posted July 26, 2004 04:28 PM              

...and I am posting quotes from it, because it's interesting to see what people's thoughts were almost two years ago...I am partial to Jacqueline's posts because she echos my thoughts so clearly....

**************************************

In hindsight:

Posted by Jacqueline Nov. 24, 2002 (very insightful gal)

quote:

---

...Are we talking about a war against terrorism , or against Sadam ?
On the practical side, the war against the terrorism is an Utopia. Terrorists don't have fixed address. You can destroy a whole country and don't kill one single terrorist.

---

Another quote, by Jackie...same post

quote:

---

The real problem is Saudi Arabia, from where 16 of the 19 terrorists that committed the attacks came. From where Osama came and according to the political analysts, it is from there that comes most of the money to finance terrorist actions.

---

..and...

quote:

---

We cannot forget that Sadam's regime was supported by U.S for a long time. U.S. gave weapons to Iraq believing that they would be capable of removes the ayatollahs' government in Iran.
Which was the result of that ?

---

....and Proxime...this is so cute.....posted December 19, 2002

quote:

---

Carlo -
I hope that you're right about Kerry & Edwards;
I'd kill to have someone worth voting for
(and who actually has a chance of winning).

---

***

Posted Jan.16, 2003 by Jackie...

quote:

---

The true criminal of 9/11 is not Saddam, but Bin Laden....yet, where is Bin Laden ? Nobody knows...

The failure in the attempt of capturing Bin Laden, took president Bush to seek an easier and less dangerous target...Saddam Hussein !
Yet, for sure, oil will be one of the rewards...

Donald Rumsfeld, that today defends an attack to Iraq, it is the same Donald Rumsfeld that in 1983, traveled to Iraq to support Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran, that gave weapons to him, like this he could kill his own people...
Who armed Saddam was the United States of America ...I'm sorry to say that, but i'ts the truth !

Now I ask: Who are the American allies in this senseless war ? Nobody... only Tony Blair, and I don't speak about the English people, but the English Minister...

Iraq is not the only dictatorship in this world, we have China, Iran, Korea, Saudi Arabia ,etc, etc, etc... why this concern just with Iraq ?

In what moment Saddam threatened the United States ?...I really don't remember...
Governments don't defend populations of other countries, governments defend their own interests in other countries.

This is a fact and against facts there are no arguments...

---

I realize that this post will undoubtedly rub some people the wrong way....but that's gonna happen here..since we all have our own views...

Let's just respectfully agree, or disagree with one another, whichever the case may be.

posted July 27, 2004 01:11 AM            

Note Rainbow, the US never gave or sold Iraq weapons. Iraq's arsenal consisted of French and Soviet military aircraft, Soviet tanks, Soviet and French artillery, soviet AK-47 assault rifles Soviet helicopters, Soviet mortars and RPG's. This has been covered here before and I think you know that. No US weapons were sold to Iraq to use against anyone, including Iran who did have US weapons in their arsenal.

quote:The true criminal of 9/11 is not Saddam, but Bin Laden....yet, where is Bin Laden ? Nobody knows...

The failure in the attempt of capturing Bin Laden, took president Bush to seek an easier and less dangerous target...Saddam Hussein !
Yet, for sure, oil will be one of the rewards...

Note Rainbow, Saddam was certainly not a less dangerous target than Bin Laden who is scrambling around the caves of northern Afghanistan and Pakistan...if he's still alive.

The nonsense about stealing Iraq's oil has been dealt with so many times I wonder why you continue to bring it up. If you persist in doing so, I will ask you how much oil we have stolen from Iraq, and on what dates...in fact since you continue with this particular disproven talking point against the war, how about backing it up here and now?

Donald Rumsfeld, that today defends an attack to Iraq, it is the same Donald Rumsfeld that in 1983, traveled to Iraq to support Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran, that gave weapons to him, like this he could kill his own people...
Who armed Saddam was the United States of America ...I'm sorry to say that, but i'ts the truth !
Now I ask: Who are the American allies in this senseless war ? Nobody... only Tony Blair, and I don't speak about the English people, but the English Minister...

