Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Lets remember: USA gave Saddam green light to invade Kuwait


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#61 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:35 PM

Glaspie said she knew the history of the region.. History said Iraq never recognized the British partitioning Kuwait into a separate country and Iraq made a claim at the UN for it.

Senate Hearing committee said, gee this does not look good Glaspie, it is like you told him it was okay to go ahead..

And after being confronted with the transcript outside by 2 reporters, she yells, BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS GOING TO TAKE THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. We thought he only wanted part of it.

DOH!!!!!!!!!

Never send a white woman to do a MAN's job... Maybe thats why she got transfered to the jungle to arrange things with monkey people now.


http://www.sfbg.com/...war/013091.html
Who lost Kuwait?
When Saddam Hussein was obviously preparing to invade Kuwait, why did the U.S. semd signals that it would not interfere?
By Murray Waas
January 30, 1991

FIVE DAYS before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, President Bush was briefed by William H. Webster, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Webster warned that Saddam Hussein was likely to invade Kuwait, predicting that Iraq would probably seize only the Rumaila oil fields and the islands of Bubiyan and Warba, not the whole country (although, he hedged, that was a possibility).

Despite this strong personal warning from Webster, high-level spokespersons for the Bush administration continued to state publicly that the U.S. would remain neutral in any Iraq-Kuwait conflict.

As the possibility of an invasion became clear to mid-level U.S. intelligence and diplomatic officials, they recommended that the administration send a strong message to Saddam that there would be U.S. retribution for any invasion.

But those warnings were ignored by Secretary of State James Baker and the president.

Since the invasion, highly classified U.S. intelligence assessments have determined that Saddam took U.S. statements of neutrality in the Iraq-Kuwait conflict as a green light for an invasion. One senior Iraqi military official, who has proved to be a valuable source of information for the CIA in the past, has told the agency that Saddam seemed to be sincerely surprised by the bellicose reaction of the Bush administration following the Aug. 2 invasion.

In an interview with this reporter, a senior administration insider bristled at the suggestion made by some intelligence analysts that the Bush administration would have acquiesced to an Iraqi annexation of the oil field and the two islands. "Our position then was what it is now: Such a seizure is a violation of international law and unacceptable to this administration.''

Taking the official at his word, the only possible explanation of the Bush administration's miscalculations in the days before the invasion is sheer incompetence on the part of the president and his men. It is impossible to say for sure whether Iraq would have invaded Kuwait if the administration's rhetoric had been remotely the same before Aug. 2 as it has been since. Now that we are at war, it can be said that the Bush administration's actions in those days almost certainly constitute the worst diplomatic failure by any modern president.

http://www.mideastfa...lostkuwait.html

SADDAM'S UNDERSTANDING that the Bush administration had given him a green light to invade could not have been any more emphatically reinforced than it was one week before the invasion, at his July 25 meeting with Ambassador Glaspie. The Iraqi government gave a transcript of that meeting to ABC News in September. The Bush administration has not disputed the accuracy of the transcript.

Saddam left little doubt during the two-hour meeting that he was considering an invasion of Kuwait. He bluntly told Glaspie that he considered Kuwait to be engaging in acts of war against Iraq by not assisting with Iraq's war debt or agreeing to limit its production of oil. If Iraq attacked, Saddam explained, it would be because Kuwait was already at war with Iraq.

"When planned and deliberate policy forces the price of oil down without good commercial means, then that means another war against Iraq,'' Saddam told Glaspie. "Military war kills people, but economic war kills their humanity by depriving them of their chance to have a good standard of living. As you know, we gave rivers of blood in a war that lasted eight years.... Iraqis have a right to live proudly. We do not accept that anyone could injure Iraqi pride or the Iraqi right to have a high standard of living [citing Kuwait specifically]. We are not aggressors, but we do not accept aggression either.''

Saddam even went so far as to warn Glaspie he would not fear U.S. retaliation, "You can come to Iraq with aircraft and missiles,'' he told her, "but do not push us to the point we cease to care.''



Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was stunned by the vehement response. He had expected a casual reaction from the West to his occupation of Kuwait, based on what U.S. ambassador April Glaspie had told him a week earlier, when she said, "We have no opinions on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

Angry journalists confronted Glaspie, clutching copies of the transcript of her session with Saddam, accusing her of giving him carte blanche to take over Kuwait. At one of these sessions a rattled Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."

Glaspie soon was removed from her post.

