Wake Up America (Merged) - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-15-2003, 03:30 PM   #16
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:34 PM
Sting:
I would do it if there were any Soviet Union, China or French guys here who would talk like you

The main reason why i'm talking about US/French/German exports is that i have much higher expectations to our free peaceloving and democratic countries.

the US sold more than 1% of the dangerous weapons. You can't count it in percent at all if it comes to the knowhow of chemical and biological weapons. You can destroy Factories and Tanks, but Knowhow stays there forever.

With how many percent do you want to count the satelite photos which were provided to Saddam so that he could use his Chemical weapons more efficent against Iran?
Information is a verry valuable good in times of war.

So .. wake up America! Fight the causes not the effects.

Klaus
__________________

__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-15-2003, 04:47 PM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:34 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by filledeperle



As for Iraq, we did support Saddam up until the early 1990s, but I don't think we helped install the Baath party. If we did, well, we were dealing with certain issues at the time that are far different from what's going on now.
The US, CIA did support Baath coup to topple pro Soviet/Communist Iraqi leadership.
Along with Afrikaner oppressors in South Africa. ANC / Mandella accepted Communist concepts/support because the West supported the oppressors.
Typical of simplistic "with us or against us" mentality.

Quote:
Also, the West didn't come up with holy wars just for the hell of it, or because they were looking to justisfy military actions. Holy wars come from anyone with irrational and extreme views about one's religion being superior to others, and anyone can start those.
Most Arabs / Moslems would agree this describes GW actions to a tee.

Quote:
There's no use in carrying around regrets for something that happened fifty years before. It's not going to solve any problems.
So the improper actions of the Nazis should be forgotten?
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-15-2003, 11:25 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Klaus,

The USA gave Biological cultures that had "Duel Uses". In another thread, another person in the anti-war crowd is argueing about how such "duel use" items were not allowed to go to Iraq during sanctions. Sort of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The USA gave biological cultures for medical use. But it was Iraq that took these cultures which they got from other places as well, and then started the difficult process of weaponizing them. The thing is, Iraq never used Biological weapons. One reason that the cultures were probably sent to Iraq was because at the time those in the commerce department probably did not think Iraq had the capability to weaponize the cultures.

Iraq used chemical weapons, but the USA did not supply chemicals to Iraq, it supplied Biological cultures. Biological weapons themselves have very little effect on the battlefield because if used properly, the effects do not happen until days later. Biological weapons are far more effective against defenseless civilian populations. Chemical weapons are also more effective against civilian populations as well. Iraq won their war with Iran because of Soviet Tanks and other Soviet weapons. Their use of chemical weapons, while deadly, was not the deciding factor on the battlefield. The conventional weapons they recieved from the Soviet Union were. Iraq's most successful use of chemical weapons was against their own civilian population. Iraq never did use biological weapons.

So again, the USA may share a good percentage of the blame for supplying biological cultures for medical use to Iraq. But there are all kinds of "duel use technologies" that are going all over the world as we speak today because there are no sanctions. Realize that much of this technology has important medical benefits which is why protestors get so angry when sanctions are used. Iraq did weaponize the biological cultures they recieved from the USA and elsewhere, but they never used them.

Its far more relevant to look at what Saddam did use and what kept him in power and allowed him to attack and invade four different countries. I have seen you on to many occasions simply say the "USA supplied Iraq with its weapons" or the "USA created Saddam". These assertions are completely false and mis-leading.

America is indeed awake unlike are allies France and Germany. The USA has removed Saddam from Iraq, the French and Germans had nothing to do with that and in fact tried to prevent it from happening.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-16-2003, 01:28 AM   #19
Registered User
 
filledeperle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 203
Local Time: 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep:

So the improper actions of the Nazis should be forgotten?

Deep:

I was not talking about the horrible acts of the Nazis. I was talking about not letting the guilt of America's wrongdoings interfere with any future relations between the US and the Mid-East. The Nazis had nothing to do with what I was saying.

And I also was not talking about forgetting past events as though they never happened.

