINGTON (AP) — Iraq's bioweapons program that President Bush wants to eradicate got its start with help from Uncle Sam two decades ago, according to government records getting new scrutiny in light of the discussion of war against Iraq.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm


http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/03/27/1195471.php
During the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq received the lion's share of American support because at the time Iran was regarded as the greater threat to U.S. interests. According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were:

* Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.

* Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.

* Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart.

* Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.

* Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.

* Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.


Also on the list: Escherichia coli (E. coli), genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA, and dozens of other pathogenic biological agents. "These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction," the Senate report stated. "It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the United Nations inspectors found and removed from the Iraqi biological warfare program."

The report noted further that U.S. exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical-warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare production facilities, and chemical-warhead filling equipment.

The exports continued to at least November 28, 1989, despite evidence that Iraq was engaging in chemical and biological warfare against Iranians and Kurds since as early as 1984.

The American company that provided the most biological materials to Iraq in the 1980s was American Type Culture Collection of Maryland and Virginia, which made seventy shipments of the anthrax-causing germ and other pathogenic agents, according to a 1996 Newsday story.

Other American companies also provided Iraq with the chemical or biological compounds, or the facilities and equipment used to create the compounds for chemical and biological warfare. Among these suppliers were the following:

* Alcolac International, a Baltimore chemical manufacturer already linked to the illegal shipment of chemicals to Iran, shipped large quantities of thiodiglycol (used to make mustard gas) as well as other chemical and biological ingredients, according to a 1989 story in The New York Times.

* Nu Kraft Mercantile Corp. of Brooklyn (affiliated with the United Steel and Strip Corporation) also supplied Iraq with huge amounts of thiodiglycol, the Times reported.

* Celery Corp., Charlotte, NC

* Matrix-Churchill Corp., Cleveland, OH (regarded as a front for the Iraqi government, according to Representative Henry Gonzalez, Democrat of Texas, who quoted U.S. intelligence documents to this effect in a 1992 speech on the House floor).


The following companies were also named as chemical and biological materials suppliers in the 1992 Senate hearings on "United States export policy toward Iraq prior to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait":

* Mouse Master, Lilburn, GA

* Sullaire Corp., Charlotte, NC

* Pure Aire, Charlotte, NC

* Posi Seal, Inc., N. Stonington, CT

* Union Carbide, Danbury, CT

* Evapco, Taneytown, MD

* Gorman-Rupp, Mansfield, OH


Additionally, several other companies were sued in connection with their activities providing Iraq with chemical or biological supplies: subsidiaries or branches of Fisher Controls International, Inc., St. Louis; Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., Princeton, NJ; Bechtel Group, Inc., San Francisco; and Lummus Crest, Inc., Bloomfield, NJ, which built one chemical plant in Iraq and, before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, was building an ethylene facility. Ethylene is a necessary ingredient for thiodiglycol

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php


And lastly

UN Security Council members complained on Monday that the US and Britain have refused to give UN weapons inspectors the results of their search for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

UN inspectors withdrew from Iraq in March, just before the US-led invasion, which overthrew Saddam Hussein's government. After the war, the US deployed its own experts and refused to allow the UN inspectors to return.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/1210wmd.htm
I wonder why?
:rolleyes:

spidergoat, I would think from all your post that it was Saddams right a the supreme leader in Iraq, that it was his right to kill all of these people, and from what I read the U.S. was actually trying to have the execution delayed so that the Information would come out in the trial, interesting thought, isn't it, it was the Iraqi's who demanded that their Court Sentence be carried out, and that the Sentence was affirmed by their Supreme Court as legal, and they set the execution date? Interesting, very interesting.

It was the Iraqis right to know the whole truth about that period.

Very very interesting indeed:rolleyes:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/06/saddam-verdict-four-days-early/
http://mediamatters.org/items/200611060010

Yesterday, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal announced that Saddam Hussein had been found guilty and would be sentenced to death. But it didn’t release the official verdict. NBC News has the story:

The full verdict, a document of several hundred pages, explaining how and why today’s judgment was reached was not released. U.S. officials said it should be ready by Thursday. So why issue the verdict today? U.S. court advisors told reporters today it was delayed mainly for technical reasons.

The court was created by the administration-controlled Coalition Provisional Authority and the administration still exercises considerable control over the court. The New York Times reports, “American influence…has been undeniably pervasive, with about 90 percent of the $145 million in annual costs for the court and associated investigations paid for by the United States Justice Department, and lawyers sent by Washington acting as advisers.”

It still comes down to the delivery systems, they are tailored to the Chemicals that they deliver, and Saddams systems were Soviet. As for your list would laundry soap be considered a chemical, and would a company that delivered laundry soap be considered as providing Chemicals to Iraq, and if you don't know there are some nasty poisonous gasses that can be made from cleaning products, would a company that delivered grain to Saddam be considered a supplier of Biological Weapons?, Raisin come as a byproduct of the molding of grains, How much more do I have to point out, to show that there were a lot of chemicals and products sent to Iraq which with a little tweaking, can become chemical or biological weapons, but it still comes down to who supplied his weapons systems, and that was the Communist Block, and later Russia, and Russia was supplying both side in the Iran Iraq war, and the French sold many weapons to Saddam even after the Cease Fire had been signed and there was to be a embargo of weapons sales to Iraq.

wishful thinking.