The final statistics show the brief war killed more than 100,000 Iraqi soldiers, wounded another 300,000, with 150,000 Iraqi soldiers deserting and 60,000 taken prisoner. The war claimed 148 American lives, another 458 were wounded, and 121 were killed in "non-hostile actions" v victims of "friendly fire." Eleven American women died in combat. The cost of the war to the West has been estimated at between $63 billion and $72 billion US.

Among the detritus of the sandy battlefield was 40 tonnes of radioactive depleted uranium from coalition weaponry. Iraqi forces also left behind seven million land mines in Kuwait, which have killed nearly 2,000 people since the war ended. Iraqi sabotage of Kuwaiti oil wells resulted in six to eight million barrels of oil spilling into the Persian Gulf, causing catastrophic damage to marine life.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...d/gulf_war.html

pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
pie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."



April Glaspie's Invitation to Saddam to Invade Kuwait

April Glaspie was the American ambassador to Iraq at the time

Purported transcript of the pivotal discussion: http://www.whatreall...CLE5/april.html

From http://csmweb2.emcwe.../27/p23s3.htm::
US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie
Carleton Cole

Eight days before his Aug. 2, 1990, invasion of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein met with April Glaspie, then America's ambassador to Iraq. It was the last high-level contact between the two countries before Iraq went to war.

GLASPIE: In March 1991, she told a Senate committee that 'we foolishly did not realize [Saddam] was stupid.'

From a translation of Iraq's transcript of the meeting, released that September, press and pundits concluded that Ms. Glaspie had (in effect) given Saddam a green light to invade.

"We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts," the transcript reports Glaspie saying, "such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary [of State James] Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction ... that Kuwait is not associated with America."

Later when confronted on this issue there was doubt injected with vague denials and partial admittal: "She said she was the victim of "deliberate deception on a major scale," and denounced the Iraqi transcript as "a fabrication" that distorted her position, though it contained "a great deal" that was accurate.

From http://www.chss.mont...r/glaspie.html:
The Iraqi view in a transcript apparently between Hussein and Glaspie and the Iraq something or other Tariq Aziz. As reported in THE NEW YORK TIMES INTERNATIONAL SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1990:
  • 0

#62 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:39 PM

http://www.sfbg.com/...war/013091.html
http://www.mideastfa...lostkuwait.html
http://www.cbc.ca/ne...d/gulf_war.html
http://www.whatreall...CLE5/april.html
http://csmweb2.emcwe.../27/p23s3.htm::
http://www.chss.mont...r/glaspie.html:


WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 -- On July 25,President Saddam Hussein of Iraq summoned the United States Ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie, to his office in the last high-level contact between the two Governments before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2. Here are excerpts from a document described by Iraqi Government officials as a transcript of the meeting, which also included the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Aziz. A copy was provided to The New York Times by ABC News, which translated from the Arabic. The State Department has declined to comment on its accuracy.


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?


------
Now keep in mind that in the larger context of the document this is just a brief exerpt from a wide-ranging conversation in which Glaspie's purpose appears to be to extract from Hussein what his intentions are regarding Kuwait. He is somewhat vague and doesn't answer the question directly except to say that if things don't go well then there could be hostilities.

http://www.geocities...am_glaspie.html

('the next day' was presumably July 26, 1990, seven days before Saddam invaded Kuwait)

At a Washington press conference called the next day, State Department spokesperson Margaret Tutweiler was asked by journalists:

"Has the United States sent any type of diplomatic message to the Iraqis about putting 30,000 troops on the border with Kuwait? Has there been any type of protest communicated from the United States government?"

to which she responded:
"I'm entirely unaware of any such protest."

On July 31st, two days before the Iraqi invasion, John Kelly, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, testified to Congress that the

"United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

http://wastelandofth...om/Coverups.cfm


Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.
Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.


Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.


Glaspie replied, "I didn't think . . . the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait."
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.

United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

"Nayirah" told a U.S. Congressional committee that she watched Iraqi troops rip respirators from premature babies in a Kuwaiti hospital, leaving the infants to die.

United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

"Nayirah" told a U.S. Congressional committee that she watched Iraqi troops rip respirators from premature babies in a Kuwaiti hospital, leaving the infants to die.
  • 0

#63 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:41 PM

FIVE DAYS before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, President Bush was briefed by William H. Webster, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Webster warned that Saddam Hussein was likely to invade Kuwait, predicting that Iraq would probably seize only the Rumaila oil fields and the islands of Bubiyan and Warba, not the whole country.

