The Obama Administration is publicly moving toward possible military strikes in Syria, a major escalation in yet another war for the United States. The reason is the likely use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government against rebel controlled areas. In the meantime, documents have been released that show that the United States has been hypocritical on the use of such weapons. According to Foreign Policy magazine (a highly respected publication), the documents show that the Reagan Administration not only knew of the use of chemical weapons by the Iraqi Regime in the Iran-Iraq war but supplied the intelligence and satellite imagery used in the attacks. The CIA then sat on evidence of the attacks while Iraq denied their use.
The Reagan Administration was concerned that Iran would win the war in 1988 and discovered build ups of Iranian forces near weak points in Iraqi lines. The United States supplied Iraq with detailed maps and images and intelligence on the location of the forces, their air support and other intelligence. A former official is quoted as saying that they knew Saddam Hussein was going to use chemical weapons and that the United States had evidence of the use of mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988. The U.S. then assured the public that it had no knowledge about the attacks or acquiesce to the use of chemical weapons.
Of course, the great irony is that we later cited the use of chemical weapons in the war to justify our actions against Iraq in the second Iraq war — insisting that any maniac who would use them in 1988 would use them again. The government never told the American people that the earlier use of chemical weapons was done with our knowledge and tacit support.
Now, the Obama Administration is publicly moving military assets closer to Syria and is preparing for “all contingencies” after the Syrians “crossed the red line” set out by President Obama. Obama has been suggesting that the United States would attack if chemical weapons were used. He has already intervened in the supply and training of rebel forces in the country.
The recent release of documents, again, show a shocking degree of duplicity and dishonesty in our foreign policy on such issues. Notably, the Reagan Administration debated whether Iran could prove the attacks and advised that the international response was likely to be muted. Indeed, the biggest use of the attacks would come later . . . when we cited it in support of our second Iraqi war under George W. Bush.
Source: Foreign Policy
bill mcwilliams.
“NASA propaganda isn’t credible of anything except as proof that it was all the most expensive hoax in history.”
Even a more expensive hoax than the current wars of aggression? Um, sorry, I meant the perpetual wars of taxation for everlasting salvation.
Enemies; everywhere, even on the moon.
Bill,
To echo Gene. There is no censorship on this site. We have all had comments eaten by Word Press.
Darren, Depleted Uranium in munitions is causing an epidemic of birth defects and death among newborns in Iraq. It is also making ill and killing salvagers and the people that clear debris to clear the way for rebuilding. I have seen a TV show about it (maybe “VICE”) and read several articles on the Internet. I could not bear to look at some of the pictures of the newborns and stillborn babies: the damage was monstrous. I have also seen some of those photos from the first Gulf War.
Thanks for the link, that’s one place I didn’t go. I know! Much as I love Wikipedia I didn’t check out their entry. That graph on birth defects is a pretty stark indictment for DU weapons as in the information regarding Gulf War syndrome and the information regarding Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. The article is well worth the reading.
bill,
The point is, and that comment proves it, is that you aren’t censored here.
Really.
Run along now.
bk,
I’m not a fan of fission power. As you note, it is more than messy. But it was and is a necessary step to developing fusion (which would be much more efficient and cleaner) and even in some ways a necessary stepping stone to the ultimate goal of anti-matter technology (which would have perfect efficiency and be totally clean). However, the capacity to weaponize anti-matter technology is a truly frightening prospect given our species proclivities.
Personally, I think it will be a miracle if we survive our technological adolescence, but personally my money is on genetic engineering leading to our downfall.
That may also be a limit on the Drake Equation; maybe most intelligent technological species don’t survive their own technological development once it begins to accelerate faster than their societies and people can adapt.
Gene.gene — if your comment was any more false, I’d say you are not only full of it, but you act like a silly old goose.
If you can refute this detailed analysis of the Apollo Moon landings hoax, I’d like to see it. But you can’t, so you won’t. Neither will you acknowledge that there’s no credible evidence that any human has ever been higher in space than low-earth orbit — about 350 miles max.
NASA propaganda isn’t credible of anything except as proof that it was all the most expensive hoax in history.
Refute THIS, gene. http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html
Gene, We should back even further and uninvent nuclear power. Its poisons cannot be sufficiently dispersed.
Darren,
DU munitions are one of those things I wish we as a species could “uninvent”.
bill,
To be clear, you think the moon landing was a hoax among other loopy things. The content of most of your comments is sufficient invitation to insult all on its own and requires no further assistance. You have never been censored here. Not once. Ridiculed? Certainly. But that is a self-inflicted wound. When people claim ridiculous things with no substantive proof, they get . . . ridicule. Imagine that.
Darren, I agree with you re: DU.
Lottakatz:
I agree most strongly with your comment about the WP use in Iraq. I would also like to point out to the other readers here about the useage of Depleted Uranium in munitions. I have been opposed to this ever since after the first gulf war (perhaps several years after I don’t remember exactly when) I read on a website compiled by some authorities in Iraq, and written in English, depicting all the children who were born with deformities and handicapps attributed to the usage of DU weaponry, many very shocking to witness.