Stop making excuses and take responsibility.

Why, are you a masochist, do you take responsibility for everything that someone else does? As for me, I'm not.

Why, are you a masochist, do you take responsibility for everything that someone else does?

Jesus...your support for you government evaporate rather quickly! Are you a communist or something`?

wishful thinking. Stop making excuses and take responsibility.

And would that actually change anything, Spurious?

Baron Max

Jesus...your support for you government evaporate rather quickly!

The way our system is set up, Spurious, it's actually our duty to support the government that was duly elected by the people.

Or would you have our government change it's policies with every large, vocal demonstration on the streets? Or worse, would have us change our policies because a few foreign nations didn't like what we do?

Baron Max

Genji, do you realize that the US military is an all-volunteer force? Do you know what "volunteer" means?

No one, rich or poor, forced any of our men to fight in the war. They all volunteered, to a man and woman, to fight in the US military. And I'm damned proud of every single one of them.

Baron MaxWealthy kids go to college or into big business. Working class kids choose the military for job training and other opportunities not available to the non rich.

America is racist.

If you can post site proof of your allegations please do, this is one big myth that we supplied Saddam with chemical weapons. - Buffalo Roam

Here's a timeline for you with references:

Arming Iraq: A Chronology of U.S. Involvement
By: John King, March 2003

What follows is an accurate chronology of United States involvement in the arming of Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war 1980-88. It is a powerful indictment of the president Bush administration attempt to sell war as a component of his war on terrorism. It reveals US ambitions in Iraq to be just another chapter in the attempt to regain a foothold in the Mideast following the fall of the Shah of Iran.

Arming Iraq and the Path to War
A crisis always has a history, and the current crisis with Iraq is no exception. Below are some relevant dates.

September, 1980. Iraq invades Iran. The beginning of the Iraq-Iran war. [8]

February, 1982. Despite objections from congress, President Reagan removes Iraq from its list of known terrorist countries. [1]

December, 1982. Hughes Aircraft ships 60 Defender helicopters to Iraq. [9]

1982-1988. Defense Intelligence Agency provides detailed information for Iraq on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb damage assessments. [4]

November, 1983. A National Security Directive states that the U.S would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran. [1] & [15]

November, 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the US government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. [14]

October, 1983. The Reagan Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act. [16]

November 1983. George Schultz, the Secretary of State, is given intelligence reports showing that Iraqi troops are daily using chemical weapons against the Iranians. [1]

Donald Rumsfeld -Reagan's Envoy- provided Iraq with chemical & biological weapons

December 20, 1983. Donald Rumsfeld , then a civilian and now Defense Secretary, meets with Saddam Hussein to assure him of US friendship and materials support. [1] & [15]

July, 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. [19]

January 14, 1984. State Department memo acknowledges United States shipment of "dual-use" export hardware and technology. Dual use items are civilian items such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances and communications gear as well as industrial technology that can have a military application. [2]

March, 1986. The United States with Great Britain block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the US becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons. [10]

May, 1986. The US Department of Commerce licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. [3]

May, 1986. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq. [7]

March, 1987. President Reagan bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. [17]

Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq. [1]

February, 1988. Saddam Hussein begins the "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds of northern Iraq. The Iraq regime used chemical weapons against the Kurds killing over 100,000 civilians and destroying over 1,200 Kurdish villages. [8]

April, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. [7]

August, 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the US Defense Intelligence Agency is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925. [6] & [13]

August, 1988. Iraq and Iran declare a cease fire. [8]

August, 1988. Five days after the cease fire Saddam Hussein sends his planes and helicopters to northern Iraq to begin massive chemical attacks against the Kurds. [8]

September, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade anthrax and botulinum to Iraq. [7]

September, 1988. Richard Murphy, Assistant Secretary of State: "The US-Iraqi relationship is... important to our long-term political and economic objectives." [15]

December, 1988. Dow chemical sells $1.5 million in pesticides to Iraq despite knowledge that these would be used in chemical weapons. [1]

July 25, 1990. US Ambassador to Baghdad meets with Hussein to assure him that President Bush "wanted better and deeper relations". Many believe this visit was a trap set for Hussein. A month later Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking the US would not respond. [12]

August, 1990 Iraq invades Kuwait. The precursor to the Gulf War. [8]

July, 1991 The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. [11]

August, 1991. Christopher Droguol of Atlanta's branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro is arrested for his role in supplying loans to Iraq for the purchase of military supplies. He is charged with 347 counts of felony. Droguol is found guilty, but US officials plead innocent of any knowledge of his crime. [14]

June, 1992. Ted Kopple of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush Sr., operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980's, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]." [5]

July, 1992. "The Bush administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. technology to be shipped to Iraqi military and to Iraqi defense factories... Throughout the course of the Bush administration, U.S. and foreign firms were granted export licenses to ship U.S. technology directly to Iraqi weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories were producing weapons." Representative Henry Gonzalez, Texas, testimony before the House. [18]