"We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts," the transcript reports Glaspie saying

"United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

"Nayirah" told a U.S. Congressional committee that she watched Iraqi troops rip respirators from premature babies in a Kuwaiti hospital, leaving the infants to die.
  • 0

#64 Rich

Rich

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 317 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:41 PM

Let me show you something.

"[The] United States has no commitment to defend Kuwait and the U.S. has no intention of defending Kuwait if it is attacked by Iraq."

This is NOT a green light. Understand?
  • 0

#65 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:55 PM

Haliburton and cheety pumped out over 1000 million barrels of Iraqi oil and sold them. Worth over 14,000 million US$..

Which makes americans also a party to looting and stealing.

despicable people!
  • 0

#66 Rich

Rich

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 317 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 08:59 PM

Gave up on the "Green light" BS? Starting a new line of irrational thinking?
  • 0

#67 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 09:02 PM

Lier's thieves murders, your words have little meaning.
  • 0

#68 Rich

Rich

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 317 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 09:06 PM

When all else fails call people names... Hehehe.

BTW: What's a "lier"?
  • 0

#69 robertromano

robertromano

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 735 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 09:20 PM

is unable to read english well. he ignores the 9/10 of what glaspie said and he only pays attention to the 1/10 that he can twist to mean somethign he wants it to mean.

"we have no interest"

and

"we have no intention"

doesnt mean that saddam should go invade kuwait. it means GOOD LUCK SADDAM! (you might need it;)... )

ANYWAY its yet another example of the US supporting a muslim nation being atatcked.....what you gots to say about that, grob???? looks like grob will have to make up some snappy and stupid catch phrase to villfiy the US in order to explain why we defended a tiny muslim country....

was it perhaps OIL??? Well, then why did France and Saudi Awabia also join the battle to kick Saddam out. Doesnt Saudis have enough oil, grob? And if it was oil...

WHERES THE OIL?
  • 0

#70 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 10:06 PM

A bump for a worthy and perplexing thread! ;)
  • 0

#71 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 January 2004 - 10:10 PM

...the bump was for the first 3 and a half pages... lol
  • 0

#72 American Pikle

American Pikle

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 30 January 2004 - 02:19 AM

$US 40 billion sponsorship of islamic fundamentalist training program - Carter + Brzezinski
http://www.zmag.org/...=11&ItemID=2463


Photos of Osama bin Laden and Zbigniew Brzezinski during weapons inspection in terrorist training camp.


http://www.geocities...Ladenphoto.html


http://www.ezresult....niew_Brzezinski

http://www.nationmas...Osama-bin-Laden




Review of Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York, Basic Books, 1997.
http://www.unanswere...sboard1997.html

Zbigniew Brzezinski: "Regret what? That secret operation (the CIA backing of Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists) was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it?"

Zbigniew Brzezinski: "What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?" Quoting Zbigniew Brzezinski Jan, 1998*[1] (This interview was deleted from the version of Le Nouvel Observateur sent to the US) [this translation into English by Blum]





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Osama bin Laden: "The Western regimes and the government of the US bear the blame for what might happen. If their people do not wish to be harmed inside their very own countries, they should seek to elect governments that are truly representative of them and that can protect their interests. **[2](This part not aired on ABC)

Osama bin Laden: "This is my message to the American people. I urge them to find a serious administration that acts in their interest and does not attack people and violate their honor and pilfer their wealth." Quoting Osama bin Laden May, 1998



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Q:WHO the hell supports such murderous people like bin Laden?
  • 0

#73 Bilbo Baggins

Bilbo Baggins

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12782 posts

Posted 30 January 2004 - 02:26 AM

http://globalresearc...es/CHO312A.html
  • 0

#74 American Pikle

American Pikle

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 30 January 2004 - 02:28 AM

12 YEARS AGO: US troops deploy in the Saudi desert Nov. 4, 1990, before the Gulf War. As the US mulls an attack on Iraq, wary experts recall faulty information used to justify past campaigns.

In war, some facts less factual

Some US assertions from the last war on Iraq still appear dubious.

When George H. W. Bush ordered American forces to the Persian Gulf v to reverse Iraq's August 1990 invasion of Kuwait v part of the administration case was that an Iraqi juggernaut was also threatening to roll into Saudi Arabia.

Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated in midvSeptember that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key US oil supplier.



But when the St. Petersburg Times in Florida acquired two commercial Soviet satellite images of the same area, taken at the same time, no Iraqi troops were visible near the Saudi border v just empty desert.



But past cases of bad intelligence or outright disinformation used to justify war are making experts wary.




Examining the evidence

Shortly before US strikes began in the Gulf War, for example, the St. Petersburg Times asked two experts to examine the satellite images of the Kuwait and Saudi Arabia border area taken in mid-September 1990, a month and a half after the Iraqi invasion. The experts, including a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst who specialized in desert warfare, pointed out the US build-up v jet fighters standing wing-tip to wing-tip at Saudi bases but were surprised to see almost no sign of the Iraqis.

"That [Iraqi buildup] was the whole justification for Bush sending troops in there, and it just didn't exist," Ms. Heller says. Three times Heller contacted the office of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (now vice president) for evidence refuting the Times photos or analysis v offering to hold the story if proven wrong.



The official response: "Trust us." To this day, the Pentagon's photographs of the Iraqi troop buildup remain classified.




John MacArthur, publisher of Harper's Magazine and author of "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War," says that considering the number of senior officials shared by both Bush administrations, the American public should bear in mind the lessons of Gulf War propaganda.

"These are all the same people who were running it more than 10 years ago," Mr. MacArthur says. "They'll make up just about anything ... to get their way."

On Iraq, analysts note that little evidence so far of an imminent threat from Mr. Hussein's weapons of mass destruction has been made public.

Critics, including some former United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq, say no such evidence exists. Mr. Bush says he will make his decision to go to war based on the "best" intelligence.

"You have to wonder about the quality of that intelligence," says Mr. Hamilton at Woodrow Wilson.



"This administration is capable of any lie ... in order to advance its war goal in Iraq," says a US government source in Washington with some two decades of experience in intelligence, who would not be further identified. "It is one of the reasons it doesn't want to have UN weapons inspectors go back in, because they might actually show that the probability of Iraq having [threatening illicit weapons] is much lower than they want us to believe."





Last fall, the Pentagon secretly created an "Office of Strategic Influence." But when its existence was revealed, the ensuing media storm over reports that it would launch disinformation campaigns prompted its official closure in late February.

Commenting on the furor, President Bush pledged that the Pentagon will "tell the American people the truth."

Critics familiar with the precedent set in recent decades, however, remain skeptical. They point, for example, to the Office of Public Diplomacy run by the State Department in the 1980s. Using staff detailed from US military "psychological operations" units, it fanned fears about Nicaragua's leftist Sandinista regime with false "intelligence" leaks.


Besides placing a number of proContra, antiSandinista stories in the national US media as part of a "White Propaganda" campaign, that office fed the Miami Herald a make-believe story that the Soviet Union had given chemical weapons to the Sandinistas. Another tale v which happened to emerge the night of President Ronald Reagan's reelection victory v held that Soviet MiG fighters were on their way to Nicaragua.


More recently, in the fall of 1990, members of Congress and the American public were swayed by the tearful testimony of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only as Nayirah.

[b]
In the girl's testimony before a congressional caucus, well-documented in MacArthur's book "Second Front" and elsewhere, she described how, as a volunteer in a Kuwait maternity ward, she had seen Iraqi troops storm her hospital, steal the incubators, and leave 312 babies "on the cold floor to die."
[/b
]
Seven US Senators later referred to the story during debate; the motion for war passed by just five votes. In the weeks after Nayirah spoke, President Bush senior invoked the incident five times, saying that such "ghastly atrocities" were like "Hitler revisited."

But just weeks before the US bombing campaign began in January, a few press reports began to raise questions about the validity of the incubator tale.

Later, it was learned that Nayirah was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington and had no connection to the Kuwait hospital.

She had been coached along with the handful of others who would "corroborate" the story v by senior executives of Hill and Knowlton in Washington, the biggest global PR firm at the time, which had a contract worth more than $10 million with the Kuwaitis to make the case for war.




http://www.csmonitor...01s02-wosc.html
  • 0

#75 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 30 January 2004 - 05:06 AM

"The enemy doesn't have much left," a battalion commander in Tikrit said this week in assessing the current situation. "They are desperate and flailing."

an Iraqi Policeman who witnessed the incident, said,
  • 0

#76 grob

grob

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4579 posts

Posted 31 January 2004 - 10:44 PM

"Governments lie" -- Isador Feinstein Stone (1907-1989)


When on August 2, 1990, the Iraqi army invaded Kuwait, the response of the Bush Sr. Administration was decisive. It would not stand, said the president. A line in the sand had to be drawn. For months the administration worked in the U.N. and with its allies to assemble a formidable force that would eventually defeat the Iraqi army and liberate Kuwait between January 17 and February 28, 1991.