Perle
__________________
filledeperle is offline  
Old 04-16-2003, 04:54 PM   #20
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:34 PM
STING2:
I have a problem to believe that they didn't see the risk of exporting that technoligy, giving access to satelite photos to use chemical weapons more efficiently, "accidentially" giving Saddams regime the feeling that the US wouldn't react at the invasion of Kuwait and then calling even pencils "duel use"

Somehow i have the feeling that they wanted to use this bastard but he was too smart and as long as there was danger from Russia he could do what he wanted to do.. now there was time for revenge.

The US regime cheated ways to often that i could believe that they are doing it for humanitarian reasons (do you remember this rediculous lie of babies taken out of incubators and thrown to earth?) remember the faked proofs at the UN security council? You really think that someone who is honestly interested in democracy and someone who cares about the humans down there would act like that?

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-16-2003, 10:13 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Klaus,

The satelite photos were used to help the Iraqi military prevent better prevent the Iranian military from overrunning Iraq despite all the help they were getting from the Soviets.

The USA said it had "no opinion" on the oil dispute between Iraq and Kuwait. It is a fantasy to believe that meant giving a green light to Iraq to invade and rape Kuwait.

Thousands of Kuwaities were killed, and much of the medical equipment brought out in the stories that were brought into question were taken out and brought back to Iraq. US soldiers last week are finding looted material from Iraq's 7 month occupation of Kuwait in Saddam's palaces. I'm surprised you would attempt to make light of the tragedy that thousands of Kuwaities(many of whom are still missing) experienced.

Klaus, I want to remind that the USA is a democracy and we are argueably more interested in democracy than any country on the planet. Lets not forgot who solved the problems of Bosnia and Kosovo, it was the USA. The fact today is that the USA has overthrown Saddam, one of the worst violators of human rights in history. Anyone who is interested in human rights should be rejoicing over this fact.

If the USA had gone along with the French/German proposal of months more of so called "tough inspections", Saddam would still be in power, thousands of more Iraqi's would be dead from being tortured or denied humanitarian assistance by Saddam. Its obvious that the Bush administration was right and the French and Germans were wrong. The more time that passes, the more that will sink in for them. The French and Germans are great at a lot of things, but right now, foreign policy is not one of them.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-16-2003, 10:43 PM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:34 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus


Somehow i have the feeling that they wanted to use this bastard but he was too smart and as long as there was danger from Russia he could do what he wanted to do.. now there was time for revenge.



Klaus
This is pretty mch correct.

Bush 1 and US had a wait and see posture for awhile after Kuwait takeover. It was the concern that Saddam might take Saudi Arabia next that forced the Calition to attack.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-16-2003, 11:21 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:34 PM
On the day the invasion of Kuwait happened, Colin Powel was already talking about the possiblity of deploying enough combat force to invade and retake Kuwait.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 08:18 AM   #24
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:34 PM
Saddam asked before the invasion of Kuwait the american diplomat what US would do if Iraq would invade kuwait.
He said something like US has no defense-contract with Kuwait and "America would look in the other direction"

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 10:49 AM   #25
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,760
Local Time: 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
Saddam asked before the invasion of Kuwait the american diplomat what US would do if Iraq would invade kuwait.
He said something like US has no defense-contract with Kuwait and "America would look in the other direction"

Klaus
klaus I've heard this before..but I've never been able to find anything to support it..do you have an article or something?
__________________
V Nura is offline  
Old 04-17-2003, 05:28 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:34 AM
Klaus, that is an extremely misleading to say that the Ambassador, who happened to be a "SHE" and not a he said that! It is not even close. Here is the official trasncript of the conversation it was declassified years ago:

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html

And here is Ambassador April Glaspie's part in that conversations. Anything I have read indicates that she misread his response to her comments. HE NEVER said he was invading Kuwait. CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack, however, picked up in Saddam's response that he was indeed willing to take a military action in the situation. Something that the Ambassador missed.