More political antiwar talking points Rainbow? This is the list in alphabetical order of the coalition of the willing. I do wish you would at least make an effort to get it right....at least some of the time.

posted July 27, 2004 01:51 AM              

Gotta love him.

posted July 27, 2004 12:26 PM              

The following doesn't really have any bearing on the convo, and is a little out dated (the numbers are as of Mar 2004), but I brought it up so here it is (note: I'm not sure of the source itself, but the numbers seem good):

Gah, n/m on copying and pasting...the info's gridded and comes up funky.
So here's the link:
http://www.geocities.com/pwhce/willing.html

If you scroll down about mid-way, it has the troop numbers by country, per 100,000 of the pop. of that country, and per 1000 of that military.
Beneath that it lists the countries by top ten by proportion of the population
(USA, UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Poland, El Salvador, Honduras, Mongolia, Bulgaria, and Italy if anyone out there's curious) and by top ten by proportion of the military (US, Honduras, UK, Latvia, Netherlands, Mongolia, Denmark, El Salvador, Australia, & the Dominican Republic).

posted July 27, 2004 12:37 PM            

I would, however, take into account that for many of those smaller countries, the fact that they are sending troops at all shows their desire to combat terrorism and support what needs to be done.

Some other 2004 estimated population facts:

Latvia: 2.4 Million
Columbia: 44 Million
Afghanistan: 25 Million
Albania: 3.2 Million
Azerbaijan: 8.2 Million
United States: 296 Million
United Kingdom: 60 Million
Canada: 31 Million

I can keep going on, but it is getting tedious - anyone can use that link I provided to look up more of the numbers.

If I was feeling especially nerdy I would look at the size of their military in comparison to the size of their population. If someone like Albania is only donated 100 troops but their military is only 0.05 of their population, you can see they don't have alot of peeps to spare. No country can afford to send the majority of their military into a foreign country and leave their own country exposed.

posted July 27, 2004 01:31 PM            

I'm sure some of the contingents are quite small and as Pid suggested, many of those nations have very small populations, military forces and equally small military budgets. Nevertheless, they are there doing what they can do.

posted July 27, 2004 01:50 PM              

First it lists the country, then the # of troops, then troops "Per 100000
population", and then "Per 1000
military"

1 USA 130,000 47.7 94.8
2 United Kingdom 9,000 15.2 42.4
3 Italy 3,000 5.3 11.3
4 Poland 2,460 6.7 10.2
5 Ukraine 1,600 3.2 5.1
6 Spain * 1,300 3.3 7.0
7 Netherlands 1,100 7.0 19.5
8 Australia 800 4.3 14.5
9 Romania 700 3.1 3.4
10 Bulgaria 480 5.9 5.9

11 Thailand 440 0.7 1.4
12 Denmark 420 7.8 17.3
13 Honduras * 368 6.1 5.4
14 El Salvador 361 6.2 14.7
15 Dominican Republic 302 3.7 12.3
16 Hungary 300 2.9 6.9
17 Japan 240 0.2 1.0
18 Norway 179 4.0 5.8
19 Mongolia 160 6.1 17.6
20 Azerbaijan 150 1.9 2.1
21 Portugal 128 1.3 2.6
22 Latvia 120 5.1 20.9
23 Lithuania 118 3.3 9.7
24 Slovakia 102 1.9 2.3
25 Czech Republic 80 0.8 1.4
26 Philippines 80 0.1 0.7
27 Albania 70 2.1 7.0 **
28 Georgia 70 1.4 2.7
29 New Zealand 61 1.7 6.4
30 Moldova 50 1.1 4.7
31 Macedonia 37 1.8 2.3
32 Estonia 31 2.2 6.5
33 Canada ^ 31^
34 Kazakhstan 25 0.1 0.4

Top ten by proportion of population
(again, per 100,000 of total pop., not percentage), listed by "Country, Troops, Proportion":

1 USA 130,000 47.7
2 United Kingdom 9,000 15.2
3 Denmark 420 7.8
4 Netherlands 1,100 7.0
5 Poland 2,460 6.7
6 El Salvador 361 6.2
7 Honduras * 368 6.1
8 Mongolia 160 6.1
9 Bulgaria 480 5.9
10 Italy 3,000 5.3

Then top ten by proportion of military (per 1000 troops), listed by "Country, Troops, Proportion":

1 USA 130,000 94.8
2 Honduras * 368 *** 44.3
3 United Kingdom 9,000 42.4
4 Latvia 120 20.9
5 Netherlands 1,100 19.5
6 Mongolia 160 17.6
7 Denmark 420 17.3
8 El Salvador 361 14.7
9 Australia 800 14.5
10 Dominican Republic 302 12.3

With the following note (among many others) for the charts:
*** Note that Honduras' military has an unusual configuration, consisting of 8,300 regular troops and 60,000 reserves. For this reason, we included reserves when calculating the figure for Honduras. If only regular troops are counted, Honduras has the second highest figure for "per 1,000 military" at 44.33 - just ahead of Britain - but if reserves are included Honduras drops off the "Top ten by proportion of military" chart, and Italy takes the tenth position with a figure of 11.3.

posted July 27, 2004 09:11 PM              

quote:

---

the US never gave or sold Iraq weapons. Iraq's arsenal consisted of French and Soviet military aircraft, Soviet tanks, Soviet and French artillery, soviet AK-47 assault rifles Soviet helicopters, Soviet mortars and RPG's. This has been covered here before and I think you know that. No US weapons were sold to Iraq to use against anyone, including Iran who did have US weapons in their arsenal.