In order to justify the war, the administration constructed a rationale that was based on the following:

1) Iraq had violated international laws by invading a sovereign country.
2) Iraq had amassed troops and tanks and was bent to invade Saudi Arabia.
3) As Congress was deliberating on a vote to grant the president authorization to use force (January 12, 1991), a story surfaced that Iraqi soldiers had removed babies from incubators that they were stealing and had left these babies to die on the floor of the hospital. This story made the headlines around the world and was a big factor in the positive result of the congressional vote.
4) Saddam Hussein was a dangerous, blood-thirsty dictator. He had accumulated Weapons of Mass Destruction, both chemical and nuclear (or was close to developing a nuclear device). He was a vicious, Hitler-like killer who had gassed his own people, and was ready to commit untold atrocities (the precursor of the Human Rights' discourse against any designated villain).

Let's review these four points and offer references and resources.

Full: http://www.swans.com...art8/ga138.html
  • 0

#77 quagmire_iraq

quagmire_iraq

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1854 posts

Posted 26 May 2004 - 07:03 AM

The Coastal Post - June, 1998
Was Gulf War A Setup For Iraq?
By Karen Nakamura

Was the Gulf War a set-up by Reagan/Bush to sell weapons, win elections and extend the West's sphere of influence in the Middle East?

Some experts think so. And they think sanctions are just a part of Bush & Co. conning Saddam into the Gulf War. Why? Because Saddam Hussein won't play ball with the West. Instead, he cared to build his own army. But mostly because he refused to deliver up Iraq's oil and mineral rights. Because he won't play ball and fetch, he's been deemed "expendable." Saddam doesn't have to be right to have been wronged.

Ollie North shredded a lot of history. Even so, let's consider what Craig Hullet, Middle East expert and lawyer, found through the Freedom of Information Act.

A CIA transcript of October 29, 1985, described a meeting between Oliver North, Richard Secord and Albert Hakkim, in Frankfort, Germany, with a "second channel" from Iran.

Iran-Contra experts will recognize this trio. Not only did they sell weapons to Iran, they made an amazing promise: America would overthrow Saddam for Iran.

During the Iran/Iraq war ("The Way to Jerusalem is through Baghdad"), instead of military support, Kuwait and other Arab states gave money. In 1988, according to the London Economist, at the end of the war, James Baker visited Saddam. He said Iraq wouldn't get more credit from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or the West to pay their war debts unless Iraq gave up phosphate, sulfate, oil and other raw material rights as collateral and in perpetuity. Saddam was outraged and refused.

Kuwait began demanding payment of its "war loans." The Iraqis, unable and unwilling to repay, said the money was Kuwait's war contribution. Here Saddam had saved the Arabs. Now, he was supposed to foot the bill. Early in 1990, Kuwait glutted the oil market with Iraqi oil. Already low prices tumbled. Iraqi's shaky economy went belly-up.

Important is a dispute over Iraq and Kuwait's "floating border." Iraq never accepted Kuwait's claim to land abutting Iraq's lucrative Rumanian oil fields. During the Iran War, Kuwait sneaked in and grabbed the turf.

Less than six months after certain November '89 meetings in Kuwait, Kuwait started drilling sideways under the new border to collect its debt. This was the oil Kuwait used to flood the market.

Interestingly, Kuwait purchased its slanted drilling equipment from the Santa Fe Drilling Company. A large stockholder was Brent Scrowcroft, Bush's National Security Advisor.

Saddam demanded negotiations. The Kuwaitis insulted him. Kuwait would ignore Iraq's protests. "Let them try to occupy our territory. We're going to have the Americans come in."

Way before that, when James Baker told Saddam to turn over his oil rights or face the consequences, Secretary of State George Schultz got sanctions against Iraq for poisoning the Kurds in March, 1988. The photos shocked us into the Chemical Weapons Age. Even the Pentagon agreed there was no proof Iraq did the gassing. Both Iran and Iraq were using chemicals by then. Iran had cyanide. That's what killed the Kurds. Iraq did not. The Pentagon investigated. The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College said:

"Having looked at all the evidence available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim poison gas was used by Iraq in this incident."