February, 1994. Senator Riegle from Michigan, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, testifies before the senate revealing large US shipments of dual-use biological and chemical agents to Iraq that may have been used against US troops in the Gulf War and probably was the cause of the illness known as Gulf War Syndrome. [7]

August, 2002. "The use of gas [during the Iran-Iraq war] on the battle field by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern... We were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose". Colonel Walter Lang, former senior US Defense Intelligence officer tells the New York Times. [4]

This chronology of the United States' sordid involvement in the arming of Iraq can be summarized in this way: The United States used methods both legal and illegal to help build Saddam's army into the most powerful army in the Mideast outside of Israel. The US supplied chemical and biological agents and technology to Iraq when it knew Iraq was using chemical weapons against the Iranians. The US supplied the materials and technology for these weapons of mass destruction to Iraq at a time when it was know that Saddam was using this technology to kill his Kurdish citizens. The United States supplied intelligence and battle planning information to Iraq when those battle plans included the use of cyanide, mustard gas and nerve agents. The United States blocked UN censure of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The United States did not act alone in this effort. The Soviet Union was the largest weapons supplier, but England, France and Germany were also involved in the shipment of arms and technology.


References:

1. Washingtonpost.com. December 30, 2002
2. Jonathan Broder. Nuclear times, Winter 1990-91
3. Kurt Nimno. AlterNet. September 23, 2002
4. Newyorktimes.com. August 29, 2002
5. ABC Nightline. June9, 1992
6. Counter Punch, October 10, 2002
7. Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
8. Timeline: A walk Through Iraq's History. U.S. Department of State
9. Doing Business: The Arming of Iraq. Daniel Robichear
10. Glen Rangwala. Labor Left Briefing, 16 September, 2002
11. Financial Times of London. July 3, 1991
12. Elson E. Boles. Counter Punch. October 10, 2002
13. Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988. Iranchamber.com
14. Columbia Journalism Review. March/April 1993. Iraqgate
15. Times Online. December 31, 2002. How U.S. Helped Iraq Build Deadly Arsenal
16. Bush's Secret Mission. The New Yorker Magazine. November 2, 1992
17. Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia: Iran-Contra Affair
18. Congressional Record. July 27, 1992. Representative Henry B. Gonzalez
19. Bob Woodward. CIA Aiding Iraq in Gulf War. Washington Post. 15 December, 1986
20. Case Study: The Anfal Campaign.

- N

How about some site links?

Here is some research that is verifiable on the Demographics of the people who enlist in the Services, and not some ones speculation.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

October 27, 2006
Who Are the Recruits? The Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Enlistment, 2003–2005
by Tim Kane, Ph.D.
Center for Data Analysis Report #06-09
A pillar of conventional wisdom about the U.S. military is that the quality of volunteers has been degraded after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Examples of the voices making this claim range from the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and New York Daily News [1] to Michael Moore’s pseudo-documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. Some insist that minorities and the underprivileged are over*represented in the military. Others accuse the U.S. Army of accepting unqualified enlistees in a futile attempt to meet its recruiting goals in the midst of an unpopular war.[2]

The current findings show that the demo*graphic characteristics of volunteers have contin*ued to show signs of higher, not lower, quality. Quality is a difficult concept to apply to soldiers, or to human beings in any context, and it should be understood here in context. Regardless of the standards used to screen applicants, the average quality of the people accepted into any organiza*tion can be assessed only by using measurable cri*teria, which surely fail to account for intangible characteristics. In the military, it is especially questionable to claim that measurable characteris*tics accurately reflect what really matters: cour*age, honor, integrity, loyalty, and leadership.

Indeed, in many criteria, each year shows advancement, not decline, in measurable qualities of new enlistees. For example, it is commonly claimed that the military relies on recruits from poorer neighborhoods because the wealthy will not risk death in war. This claim has been advanced without any rigorous evidence. Our review of Pen*tagon enlistee data shows that the only group that is lowering its participation in the military is the poor. The percentage of recruits from the poorest American neighborhoods (with one-fifth of the U.S. population) declined from 18 percent in 1999 to 14.6 percent in 2003, 14.1 percent in 2004, and 13.7 percent in 2005.

This report updates the previous Heritage Foun*dation report, with data on all U.S. recruits during 2004 and 2005. We introduce the term “wartime recruits” to identify volunteer enlistees in all branches during 2003, 2004, and 2005. Like the previous report,[3] the analysis considers the follow*ing characteristics:

Household income,
Level of education,
Race/ethnicity, and
Regional/rural origin.
In summary, the additional years of recruit data (2004–2005) sup*port the previous finding that U.S. military recruits are more similar than dissimilar to the American youth population. The slight dif*ferences are that wartime U.S. mil*itary enlistees are better educated, wealthier, and more rural on aver*age than their civilian peers.

Recruits have a higher percent*age of high school graduates and representation from Southern and rural areas. No evidence indicates exploitation of racial minorities (either by race or by race-weighted ZIP code areas). Finally, the distri*bution of household income of recruits is noticeably higher than that of the entire youth population.