---

quote:

---

"Leaked Report Says German and US Firms Supplied Arms to Saddam"

By Tony Paterson
The Independent (UK)

Baghdad's uncensored report to UN names Western companies alleged to have developed its weapons of mass destruction.
Wednesday, 18 December, 2002

Iraq's 11,000-page report to the UN Security Council lists 150 foreign companies, including some from America, Britain, Germany and France, that supported Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program, a German newspaper said yesterday.

Berlin's newspaper, Die Tageszeitung, said it had seen a copy of the original Iraqi dossier which was vetted for sensitive information by US officials before being handed to the five permanent Security Council members two weeks ago.
An edited version was passed to the remaining 10 members of the Security Council last night.

British officials said the list of companies appeared to be accurate. Eighty German firms and 24 US companies are reported to have supplied Iraq with equipment and know-how for its weapons program from 1975 onwards and in some cases support for Baghdad's conventional arms program had continued until last year…

---

quote:

---

USA Today
09/30/2002 -

Report: "U.S. supplied the kinds of germs Iraq later used for biological weapons"

WASHINGTON (AP) —Iraq's bioweapons program that President Bush wants to eradicate got its start with help from Uncle Sam two decades ago, according to government records getting new scrutiny in light of the discussion of war against Iraq.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent samples directly to several Iraqi sites that U.N. weapons inspectors determined were part of Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program, CDC and congressional records from the early 1990s show. Iraq had ordered the samples, claiming it needed them for legitimate medical research.

The CDC and a biological sample company, the American Type Culture Collection, sent strains of all the germs Iraq used to make weapons, including anthrax, the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and the germs that cause gas gangrene, the records show. Iraq also got samples of other deadly pathogens, including the West Nile virus.

The transfers came in the 1980s, when the United States supported Iraq in its war against Iran. They were detailed in a 1994 Senate Banking Committee report and a 1995 follow-up letter from the CDC to the Senate.
The exports were legal at the time and approved under a program administered by the Commerce Department…

---

quote:

---

"Gulf War veterans sue banks, firms over chemicals"
They allege liability for ailments linked to service in 1991

From Phil Hirschkorn and Deborah Feyerick
CNN New York Bureau
Wednesday, August 20, 2003

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Veterans of the first U.S.-led war with Iraq filed a lawsuit in federal court in Brooklyn on Tuesday alleging that companies that exported chemicals to Iraq in the 1980s, and the banks that financed those deals, are liable for illnesses the U.S. veterans sustained from exposure to chemical weapons stockpiles that were blown up during the 1991 war.

The veterans are among the more than 100,000 U.S. soldiers who have symptoms including extreme fatigue, memory loss, and bone and joint pain, which are often referred to as Gulf War syndrome or Gulf War illness.
The defendants are 11 companies that the suit accuses of supplying Iraq with precursors for chemical weapons, and 33 banks that provided letters of credit for Iraq's purchases according to Iraq's declarations to U.N. weapons inspectors.

Plaintiffs attorneys acquired the never-made-public documents last year from Iraq and showed them to CNN.
They list banks that provided letters of credit for Iraq and more than 50 suppliers of chemical precursors that could have been used to manufacture mustard gas, sarin and VX.

"Those documents reveal which companies were involved, what they sold -- and the veterans have unfinished business with these companies," attorney Gary Pitts said.

Lawyers said they hoped to force chemical corporations from France, Germany, Switzerland and the United States to reject future requests for business from tyrants around the globe...

---

quote:

---

"A look at U.S. shipments of pathogens to Iraq"

Shipments from the United States to Iraq of the kinds of pathogens later used in Iraq's biological weapons programs, according to records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Senate Banking Committee and U.N. weapons inspectors:

ANTHRAX

Iraq admitted making 2,200 gallons of anthrax spores and putting some of them into weapons. U.N. inspectors said Iraq could have made three times as much anthrax as it acknowledged, and could not verify Iraq's claims to have destroyed all of its weaponized anthrax.

The American Type Culture Collection, a biological samples repository in Manassas, Va., sent two shipments of anthrax to Iraq in the 1980s. Three anthrax strains were in a May 1986 shipment sent to the University of Baghdad, which U.N. inspectors later linked to Iraq's biological weapons program. A 1988 shipment from ATCC to Iraq also included four anthrax strains.