The UN came to the same conclusion. Jordan decided much of the evidence was outright forgery.

The Institute concluded, "...Congress acted more on...emotionalism than factual information."

Consider this anecdote told by Mr. Hulet: A lawyer, he's a stickler for authenticity. After the Gulf War, Kuwaiti Foreign Minister al-Shabott, "...confronted Tariq Aziz [Iraqi's Foreign Minister]...jabbed his finger at [him] and said, 'You nasty rascal. You...invaded my country... It was totally unjustified... You people are going to pay...'

"Tariq Aziz...said, 'You...better be extremely careful what you say...in public because we're in possession of documented proof of the...meetings...you were holding in the foreign ministry of Kuwait with...Central Intelligence Agency officials working out a covert operation against Saddam Hussein in Iraq."

"...Foreign Minister Shabott...passed out. Fainted dead away..."

A little history to understand context: In mid-1989, when Gorbachev began dismantling the Soviet Army, the military/industrial complex was not amused. Top-level meetings were held to find ways to retain military relevancy and funding. The decision was to re-tool for small wars in unstable countries and create a military "shield" to protect access to raw materials for a new "Northern Industrial Alliance."

By November 14, 1989 (watch this date), a decision had been made to pursue a clandestine operation against Saddam. That was the same week Communism crumpled. The Berlin Wall fell November 9; Czechoslovakia, November 17.

A January, 1990, military document, entitled "Global Reach, Global Power," designated the Iraq/Kuwait border dispute an example of how to demonstrate the need for massive U.S. military development.

That same month, at an Iraq Arms Fair, the world's death merchants complained bitterly about plunging profits.

April 19, 1990, Bush convened the Western Powers. A White Paper stated that as the Soviet Union was no longer a player in the Middle East, the West should move in to fill the vacuum. The region could "stabilize" by eliminating military powers in Iraq, Iran and Syria.

The same month, Senator Bob Dole and other Congressional leaders visited Iraq and presented an ultimatum: disarm and play fetch or face the consequences. Saddam refused. Not until Israel did the same. Saddam had tripped the trap.

Which gets us to Tariq Aziz and the documents found by the Iraqis. A memo dated November 14, 1989, and prepared by the Kuwait Security Minister, outlined meetings with the CIA. It stated Kuwait entered into an agreement with the CIA to apply pressure on Iraq to create a confrontation to be used as a reason for toppling Saddam.

Recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency said it considers Iraq free of nuclear weapons. The military/industrial complex is not amused. Saddam still won't play ball and fetch. Aid isn't getting to the needy. Hundreds of kids still die every day.

In April, AmeriCare shipped a planeload of medical supplies. The International Action Center, founded by Ramsey Clark, sent another planeload in May with more on the way. Through the goodness of supply companies, $1 buys about $100 in medicine. Make your check as stated to be tax deductible.

People's Rights Fund/Medical Aid c/o International Action Center, 2489 Mission St. #28, San Francisco 94110. Internet: npcsf@igc.apc.org. Call Richard or Ron at (415) 821-7575; fax (415) 821-5782.

http://www.coastalpost.com/98/6/4.htm
  • 0

#78 PeaBrain

PeaBrain

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 750 posts

Posted 16 September 2004 - 05:56 PM

http://www.atimes.co...t/FI17Ak01.html

While pledging US neutrality on Arab-Arab conflicts, thus not discouraging Iraq from moving against Kuwait, the US at the same time gave Kuwait, through then defense secretary Dick Cheney, assurances that it would defend it against an attack from Iraq, emboldening Kuwait to refuse to negotiate.

The US goes to war in the Gulf
On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait. Four days later, on August 6, the United Nations imposed heavy sanctions on Iraq, on request from the US. Simultaneously, after consulting with US secretary of defense Cheney, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, the head of the Arab regionalist snake, invited US troops on to Saudi soil. The unhappy fate of Kuwait had led the Saudi king to seek protection from the US against the march of pan-Arabism. Iraq's transgression was not so much to repossess Kuwait as an integral part of Iraq, but that it claimed Kuwait as the first step on the march toward pan-Arabism. If Iraq were to be allowed to keep Kuwait on the basis of pan-Arabism, the survival of the Arab regionalist states will be directly threatened.