HUSSEIN: We do not want too high prices for oil. And I remind you that in 1974 I gave Tariq Aziz the idea for an article he wrote which criticized the policy of keeping oil prices high. It was the first Arab article which expressed this view.

TARIQ AZIZ: Our policy in OPEC opposes sudden jumps in oil prices.

HUSSEIN: Twenty-five dollars a barrel is not a high price.

GLASPIE: We have many Americans who would like to see the price go above $25 because they come from oil-producing states.

HUSSEIN: The price at one stage had dropped to $12 a barrel and a reduction in the modest Iraqi budget of $6 billion to $7 billion is a disaster.

GLASPIE: I think I understand this. I have lived here for years. I admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.

I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during the late 60's. The instruction we had during this period was that we should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using any suitable methods via Klibi or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these issues are solved quickly. With regard to all of this, can I ask you to see how the issue appears to us?

My assessment after 25 years' service in this area is that your objective must have strong backing from your Arab brothers. I now speak of oil But you, Mr. President, have fought through a horrific and painful war. Frankly, we can see only that you have deployed massive troops in the south. Normally that would not be any of our business. But when this happens in the context of what you said on your national day, then when we read the details in the two letters of the Foreign Minister, then when we see the Iraqi point of view that the measures taken by the U.A.E. and Kuwait is, in the final analysis, parallel to military aggression against Iraq, then it would be reasonable for me to be concerned. And for this reason, I received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship -- not in the spirit of confrontation -- regarding your intentions.

I simply describe the position of my Government. And I do not mean that the situation is a simple situation. But our concern is a simple one.


HUSSEIN: We do not ask people not to be concerned when peace is at issue. This is a noble human feeling which we all feel. It is natural for you as a superpower to be concerned. But what we ask is not to express your concern in a way that would make an aggressor believe that he is getting support for his aggression.

We want to find a just solution which will give us our rights but not deprive others of their rights. But at the same time, we want the others to know that our patience is running out regarding their action, which is harming even the milk our children drink, and the pensions of the widow who lost her husband during the war, and the pensions of the orphans who lost their parents.

As a country, we have the right to prosper. We lost so many opportunities, and the others should value the Iraqi role in their protection. Even this Iraqi [the President points to their interpreter] feels bitter like all other Iraqis. We are not aggressors but we do not accept aggression either. We sent them envoys and handwritten letters. We tried everything. We asked the Servant of the Two Shrines -- King Fahd -- to hold a four-member summit, but he suggested a meeting between the Oil Ministers. We agreed. And as you know, the meeting took place in Jidda. They reached an agreement which did not express what we wanted, but we agreed.

Only two days after the meeting, the Kuwaiti Oil Minister made a statement that contradicted the agreement. We also discussed the issue during the Baghdad summit. I told the Arab Kings and Presidents that some brothers are fighting an economic war against us. And that not all wars use weapons and we regard this kind of war as a military action against us. Because if the capability of our army is lowered then, if Iran renewed the war, it could achieve goals which it could not achieve before. And if we lowered the standard of our defenses, then this could encourage Israel to attack us. I said that before the Arab Kings and Presidents. Only I did not mention Kuwait and U.A.E. by name, because they were my guests.

Before this, I had sent them envoys reminding them that our war had included their defense. Therefore the aid they gave us should not be regarded as a debt. We did not more than the United States would have done against someone who attacked its interests.

I talked about the same thing with a number of other Arab states. I explained the situation t brother King Fahd a few times, by sending envoys and on the telephone. I talked with brother King Hussein and with Sheik Zaid after the conclusion of the summit. I walked with the Sheik to the plane when he was leaving Mosul. He told me, "Just wait until I get home." But after he had reached his destination, the statements that came from there were very bad -- not from him, but from his Minister of Oil.

And after the Jidda agreement, we received some intelligence that they were talking of sticking to the agreement for two months only. Then they would change their policy. Now tell us, if the American President found himself in this situation, what would he do? I said it was very difficult for me to talk about these issues in public. But we must tell the Iraqi people who face economic difficulties who was responsible for that.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com