BOTULINUM

Iraq admitted making 5,300 gallons of botulinum toxin, a deadly poison produced by the Clostridium botulinum bacteria, and putting some of it into weapons. Five warheads filled with botulinum toxin are missing.

ATCC sent six strains of Clostridium botulinum to the University of Baghdad in the May 1986 shipment. The September 1988 ATCC shipment to Iraq also contained one strain of Clostridium botulinum.

In March 1986, the CDC sent samples of botulinum toxin and botulinum toxiod (used to make a vaccine against botulinum poisoning) directly to Iraq's al-Muthanna complex, a center for Iraq's chemical weapons program and the site where Iraq restarted its dormant biological weapons program in 1985.

GAS GANGRENE

U.N. inspectors concluded Iraq could have produced hundreds of gallons of the germs that cause gas gangrene, though Iraq admitted producing just a fraction of that amount. Gas gangrene, caused by the Clostridium perfringens bacteria, causes toxic gases to form inside the body, killing tissues and causing internal bleeding, lung and liver damage.

ATCC sent three strains of Clostridium perfringens to the University of Baghdad in the May 1986 shipment and another three strains in the 1988 shipment.

OTHER

The CDC sent bacteria samples to Iraq's Atomic Energy Commission in 1985, 1987 and 1988. The commission was involved in Saddam's attempts to build a nuclear bomb and other weapons of mass destruction.

The CDC also sent bacteria samples to the Sera and Vaccine Institute in Amiriyah, Iraq in 1988. The institute stored samples and did genetic engineering research for Iraq's biological weapons programs, U.N. inspectors found.

Copyright 2003 The Associated Press

---

posted July 27, 2004 09:31 PM              

quote:

---

"Iraq Links Germs for Weapons to U.S. and France"
By PHILIP SHENON
The New York Times

WASHINGTON, March 15 2003

Iraq has identified a Virginia-based biological supply house and a French scientific institute as the sources of all the foreign germ samples that it used to create the biological weapons that are still believed to be in Iraq's arsenal, according to American officials and foreign diplomats who have reviewed Iraq's latest weapons declaration to the United Nations.

The American supply house, the American Type Culture Collection of Manassas, Va., had previously been identified as an important supplier of anthrax and other germ samples to Iraq.

But the full extent of the sales by the Virginia supply house and the Pasteur Institute in Paris has never been made public by the United Nations, which received the latest weapons declaration from Iraq in December.

Nor was there any public suggestion before now that Iraq had — apart from a small amount of home-grown germ samples — depended exclusively on supplies from the United States and France in the 1980's in developing the biological weapons that American officials say are now believed to threaten troops massing around Iraq.

The shipments were approved by the United States government in the 1980's, when the transfer of such pathogens for research was legal and easily arranged.

A copy of the pages of the Iraqi declaration dealing with biological weapons was provided to The New York Times, and it reveals the full variety of germs that Iraq says it obtained from abroad for its biological weapons program.

The document shows that the American and French supply houses shipped 17 types of biological agents to Iraq in the 1980's that were used in the weapons programs. Those included anthrax and the bacteria needed to make botulinum toxin, among the most deadly poisons known. It also discloses that Iraq had tried unsuccessfully to obtain biological agents in the late 1980's from other biological supply houses around the world...

---

posted July 27, 2004 09:47 PM              

quote:

---

"Every once in a while you kind of wonder when you sell something to a certain country," said Robert Finney, president of Electronic Associates, Inc., which supplied Saddam 16 with a powerful computer that could be used for missile testing and development.
"But it's not up to us to make foreign policy," Finney told The Wall Street Journal.

---

quote:

---

A spokesperson for Hewlett Packard said the company believed that the Iraqi recipient of its shipments, Saad 16, was an institution of higher learning.
In fact, in 1990 The Wall Street Journal described Saad 16 as "a heavily fortified, state-of-the-art complex for aircraft construction, missile design, and, almost certainly, nuclear-weapons research."

---

quote:

---

Representative Samuel Gejdenson, Democrat of Connecticut, chairman of a House subcommittee investigating "United States Exports of Sensitive Technology to Iraq," stated in 1991:

"From 1985 to 1990, the United States Government approved 771 licenses for the export to Iraq of $1.5 billion worth of biological agents and high-tech equipment with military application. [Only thirty-nine applications were rejected.]

