Topic: Some Pesky Facts
Lynann's photo
Mon 12/01/08 03:49 PM
PDF's available at http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/20/sbm.documents/index.html

(CNN) -- The U.S. diplomatic courtship with Iraq in the 1980s continued despite Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons. Click on the links to read once-classified documents from the Reagan administration.
Once-classified documents show the U.S. continued its courtship with Iraq despite use of chemical weapons.

Once-classified documents show the U.S. continued its courtship with Iraq despite use of chemical weapons.

Date: December 5, 1986
Subject: U.S.-Iraqi Relations: Picking Up the Pieces
Summary: After disclosures that the United States was secretly providing weapons to Iraq's enemy, Iran, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Murphy recommends strengthening commercial ties with Saddam Hussein because "U.S.-Iraqi relations are in crisis." Read the document (pdf)



Date: March 3, 1988
Subject: Iraq's Foreign Policy: Deeper into the Mainstream
Summary: Anticipating an end to the Iran-Iraq war, a State Department official is optimistic that continued ties between the United States and Iraq will lead Saddam Hussein "deeper into the mainstream." The author concludes that "fears of Iraq's aggression seem exaggerated." Two weeks later, Iraqi forces attack Kurdish civilians in Halabja with poisonous gas. Read the document (pdf)


Date: December 29, 1988
Subject: Export-Import Financing for Iraq
Summary: In the closing days of the Reagan administration, the State Department's top human rights official argues that continued financial aid to Iraq "can simply not be squared with our worldwide human rights policy." However, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Murphy counters that U.S. financial ties with Iraq have "far greater use with Baghdad as a carrot than as a stick." A year and a half later, Iraq invades Kuwait.

madisonman's photo
Mon 12/01/08 03:57 PM
Saddam we hardly knew him. http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html

AndrewAV's photo
Tue 12/02/08 07:21 PM
I'd say I'm surprised that you think this is something new but... well... you know.

Lynann's photo
Tue 12/02/08 07:26 PM
I don't but it will be to some readers.

no photo
Tue 12/02/08 07:44 PM
Saddam was a thug, but he was OUR thug against Iran.

adj4u's photo
Tue 12/02/08 07:51 PM
patton was right

abot russia

and iraq was russia

when it came to iran

Thomas3474's photo
Wed 12/03/08 01:10 AM
The worlds a better safer place now that Saddam is dead.Anyone miss him?I didn't think so.

Lynann's photo
Wed 12/03/08 01:56 AM
wow

When all else fails...

ummm never mind pointing out the obvious will likely earn me...

oh nm

adj4u's photo
Wed 12/03/08 03:40 AM

The worlds a better safer place now that Saddam is dead.Anyone miss him?I didn't think so.


is that your it ok to murder

but yer not permitted to be gay routine

http://mingle2.com/topic/show/185553

thePatriot's photo
Wed 12/03/08 09:51 AM

The worlds a better safer place now that Saddam is dead.Anyone miss him?I didn't think so.


No! , i disagree and you know whats funny back in 9th grade me and a kid argued this in history class except i used your line that you just said exactly. its funny because reading your post make me remember what a stubborn ass i was when i was just a little younger.
Our govt. is running a muck on the world, nothing is stopping them from using us the people for its will using evey opportunity and playing on our ignorance and misguidance making a reason for war.



do you believe in sovereignty? you know the thing the country of the great u s of a was founded on?
do you know what that means?
i am not going to explain it to you...


Lynann's photo
Wed 12/03/08 10:48 AM
Let me be the first to say

Thank you!

madisonman's photo
Wed 12/03/08 01:16 PM

The worlds a better safer place now that Saddam is dead.Anyone miss him?I didn't think so.
Im sure Iraq was better off under Saddam than amerika. Under saddam they had running water, food, jobs. Didnt have random bombs dropping on wedding parties etc etc

AndrewAV's photo
Thu 12/04/08 08:56 PM

I don't but it will be to some readers.


not in this context but historically. you act like this is something new.