Daily Kos

Saddam: Justice and The Memory Hole

Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 05:59:52 PM PDT

So Saddam is guilty of crimes against humanity?

The former Iraqi dictator and six subordinates were convicted and sentenced for the 1982 killings of 148 people in a single Shiite town after an attempt on his life there.

How about those who helped?


Video link. Don Rumsfeld shakes hands with our ally. December 20, 1983.

Sure, the timing of the verdict condemning Saddam Hussein was designed to help the GOP. That's ugly.

But the bigger ugliness -- the only question not being asked this weekend -- is the one about US foreign policy. A policy where a murdering raping thug like Saddam Hussein could serve as an "ally" until he was no longer "useful". A policy that to this day embraces dictators and thugs and kleptocrats in countries like Uzbekistan and Colombia.

This is an important question if you're trying to understand why "they" hate "us", is it not?

...in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of states supporting international terrorism... The U.S. restored formal relations with Iraq in November 1984, but the U.S. had begun, several years earlier, to provide it with intelligence and military support (in secret and contrary to this country's official neutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President Ronald Reagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward the Middle East.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Even if he's a murdering criminal?

By the summer of 1983 Iran had been reporting Iraqi use of using chemical weapons for some time. The Geneva protocol requires that the international community respond to chemical warfare, but a diplomatically isolated Iran received only a muted response to its complaints [Note 1]. It intensified its accusations in October 1983, however, and in November asked for a United Nations Security Council investigation.

The U.S., which followed developments in the Iran-Iraq war with extraordinary intensity, had intelligence confirming Iran's accusations, and describing Iraq's "almost daily" use of chemical weapons, concurrent with its policy review and decision to support Iraq in the war. The intelligence indicated that Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces, and, according to a November 1983 memo, against "Kurdish insurgents" as well [Document 25].

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Even if he uses chemical weapons on civilians.

Throughout the period that Rumsfeld was Reagan's Middle East envoy, Iraq was frantically purchasing hardware from American firms, empowered by the White House to sell. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982. According to a February 13, 1991 Los Angeles Times article:

"First on Hussein's shopping list was helicopters -- he bought 60 Hughes helicopters and trainers with little notice. However, a second order of 10 twin-engine Bell "Huey" helicopters, like those used to carry combat troops in Vietnam, prompted congressional opposition in August, 1983... Nonetheless, the sale was approved."

In 1984, according to The LA Times, the State Department--in the name of "increased American penetration of the extremely competitive civilian aircraft market"--pushed through the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million, were originally designed for military purposes. The New York Times later reported that Saddam "transferred many, if not all [of these helicopters] to his military."

In 1988, Saddam's forces attacked Kurdish civilians with poisonous gas from Iraqi helicopters and planes. U.S. intelligence sources told The LA Times in 1991, they "believe that the American-built helicopters were among those dropping the deadly bombs."

In response to the gassing, sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the US Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most US technology. The measure was killed by the White House.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Because it's good for business.

A 1994 congressional inquiry also found that dozens of biological agents, including various strains of anthrax, had been shipped to Iraq by US companies, under licence from the commerce department.

...

The only occasion that Iraq's use of banned weapons seems to have worried the Reagan administration came in 1988, after Lt Col Francona toured the battlefield on the al-Faw peninsula in southern Iraq and reported signs of sarin gas.

"When I was walking around I saw atropine injectors lying around. We saw decontamination fluid on vehicles, there were no insects," said Mr Francona, who has written a book on shifting US policy to Iraq titled Ally to Adversary. "There was a very quick response from Washington saying, 'Let's stop our cooperation' but it didn't last long - just weeks."

He was our son of a bitch. And no matter how much blowback we get, we never stop to ask ourselves if we ought to stop creating more blowback. We never stop to ask. Maybe that's why "they" hate "us"?

Poll

Are we ever going to have a real dialogue about our foreign policy?

42%8 votes
21%4 votes
36%7 votes

| 19 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: Saddam Hussein, US foreign policy, kleptocrats, imperialism, Donald Rumsfeld, Ronald Reagan, genocide, international law, justice, blowback (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 12 comments

  •  I have to go see an important documentary... (12+ / 0-)

    back later.

    There is another almost identical diary two down from this. Perhaps that should be the home of this discussion (if there is a discussion)?

    •  Excellent diary - Sanctions killed by WH (2+ / 0-)

      Excellent diary, tigger. Great minds think alike? Of course, the news today made this coincidence a lot more likely. It looks like there's already more of a discussion going on here, so I would say that it should stay here. And you've got great details on weapons sales to Iraq.

      The sanctions on Iraq for using chemical weapons, mentioned above, which the White House killed, are detailed in this Boston Globe story. That story was linked to from the front page, but I thought it would be useful to have a link to it from here.

      We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.

      by dconrad on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 07:14:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for that link (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        dconrad

        I had not seen that article.

        In 1988, Saddam Hussein launched extensive chemical weapons attacks on the Kurds, killing tens of thousands. Senator Kennedy strongly supported sanctions on Iraq in order to stop these ongoing crimes, but was opposed by the Reagan administration. National security adviser Colin Powell coordinated the opposition to Senate-passed sanctions legislation in 1988, while Defense Secretary Dick Cheney was part of the first President Bush's national security team that opposed efforts to revive the sanctions bill in 1989 and 1990.

        That speaks for itself, doesn't it? All the same evil players running our country today were busying coddling the butcher of Baghdad. Saddam : They were for him, before they were against him.