The United States spent virtually an entire decade making sure that Saddam Hussein had almost whatever he wanted. . . The Administration has never acknowledged that it took this course of action, nor has it explained why it did so. In reviewing documents and press accounts, and interviewing knowledgeable sources, it becomes clear that United States export-control policy was directed by U.S. foreign policy as formulated by the State Department, and it was U.S. foreign policy to assist the regime of Saddam Hussein."

---

A larger number of American firms supplied Iraq with the specialized computers, lasers, testing and analyzing equipment, and other instruments and hardware vital to the manufacture of nuclear weapons, missiles, and delivery systems. Computers, in particular, play a key role in nuclear weapons development. Advanced computers make it feasible to avoid carrying out nuclear test explosions, thus preserving the program's secrecy. The 1992 Senate hearings implicated the following firms:

* Kennametal, Latrobe, PA

* Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA

* International Computer Systems, CA, SC, and TX

* Perkins-Elmer, Norwalk, CT

* BDM Corp., McLean, VA

* Leybold Vacuum Systems, Export, PA

* Spectra Physics, Mountain View, CA

* Unisys Corp., Blue Bell, PA

* Finnigan MAT, San Jose, CA

* Scientific Atlanta, Atlanta, GA

* Spectral Data Corp., Champaign, IL

* Tektronix, Wilsonville, OR

* Veeco Instruments, Inc., Plainview, NY

* Wiltron Company, Morgan Hill, CA

The House report also singled out:

TI Coating, Inc., Axel Electronics, Data General Corp., Gerber Systems, Honeywell, Inc., Digital Equipment Corp., Sackman Associates, Rockwell Collins International, Wild Magnavox Satellite Survey, Zeta Laboratories, Carl Schenck, EZ Logic Data, International Imaging Systems, Semetex Corp., and Thermo Jarrell Ash Corporation.

Other American companies also provided Iraq with the chemical or biological compounds, or the facilities and equipment used to create the compounds for chemical and biological warfare. Among these suppliers were the following:

* Alcolac International, a Baltimore chemical manufacturer already linked to the illegal shipment of chemicals to Iran, shipped large quantities of thiodiglycol (used to make mustard gas) as well as other chemical and biological ingredients, according to a 1989 story in The New York Times.

*Nu Kraft Mercantile Corp. of Brooklyn (affiliated with the United Steel and Strip Corporation) also supplied Iraq with huge amounts of thiodiglycol, The Times reported.

*Celery Corp., Charlotte, NC

*Matrix-Churchill Corp., Cleveland, OH (regarded as a front for the Iraqi government, according to Representative Henry Gonzalez, Democrat of Texas, who quoted U.S. intelligence documents to this effect in a 1992 speech on the House floor).

That's enough?
If you want more, the list has biblical proportions...

posted July 27, 2004 10:18 PM            

It is a misconception that reference samples are in any way the weaponized versions used in WMD. For instance, some of the agents found in Iraq had a shelf life of something on the order of a few weeks to months. No one would make the claim those were the sophisticated types the US is capable of making and did make at one time. Those were highly stable and had an indefinite shelf life.

By the way, the CDC is the US Center for Disease Control. The CDC is not in any way involved in making weaponized biological or chemical weapons nor are any of the companies mentioned in the reports that were posted.

The CDC is a United States governmental agency under the Department of Health and Human Services which works closely with the medical community to identify and control disease....such as SARS and HIV/AIDS.

To say the US or US companies assisted Iraq in the development and production of biological and/or chemical weapons is shrill rhetoric.

If anyone were going to supply Iraq out of the box weaponized chemical and/or biological weapons, it would have been the Soviet Union which supplied most of Iraq's conventional weapons. The Soviet Union had no scruples about supplying WMD and attempted to place nuclear weapons in Cuba in the early 60's.

This is another topic that's been covered before on this forum but that doesn't seem to matter much to those who would rather continue the fallacy. However, it does raise the issue of their motives.

posted July 28, 2004 02:26 AM              

Hi Jackie! Boy when you come with evidence....YOU COME UP WITH EVIDENCE, don't you! Thanks!

Jwhop....you said..and I quote...

quote:

---

This is another topic that's been covered before on this forum but that doesn't seem to matter much to those who would rather continue the fallacy. However, it does raise the issue of their motives

---

Motives? What the heck are you talking about?

When I started this thread, it was my intention to compare thoughts from two years ago to current thoughts to see how they had changed...if at all....(cuz sometimes some of us like to "flip flop" ya know.) One of the first I checked into, was the WAR ON TERROR one, and found Jackie's posts which pretty much sound like the opinions of many today.....two years later....

No motives that I can think of...unless to show how opinions really hadn't changed in two years...

