Iraq Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by Jag Singh, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jan 30, 2007 at 9:12 pm
29, January 2007
A startling new book authored by Barry Lando, a former 60 Minutes producer, sheds new light on the complicity of Western nations arming Saddam Hussein when he was committing atrocities on his own people. The book, “Web of Deceit, The History of Western Complicity in Iraq, From Churchill to Kennedy to George W. Bush", traces the historical record of this shameful period in our history. Lando reveals that in the late 1980s Hussein was launching his genocidal attacks on his own people with chemical and other weapons supplied by US arms merchants with the full knowledge and approval of the Reagan and Bush (senior) administrations. Efforts by the U.S. Congress to condemn Saddam Hussein were blocked by the White House. Senators from the farm states (including Senator Dole) rushed to meet Hussein to assure him that the U.S. was largely unconcerned about the genocidal attacks so long as Iraq continued to import U.S. agricultural products. Attempts by Iran to initiate UN intervention and investigations on the use of chemical weapons by Iraq were consistently blocked by the U.S. and United Kingdom. U.S. and other western arms merchants raked in billions of dollars in weapons sales to both Iran and Iraq during their 8 year war.
The rush to hang Saddam Hussein may well have been prompted by a desire to silence him before the unsavory facts connecting him to western leaders was made public.
Posted by Albert, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2007 at 5:24 pm
We were Saddam's ally when he was using poison gas and deadly chemicals against the Kurds and the Iranians, we didn't have any moral repulsion then. At the very same time he was committing heinous crimes against his own people, Donald Rumsfeld was visiting him in Baghdad, knowing very well what he was doing. As a matter of fact, US corporations were providing him with some of the materials. Since we know now that the WMD excuse was a hoax and that there was never any connection between Saddam and 9/11 and islamic terrorism, most of the invasion supporters now claim that we had to invade because, can you believe this:'he used poison gas on the Kurds and Iranians'.
Posted by Albert, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Feb 3, 2007 at 10:07 am
There had never been a possibility of Iran ruling Iraq until the US made it possible by invading Iraq and help the Shi'ite ascend to power. Now we have a government with close ties to Iran whose power base is Shi'ite religious militias. Just what we needed. Bush turned out to be Iran's best friend and benefactor, making the impossible come true for Iran. The only decision by a head of state that can be compared in its hubris and sheer madness to the decision by the Bush regime to invade Iraq, is probably Hitler's order to invade the USSR in 1942.
Posted by Albert, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2007 at 9:12 am
Saddam was our best friend in the ME viz-a-vis Iran. He kept them in check and provided a counter balance to their ambitions. The Iranians were so concerned about Saddam that they concentrated all their energy on him and not on their historic ambition of becoming a regional power. Since we were so concerned about Iran, we had to remove their greatest enemy and now Iran is free to become more and more influential, has a friendly government in Baghdad and the ME has never been so hostile to us. Now I really see the logic in the invasion...