  •  don't know if you should switch- (3+ / 0-)

    -personally I recommended your diary for starting with the Devil's Handshake picture. I've been saying these things (especially the biologicals) since they occurred and it's wonderful to find I'm not the only voice in the wilderness.

    all of us are pupils in the eyes of God

    by SassyFrass on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:06:59 PM PDT

  •  I would love to see this chronology (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ek hornbeck

    on CNN/MSNBC.

    "Shortly after the atrocities for which Sadam has been sentenced, Donald Rumsfeld had a friendly visit with the tyrant"

  •  He was our son of a bitch. (0+ / 0-)

    "The system is a fraud". Mutabaruka

    our foreign policy, run largely to benefit certain corporations for the last 100 years-- is a fraud. this is why we are hated.

    democrats in congress who continue to support this bullshit are also a fraud.

    Hussein must be made an example for other dictators (the two or three in central Asia we currently fund) i.e. don't go off the reservation when it comes to your oil and natural gas.

    "Cigna cannot decide who is going to live and who is going to die." -- Nataline's mother

    by Superpole on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:14:42 PM PDT

    •  text of my LTE back in the days of Freedom Fries: (4+ / 0-)

         

       Over and over in the news we hear the phrase “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” In fact isn’t that what we are fighting to destroy? At least those weapons belonging to our “enemy.” Remember back in December [2002], when Saddam Hussein finally turned over “the documents” pertaining to his “program” and it turned out to be close to 12,000 pages, not including the additional CD’s? At that time, no journalists were allowed to actually see any contents, so the world saw only pictures of them spread out on the tables.  Then, before anyone outside the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the United States, Russia, France, China and Britain) could examine them, the United States took them, and removed the parts pertaining to which companies, in which countries, had spent the last several decades supplying chemicals, rocketry, logistics, biologicals, and weapons- atomic and conventional- to Iraq. “Secretary General of the UN Kofi Annan accepted that it was 'unfortunate' that his organization had allowed the US to take the only complete dossier and edit it.” The stated reason for censorship before it was presented to the world at large was the agreement among those five permanent members that the “contents were 'risky' in terms of security on weapons proliferation.”
            Well  that certainly sounds sensible- we wouldn’t want to jeopardize security, right? But think about it for a minute. Iraq was producing these documents so the world could see what they supposedly had and where they got it. Now, why would the permanent members of the Security Council want to cover that up? Unless, a country like France were on the list. Would that explain why they don’t want war? Recently we’ve heard that France supplied parts to the Iraqi air force, and America has gone on a frenzy of France-bashing. But if that were the only problem (and remember, we’re not even talking about oil production contracts or the after-war reconstruction here, only about who’s been making money arming Saddam all these years) then wouldn’t America want the world to know?  American sources said it was Iraq that thought disclosure would “jeopardize” the situation, but it was Iraq that leaked the news to a German newspaper. France did have a long list of corporations that have supplied many things to Iraq. Eight French companies were named. The problem here is that France is not first on the list. Eighty German corporations also supplied most types of weaponry to Iraq. And so did Great Britain, Russia, Belgium, The Netherlands, Japan, China, Spain, and Sweden, pretty much in that order. All of these countries are home to corporations that supplied Iraq with atomic and conventional weapons and the rocketry and logistics necessary to use them. Most but not all of these countries (Russia, Japan, and Sweden did not) have also provided chemical weaponry. The biggest problem- the “risk to security” that the US did not want made public- is that with eight corporations, France is not number two, or even number three on the list, either. At seventeen companies, Great Britain comes in third. The country that hosts twenty-four corporations, and a variety of government ministries and laboratories that have supplied all of the above to Iraq, is the United States. Not only that, the only place that Iraq acquired biologicals (anthrax, the plague, and others) was American Type Culture Collection, in Maryland, USA.
          This information is all out there on the internet, for anyone who wants a little Freedom of information with their fries.

      So I was wondering, lately, where the US Web Archive Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer fits in to the picture. Sure it was in Arabic, but where did the initial information come from?

      all of us are pupils in the eyes of God

      by SassyFrass on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:40:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for the memories... (0+ / 0-)

    George Eastman and the Kodak Camera
    "You press the button, we do the rest" promised George Eastman in 1888 with this advertising slogan for his Kodak camera.George Eastman wanted to simplify photography and make it available to everyone, not just trained photographers. In 1883, Eastman announced the invention of photographic film in rolls. Kodak the company was born in 1888 when the first Kodak camera entered the market. Pre-loaded with enough film for 100 exposures, the Kodak camera could easily be carried and handheld during its operation. After the film was exposed (all the shots taken), the whole camera was returned to the Kodak company in Rochester, New York, where the film was developed, prints were made, new photographic film was inserted, and then the camera and prints were returned to the customer.

    George Eastman was one of the first American industrialists to employ a full-time research scientist. Together with his associate, Eastman perfected the first commercial transparent roll film which made possible Thomas Edison’s motion picture camera in 1891.

    "Great men do not commit murder. Great nations do not start wars". William Jennings Bryan

    by ImpeachKingBushII on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:19:01 PM PDT

  •  we will have a real dialogue (0+ / 0-)

    in terms of diplomatic foreign policy sometime after we hold an article v convention.

    it's complicated, but it's likely true.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    Billion dollar presidential campaigns are for losers.

    by john de herrera on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:38:06 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for posting this (2+ / 0-)

    I was hoping someone would have that picture.  It needs to be posted 50 yards from every polling station (or whatever the legal limit is).

Permalink | 12 comments