Love,
Rainbow

posted July 28, 2004 09:49 AM            

that the US supplied weapons to Iraq to use against Iran including chemicals and biologicals.

that the purpose of war with Iraq was to steal Iraqi oil for America and American oil companies

that shaking hands with someone and normalizing relations between countries is a ringing endorsement of all their subsequent actions

that if the US didn't attack all dictatorships at the same time, then the process should not have begun at all

that a war on terrorists and terrorism is futile because we don't know who or where they are

that we should have attacked Saudi Arabia instead and permitted radical Islamic fundamentalists to seize control of the country....because that's what would happen if the royal family fell out of power.

that the US acted unilaterally with respect to the war in Iraq

that Bin Laden was a stronger enemy than Saddam and Bush was somehow afraid to tackle Bin Laden

Two words Rainbow......Bull *hit.

posted July 28, 2004 06:41 PM              

reference samples of anthrax and other toxins are routinely supplied to nations to permit the research necessary for nations to build their own stocks of antitoxins.

That’s fine for me to sent these microbiological samples to the Ministry of Agriculture, to Universities, to drug development agencies of (almost) any nation…the problem it’s to sent these dangerous and "dual-use" components” including a series of agents which have been considered by various nations for use in war because of the diseases they can cause - Anthrax, Botulinum Toxin, Mustard Gas - to a murder dictator…

What did they imagine that Saddam would do with these agents?
A cake?
Great idea, a cake that was big enough to be distributed among the Kurds, the Iranians and the Shiite…

And what about the shipments of germs that CDC sent to the ”Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission”…yes…”Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission”…
What does “Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission” means ?
Anyone knows?

By the way, the CDC is the US Center for Disease Control. The CDC is not in any way involved in making weaponized biological or chemical weapons nor are any of the companies mentioned in the reports that were posted.

I know what CDC is…what I don’t know is if you understood what I wrote.
Let me repeat:

Shipments from the United States to Iraq of the kinds of pathogens later used in Iraq's biological weapons programs, according to records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Senate Banking Committee and U.N. weapons inspectors.

I never said that CDC make it, yet, according to their own records, CDC and a biological sample company, the American Type Culture Collection, sent strains of all the germs Iraq used to make weapons.

quote:

---

…The records show the transfers were done in the 1980s, when the United States supported Iraq in its war against Iran. They were detailed in a 1994 Senate banking committee report and a 1995 follow-up letter from the CDC to the Senate.

A letter from CDC in 1995, points out that the US Government provided nearly two dozen viral and bacterial samples to Iraqi scientists in 1985, including the plague, botulism, and anthrax, among other deadly diseases.
Many of the materials were carried by hand by an Iraqi scientist on a flight to Baghdad. He'd just spent three months training in the CDC's Washington laboratory.

The CDC also sent samples directly to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission, and to another agency developing weapons of mass destruction, the chemical and biological weapons complex at al Muthanna. The sales were legal at the time and were administered by the Department of Commerce. The record shows.

USA Today- 09/30/2002
Washington Times- 10/01/ 2002
ABC.net
NEWSWEEK

---

To say the US or US companies assisted Iraq in the development and production of biological and/or chemical weapons is shrill rhetoric.

I said that based on sources that I believe be reliable:

quote:

---

The New York Times March 29, 1984:
“…American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name...”

“…Iraq purchased large amounts of weapons and military hardware from American firms. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982…”

---

quote:

---

The Washington Post, on Jan. 1, 1984 reported that the “United States’ policy had shifted in support of Iraq. The U.S. informed friendly Persian Gulf nations that the defeat of Iraq in the 3-year-old war with Iran would be ‘contrary to U.S. interests’ and has made several moves to prevent that result.”

---

quote:

---

UPI, on March, 1984 reported that “Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers in the 43-month Persian Gulf War between Iran and Iraq, a team of UN experts has concluded... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, U.S. presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz on the Gulf War before leaving for an unspecified destination.”

---

This is another topic that's been covered before on this forum but that doesn't seem to matter much to those who would rather continue the fallacy. However, it does raise the issue of their motives.

Jwhop, when I want to understand a subject I study.
Based on books, serious and respected newspapers, vehicles of information that I trust, documentaries, scientists and studious of the subject, I create my concept that you affirm is a fallacy...

Now I ask you:
Based on what You say that my statements are fallacies and just rhetoric?
Which are your sources?
Why are all these newspapers lying?
The letter of CDC is also a lie?

Please, don't come with the old story that they are all communist, socialists, anarchists or any other ists...

It would be a too simplistic statement for an intelligent man as you are.

In my “OPINION” – until now - it's beyond question that the US was supporting Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war…you can deny that, it’s your “OPINION” and I respect.

