This is serious stuff, because the US Army War College tells us that 1.4
million Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the sanctions, which is
3,000 times more than the number of Kurds who supposedly died of gassing
at the hands of Saddam. Many of my old Cold Warrior friends practically
DEMAND that we not lift the sanctions because if Saddam would gas his
own people, he would gas anyone. Now I have come across the 1990
Pentagon report, published just prior to the invasion of Kuwait. Its
authors are Stephen C. Pelletiere, Douglas V. Johnson II and Leif R.
Rosenberger, of the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. War College
at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The report is 93 pages, but I append here
only the passages having to do with the aforementioned issue:

Iraqi Power and U.S. Security in the Middle East
Excerpt, Chapter 5
U.S. SECURITY AND IRAQI POWER

Introduction. Throughout the war the United States practiced a fairly
benign policy toward Iraq. Although initially disapproving of the
invasion, Washington came slowly over to the side of Baghdad. Both
wanted to restore the status quo ante to the Gulf and to reestablish the
relative harmony that prevailed there before Khomeini began threatening
the regional balance of power. Khomeini's revolutionary appeal was
anathema to both Baghdad and Washington; hence they wanted to get rid of
him. United by a common interest, Iraq and the United States restored
diplomatic relations in 1984, and the United States began to actively
assist Iraq in ending the fighting. It mounted Operation Staunch, an
attempt to stem the flow of arms to Iran. It also increased its
purchases of Iraqi oil while cutting back on Iranian oil purchases, and
it urged its allies to do likewise. All this had the effect of repairing
relations between the two countries, which had been at a very low ebb.

In September 1988, however -- a month after the war had ended -- the
State Department abruptly, and in what many viewed as a sensational
manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemicals against its Kurdish
population. The incident cannot be understood without some background of
Iraq's relations with the Kurds. It is beyond the scope of this study to
go deeply into this matter; suffice it to say that throughout the war
Iraq effectively faced two enemies -- Iran and the elements of its own
Kurdish minority. Significant numbers of the Kurds had launched a revolt
against Baghdad and in the process teamed up with Tehran. As soon as the
war with Iran ended, Iraq announced its determination to crush the
Kurdish insurrection. It sent Republican Guards to the Kurdish area, and
in the course of this operation - according to the U.S. State Department
-- gas was used, with the result that numerous Kurdish civilians were
killed. The Iraqi government denied that any such gassing had occurred.
Nonetheless, Secretary of State Schultz stood by U.S. accusations, and
the U.S. Congress, acting on its own, sought to impose economic
sanctions on Baghdad as a violator of the Kurds' human rights.

Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find
it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used
in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced.
International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey
where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there
ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the
Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were
interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

We would have expected, in a matter as serious as this, that the
Congress would have exercised some care. However, passage of the
sanctions measure through the Congress was unusually swift -- at least
in the Senate where a unanimous vote was secured within 24 hours.
Further, the proposed sanctions were quite draconian (and will be
discussed in detail below). Fortunately for the future of Iraqi-U.S.
ties, the sanctions measure failed to pass on a bureaucratic
technicality (it was attached as a rider to a bill that died before
adjournment).

It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, the Congress was influenced
by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another
Iraqi-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were
bombarded with chemical weapons, producing a great many deaths.
Photographs of them Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the
international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even
though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals
in this operation, and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian
bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.

Thus, in our view, the Congress acted more on the basis of emotionalism
than factual information, and without sufficient thought for the adverse
diplomatic effects of its action. As a result of the outcome of the
Iran-Iraq War, Iraq is now the most powerful state in the Persian Gulf,
an area in which we have vital interests. To maintain an uninterrupted
flow of oil from the Gulf to the West, we need to develop good working
relations with all of the Gulf states, and particularly with Iraq, the
strongest

Oh. We screwed up this war. There's no doubt of that in anyone's mind.
But we weren't deliberately malicious about it. Saddam was.

shadow-

you know what , never mind.... cant make you drink the water.

enjoy your ravings and conspiracies, watch out fo rthe black
helicopters.


doc

In reference to the op.

I reckon Iraq is no longer the most powerful nation in that region now.

Why? Perhaps because S. Hussein attempted to invade one of the
countries on his border. (kuwait).

A more or less defenceless one, at that. Kuwait was about as peaceful
as the middle-east ever got.

shadow his own people hung him 30 minutes after getting him. Tell you
something? wake up dude. Sadaam got exactly what he deserved. Death.

Actually, he got a quick death. Which was more than he deserved. But no
less than mercy would allow.

If Saddam had married Little Miss Muffet, Would the Kurds have got their
whey?

That. Is the most bizarre thing I've ever heard. Kudos to you.

Allright UK.

Levity in a serious thread.

AB

can you back up your statement that Iraq was the most powerful in that
region?

I have major problems with that.

And if they are/were why in the world are we having problems over there
no that hes gone.


Is Iran the 2nd most? LOL

Not my statement shadow was quoting chapter 5 of a War College document.

That document stated that Iraq was the most powerful in the region at
that time ACCORDING TO THE WAR COLLEGE.

That back up enough for you sir.

well gee, if it comes from this government then it must be true.


Bow to whatever you want to bow to, sir.


lol

Actually, the "War College" isn't from our government. It's the
international studies stuff. America's certainly involved- but it's the
UN that does the calculations.

And at the time, Iraq had the largest standing military, and best
equipped, in the area.

Yep....thats why Bush said it would be a 100 year war.



bow to whom you bow to.

lol

I only bow to two things. One is my Creator. The other is the truth. And
occasionally asian people, but that's out of politeness. And even then
it's only to those who weren't born in a western nation.

yep, I see that every time you reply.


LOL

Wow!

First you tell me I am wrong for not backing up my claim.

Then when I do....

You tell me I'm wrong for having a good answer.

What the heck... Are there two of you?

I'm not the one resorting to name calling and insults. Seriously. I'm
not even in my mid 20s- why am I the mature one in this thing?

where was I name calling?

and where was I calling you wrong?


please tell us.