Admittedly, for the first two or three minutes after I first began reading that website, I had a great amount of skeptacism considering where it was coming from in that we had been at war with this gov’t. But it became readily apparent this was not a form of exaggeration or bending the truth or propaganda for a bad purpose. The text was written from the heart and mind and what it described was so outrageous, there clearly was no need to exaggerate anything.
I then did some research on my own and afterward the Iraqi website to me was fully credible. I was so dismayed that anyone would use such weapons that if for some fantastic reason I was president I would have issued an executive order banning their use from that day forward.
But we and other countries continue to have these munitions available. The Wikipedia website has some good general information on DU and its effects. Pay particular note to the graph depicting birth defects in Basara, that alone is enough to be convincing in my book.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium
” dismayed that anyone would use such weapons ”
What strikes me is that these weapons differ from others designed for the same purpose only by a matter of degree.
DU is used because of its density. So there is no effect that is different in kind. If you want the effect of a poisonous gas you are sort of locked into using a poison gas. If you want the effects of a nuclear device you sort of have to use an atomic bomb – nothing else comes close.
DU may offer excellent characteristics in an anti tank weapon but there are alternatives. Any lack of efficiency in a similar weapon can be compensated by factors like additional projectile velocity, hardening, or increased explosive charge.
The claim is that as weapons they are generally safe to use. But that safety refers to the troops that employ the weapons – not to the civilian populations that move back and inhabit the areas where battles took place.
The facts is we are threatening our genetic endowment for the sake of efficiency in a military weapon when alternatives are easily available.
Does that make sense – any sense at all?
Pat said:
“Just wondering if there is a connection between weird acting spam filters and criticism of the current administration, the CIA and past policies of former administrations”
Good question. It appears to be the case that the gatekeeper simply insults and invites others to insult and attempt to demean comments that stray from
NPR-acceptable copy.
Here’s some more “ridiculous crap” for you Frank… Who could Sergei Lavrov be referring to here? Hmmm… what non-US friendly nation has everything to gain by setting up ANOTHER bogus-war (i.e. USA v. SW Asia?) to enhance their lofty dreams of home-self-defense-cover-stories hiding their arrogant desire for global petroleum dominance larger than Saudi Arabia? Who has NO TROOPS embedded with Americans and allies in SW Asia war-theater? Who is constantly trying to “hatch” plans to implicate IT’S ENEMIES as “our” (i.e. USA) enemies? What country has a it’s own built-in very powerful lobby committee in Washington DC which literally feels it “controls America”?
It’s not hard to see who Lavrov is talking about. No wonder NSA is ALLEGEDLY spying on UN video conferences. Guess who sits in on them? Like Michael Corelioni said: “Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.” I feel this alone justifies NSA spying on our so-called “friends”. The CIA can’t do it as they aren’t allowed to even mention these people let alone spy on them.
BTW – Saddam Hussein was a CIA asset for George HW Bush when he was director of CIA. It’s common knowledge that Donald Rumsfeld delivered all that chemical stuff to him back in the day. Saddam promptly used it on the Kurds in Northern Iraq and not it’s intended victims – IRAN. How do you think George W Bush was sure Saddam had WMD’s? Because POPPA gave them to him!
The CIA has had it’s sights on IRAN since the 1950’s under Mosaddegh. It hasn’t stopped yet…
My comments to your page are being deleted. Immediet, this comment cannot be posted. One had info on empty Sarin gas canisters found… with Saudi marking…
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 10:39:02 +0000 To: kualapilah77@hotmail.com
No, just no. Another front in a country we have no reason to be militarily engaged in.
Pat, white phosphorus and napalm were outlawed for use on civilians in 1980 with an amendment to the Geneva Conventions. White phosphorus can be used to illuminate as well as screen and can be used on military targets. It’s all BS. whenever you drop WP over cities (like Gaza) whatever the reason it lands somewhere and if civilians are there they are in deep trouble. Such disgusting weapons have been/are used widely and shouldn’t be IMO. Check out the list on known incidents of use:
***
“The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, not the Chemical Weapons Convention, goes on, in its Protocol III, to prohibit the use of all air-delivered incendiary weapons against civilian populations, or for indiscriminate incendiary attacks against military forces co-located with civilians.[96] However, that protocol also specifically excludes weapons whose incendiary effects are secondary, such as smoke grenades. This has often been read as excluding white phosphorus munitions from this protocol, as well. Several countries, most notably Israel, are not signatories to Protocol III.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus
It’s not the filter, comments are submitted to the NSA first for approval.
Hows that for conspiracy ROTFLMFAO
“comments are submitted to the NSA first for approval.”
That’s the ticket.
You see, somebody really does read my remarks with thought and care.
Gene
it’s dick cheney, the evil is extending into the ether.
“The filters are acting a little weird this morning. It took a long time for your posts to appear after I freed them from the spam filter and approved them.”
Just wondering if there is a connection between weird acting spam filters and criticism of the current administration, the CIA and past policies of former administrations.
With that being said does anyone know when it became illegal to use white phosphorus? Because it was used extensively in Vietnam.
BTW, we (the GBs) are doing our best to keep the spam filter cleaned out and apologize for the inconvenience to anyone. If it is any consolation, the problem is trying to eat our comments as well.