My opinion is not crystallized, that’s why I’m waiting for someone to prove me the opposite.
Unhappily, everything that I read up to now in this Forum on these two years were just ideological wars, based on dogmas, not in facts…

The only thing I want you – and everybody else - to know is that I may hate this game, yet, I don’t hate the players.

Jackie

“Here is the Gulf War story the goverment does not want the American people to know:” www.gulfwarvets.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000083.html
http://www.gulfwarvetlawsuit.com/nyt31603.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm
http://www.gulfwarvetlawsuit.com/newyork%20news.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul58.html

posted July 28, 2004 06:55 PM              

My Mercury is in Virgo - the same as Jwhop- that's why I love details...

Dinner is served and my husband is waiting... ... ... but I'll be back.

posted July 29, 2004 01:39 AM            

In 1980, Iran began complaining about Iraq using chemical warfare against them. Mind you, that was years before Rumsfeld met and shook the hand of Iraqis and years before normalization of relations between the US and Iraq. There had been not a relationship between the US and Iraq since the Arab/Israeli war of 1967 and diplomatic relations had been broken off.

16 November 1980
Iran publishes its first allegation of an Iraqi CW attack. [Note: As shown directly below, there are varying reports as to when exactly Iraq began using CW against Iranian troops in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988).]
—"Timeline for Iraq's Use of Chemical Weapons," in Gordon M. Burck and Charles C. Flowerree, International Handbook on Chemical Weapons Proliferation (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1991), p. 32.
16 November 1980
The Iranian Chief of Staff Office alleges that the Iraqis used "chemical weapons that caused blisters" and "spread germs" during a battle in the Southwestern city of Susangerd that left many civilian and military casualties. While the chemical substance was never specified, journalists speculated about the use of napalm.
—"Iran Claims Biggest Victory of War," Associated Press, 18 November 1980; "Iran Foreign Ministry Statement on Iraq's "Germ" Warfare," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 19 November 1980; "Iran Seeks Outside Inquiry on Chemical-arms Claims," Christian Science Monitor, 19 November 1980; "Iran Statement on Iraq's 'Inhuman' Weapons," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 19 November 1980; "Iraqi Troops Storm Susangerd," Associated Press, 16 November 1980; Alex Efty, "International News," Associated Press, 17 November 1980; Alex Efty, "Iran Claims Iraqis Retreat from Susangerd," Associated Press, 17 November 1980; Loren Jenkins, "Iraqis Press Major Battle in Gulf War; Iraqis Press Drive Against Susangerd in Major Campaign; Iran Says Enemy Launches Big Push Against Susangerd," Washington Post, 17 November 1980; Farouk Nassar, "Iranian Warplanes Hit Kuwaiti Outpost," Associated Press, 16 November 1980.
9 January 1981
SIPRI reports in 1985 that on this day Iraq began using CW against Iranian troops. Tehran Radio claimed that "Iraqis used napalm and "chemical warfare bombs" in their attacks on Ahvaz, Southwestern Iran.
—World Armaments and Disarmament: SIPRI Yearbook 1985 (London: Taylor and Francis, 1985); Nicolas Tatro, "Iran Vows to Fight On Whatever the Cost," Associated Press, 10 January 1980.
[Note: The SIPRI reports cites the following news report: Pars News Agency; quoted in Guardian (London), 10 January 1981.] http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Chemical/2340.html

Use of chemical weapons during the war with Iran

In 1980 the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency filed a report asserting that Iraq had been actively acquiring chemical weapons capacities for several years. Subsequent events proved that this estimate was very likely correct.
In 1982 Iraqi forces started deploying chemical weapons against Iranian troops. In 1983 the use was greatly increased.

Note Jackie, the US Defense Intelligence Agency filed the report in 1980, years before the US became in any way involved with Iraq. Note also the report says Iraq had been working on a chemical weapon capability for several years before 1980. Ask yourself, why the DIA would file a report within the US government system to alert the government Iraq was acquiring a chemical weapon if in fact it was the US government who gave Iraq the capability. Hell, they would already know that.
http://www.wordiq.com/cgi-bin/smartsearch/smartsearch.cgi?keywords=Iraq+and+weapons+of+mass+destruction&search=SEARCH+NOW&radio_type=knowledge

From textile sizing to poisoning:
how thiodiglycol was made to lose its way

There are two basic routes to manufacture mustard gas, one of which uses the industrial chemical thiodiglycol. As Iraq scaled up its chemical weapons program it found it easier to buy precursors than to make them. The easiest place to do this was in the Far East where export regulations are particularly slack. Iraq and Iran (as it tried to obtain the ability to retaliate in kind) stripped Japan of its stocks of the mustard gas precursor thiodiglycol by 1986. Iran then tried to use the large petrochemical company Phillips Petroleum as a source, but was rebuffed when Phillips became uneasy about the deal. The broker for Iran then picked the small New Jersey-based company Alcolac International as a single source. Morton Thiokol subsequently declined to supply thiodiglycol to Iraq and Alcolac then had the opportunity to also supply Baghdad. Alcolac turned out to be a reliable and compliant source for both sides until the operations were broken up by U.S. Customs in mid-1988. Procurement for Teheran was led by an Iranian diplomat, Karim Ali Sobhani, and a Czech-born German (Peter Walaschek). A Dutch national, Frans van Anraat, and a Japanese national, Charles Tanaka, were responsible obtaining thiodiglycol for Iraq. Export of thiodiglycol from the United States is restricted because of its use in the synthesis of chemical weapons and Tanaka reasoned that having one US company purchase it from another was not going to provoke interest the way a foreign transaction would. Several of the purchases for Iraq started on the road by being sold to US companies that Tanaka had friendly dealings with. The first dealings were with the California company Technalloy Chemical Corp., but transfer of the thiodiglycol across country was time-consuming and expensive. Later shipments used a front company (an empty warehouse in Brooklyn, New York) called Nu Kraft Mercantile that was owned by United Steel and Strip Corp. From Nu Kraft, Iraqi shipments were usually diverted through Europe and Aqaba as the final port before delivery to Baghdad. The Iranians used Singapore and Hong Kong as entrepôts with Pakistan as the last stop before unloading at Bandar Abbas. During one of the Iranian transfers to Singapore, Alcolac had the misfortune to run into a freight forwarder who refused to alter the accurate declarations made on shipping documents to ones that would cover up the shipment and Alcolac was forced to alter the documents itself. A common practice was to replace the previously stated destination on the shipping declaration with the vague “Goods in Transit.” If the freight forwarder had reported the incident to the local customs authorities, Alcolac could have been identified as a supplier sooner than it eventually was. This source was exposed when the paper trail started showing errors that brought it to the attention of the U.S. Customs Service. The Customs Service had had its attention to drawn to chemical weapon precursors by the then-recent Iraqi gas attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja. Two such errors included labeling the material by a trade name (Kromfax) rather than by its chemical name as required, and filling out an order for a European supplier (Walaschek’s West German employer, Colimex GmbH & Co.) with a final destination in Asia (Singapore). Furthermore, the quantities being shipped were enormous. Alcolac sold its thiodiglycol to textile industries and was shipping enough to supply the entire Western European textile industry for years.
http://www.cbwinfo.com/General/Proliferation/Thiodiglycol.html

Yes, the CDC sent reference samples to Iraq in the 1980's and the articles make it sound like they were sent to destinations the US knew were involved with biological weapons research and manufacture. In reality, they were not addressed to "Saddam's Biological Warfare Production Facility" but to Universities. I have no idea why one shipment was sent to the Iraq Atomic Energy Dept. It makes no sense whatsoever and I would question the truth of that statement.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent samples directly to several Iraqi sites that U.N. weapons inspectors determined were part of Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program, CDC and congressional records from the early 1990s show. Iraq had ordered the samples, saying it needed them for legitimate medical research.

The CDC and a biological-sample company, the American Type Culture Collection, sent strains of all the germs Iraq used to make weapons, including anthrax, the bacteria that make botulinum toxin, and the germs that cause gas gangrene, the records show. Iraq also got samples of other deadly pathogens, including West Nile virus.
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp

I repeat, all of Iraq's conventional weapons were of French and Soviet Union manufacturer and no American made guns, tanks, planes, mortars, rifles, helicopters, etc., were found in Iraq nor were any used by Iraq in the 1st Gulf War.

I'll leave it to your good sense to see from published reports that Saddam used a wide ranging array of devices and deceptions to obtain the precursors used to manufacture chemical weapons, including dummy companies, mislabeling contents, shipping materials to forwarding companies and all the rest. None of that would have been necessary if the US government was involved and approved of Saddam obtaining WMD. You might be interested to know some US companies who participated in the charade were prosecuted by the Justice Dept for bypassing export rules for those shipments..

OK Jackie, I'm finished and have no intention of spending any more time running down references to the origin of Iraq's WMD of whatever type. Those who wish to believe the US gave Saddam Hussein biological and chemical weapons to use against Iran could not be convinced otherwise since their belief system that the US is evil depends on their believing every word anyone says or prints that it's true and conversely scoffing at any proof that it isn't.