President George H W Bush quickly announced that the US would launch a "wholly defensive" mission to prevent Iraq from invading Saudi Arabia, and US troops moved into Saudi Arabia on August 7, 1990. Those who thought simplistically that the US moved troops into Saudi Arabia to protect Saudi oil were missing the point. At the time, Iraq was selling a higher percentage of its oil to the US than Saudi Arabia, and there was no reason to expect Iraq to change its oil export strategy. The Iraqi purpose in repossessing Kuwait oil was to sell it, not to hoard it. Yet the idea of a war to protect oil supply enjoyed wide automatic support in US politics, more than obscure geopolitical calculations, especially when greed and power have been celebrated in US society as moral positives since the 1970s. Under the cover of protection of oil supply, the US moved troops into Saudi Arabia to stop the march of pan-Arabism. It was a fateful development, as the al-Qaeda pretext for the attacks on US soil on September 11, 2001, 11 years later was centered on demands for the removal of US troops from Saudi Arabia. The unintended consequences of geopolitical stratagem was being expressed through the iron law of terrorism of what goes around, comes around, known generally as the blowback effect, a term coined by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

On September 25, the UN imposed an interdiction on air traffic to and from Iraq. On November 29, the US got its UN war resolution. John Pilger reported in The Guardian that this was achieved through a campaign of bribery, blackmail and threats. In 1990, Egypt was the most indebted country in Africa. Secretary of state James Baker bribed president Hosni Mubarak with $14 billion in "debt forgiveness" in exchange for Egypt withholding opposition to the pending war on Iraq. Washington gave President Hafez al-Assad the green light to wipe out all opposition to Syrian rule in Lebanon, plus a billion dollars' worth of arms. Iran was bribed with a US promise to drop its opposition to World Bank loans. Bribing the Soviet Union was especially urgent, as Moscow was close to pulling off a deal that would allow Saddam to extricate himself from Kuwait peacefully. However, with its wrecked economy, the Soviet Union was easy prey. Bush sent the Saudi foreign minister to Moscow to offer a billion dollars before the Russian winter set in to compensate for Soviet investment in Iraq. Mikhail Gorbachev, with life-threatening political problems of his own at home, quickly agreed to the war resolution, and another $3 billion from other Gulf oil states was wired to the Soviet government to secure outstanding Iraqi debts to the USSR.

The votes of the non-permanent members of the Security Council were crucial. Zaire, occupying the rotating chair, was offered undisclosed "debt forgiveness" and military equipment in return for silencing Security Council members during the attack. Only Cuba and Yemen held out. Minutes after Yemen voted against the resolution to attack Iraq, a senior US diplomat characterized the vote to the Yemeni ambassador as the most expensive "no" vote he ever cast. Within three days, a US aid program of $70 million to one of the world's poorest countries was suspended. Yemen suddenly had problems with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund; and 800,000 Yemeni workers were abruptly expelled from Saudi Arabia.

Exhaustive remote-controlled precision bombings were followed by blitzkrieg movements of ground troops. Tens of thousands of Iraqis troops were killed by smart-bomb air strikes, never having even come within sight of the enemy, and most of the military infrastructure was destroyed together with much of the civilian infrastructure. On March 3, a ceasefire was reached between US-led coalition forces and Iraq. By April, Iraq suppressed rebellions in the south by Shi'ites, and in the north by Kurds. Millions of Kurds fled to Turkey and Iran. US, British and French troops moved into northern Iraq to set up refugee camps and to protect the Kurds. In May, Iraq was presented with an international claim for compensation of $100 billion, which dwarfed the $23 billion reparation imposed on Germany after World War I that was considered incredibly excessive and as contributing to the rise of Nazism in the defeated nation. But the government of Saddam survived, while the Iraqi population suffered a decade of sanctions that caused the death of 2 million people, 800,000 of whom were children. While pan-Arabism was dealt a setback, the suffering of the Arab people in Iraq boosted Arab solidarity in the region.



Blowbacks a bitch and it couldnt have happened to better bunch of asssholes!
  • 0

#79 Tokyoman

Tokyoman

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2784 posts

Posted 16 September 2004 - 06:14 PM

"Blowbacks a bitch and it couldnt have happened to better bunch of asssholes!"

What an awful thing to say about Muslims. I agree the thousands of dead Muslims and destroyed villages since 2001 is bad, but they didn't all deserve it.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru