If Spain leaves the coalition, then who's next?

[Holden]

Gerry Quinn wrote: In article <acd660hr7c25h686gple49f65f5lh0enhq@4ax.com>, Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> wrote: On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 16:47:58 GMT, gerryq@indigo.ie (Gerry Quinn) wrote: If you had anything you'd be able to find it easily (you'd remember enough to find links to these reports). How come everyone else has forgotten the name of this company and this observer too? Are you serious ? I read an article in a newspaper months ago, and because I don't have a link to it that you're claiming I'm hallucinating or lying ? If I remember an article well enough to talk about it, I can usually google for it. Okay, you've said it was subscription only. But claims so extraordinary would surely have been picked up and widely reported. I don;t read the Times (I do read the Sunday Times) but I read many reputable papers. if I'd ever seen a credfible claim that the US sold chemical weapons to Saddam I'd have remembered it. (I've heard *claims* of course - for example Tony Benn has claimed twice on Irish radio shows that Donald Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 to sell him chemical weapons that were later used on the Kurds. But that is rather obviously a lie.) - Gerry Quinn

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

There is a picture in the above link documenting Rumsfeld's visit to Iraq.
Also in the text you'll note -

"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."

So Rumsfeld makes a widely documented visit to Iraq at the same time that
the US is supplying military support and you don't think the two have
anything to do with one another and that the entire thing is one big lie?

[Gerry Quinn]

In article <c51ngj$2n6cdp$1@ID-91786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Holden" <nothx@ihatespam.com> wrote:Gerry Quinn wrote:
(I've heard *claims* of course - for example Tony Benn has claimed twice on Irish radio shows that Donald Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 to sell him chemical weapons that were later used on the Kurds. But that is rather obviously a lie.) - Gerry Quinnhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/There is a picture in the above link documenting Rumsfeld's visit to Iraq.Also in the text you'll note -"in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of statessupporting 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 andmilitary support (in secret and contrary to this country's officialneutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President RonaldReagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National SecurityStudy Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward theMiddle East."So Rumsfeld makes a widely documented visit to Iraq at the same time thatthe US is supplying military support and you don't think the two haveanything to do with one another and that the entire thing is one big lie?

<QUOTE>
"Rumsfeld met with Saddam, and the two discussed regional issues of
mutual interest, shared enmity toward Iran and Syria, and the U.S.'s
efforts to find alternative routes to transport Iraq's oil; its
facilities in the Persian Gulf had been shut down by Iran, and Iran's
ally, Syria, had cut off a pipeline that transported Iraqi oil through
its territory. Rumsfeld made no reference to chemical weapons, according
to detailed notes on the meeting [Document 31].

Rumsfeld also met with Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz, and the two
agreed, "the U.S. and Iraq shared many common interests." Rumsfeld
affirmed the Reagan administration's "willingness to do more" regarding
the Iran-Iraq war, but "made clear that our efforts to assist were
inhibited by certain things that made it difficult for us, citing the
use of chemical weapons, possible escalation in the Gulf, and human
rights." "
<END QUOTE>

Yes, Benn's claim that Rumsfeld went to Iraq to sell chemical weapons to
Saddam is quite obviously a lie. Where in your link is such a claim
supported?

I never claimed that Rumsfeld did not visit Iraq or that the US did not
help Iraq.

- Gerry Quinn

[Holden]

Gerry Quinn wrote: In article <c51ngj$2n6cdp$1@ID-91786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Holden" <nothx@ihatespam.com> wrote: Gerry Quinn wrote: (I've heard *claims* of course - for example Tony Benn has claimed twice on Irish radio shows that Donald Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 to sell him chemical weapons that were later used on the Kurds. But that is rather obviously a lie.) - Gerry Quinn http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ There is a picture in the above link documenting Rumsfeld's visit to Iraq. Also in the text you'll note - "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." So Rumsfeld makes a widely documented visit to Iraq at the same time that the US is supplying military support and you don't think the two have anything to do with one another and that the entire thing is one big lie? <QUOTE> "Rumsfeld met with Saddam, and the two discussed regional issues of mutual interest, shared enmity toward Iran and Syria, and the U.S.'s efforts to find alternative routes to transport Iraq's oil; its facilities in the Persian Gulf had been shut down by Iran, and Iran's ally, Syria, had cut off a pipeline that transported Iraqi oil through its territory. Rumsfeld made no reference to chemical weapons, according to detailed notes on the meeting [Document 31]. Rumsfeld also met with Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz, and the two agreed, "the U.S. and Iraq shared many common interests." Rumsfeld affirmed the Reagan administration's "willingness to do more" regarding the Iran-Iraq war, but "made clear that our efforts to assist were inhibited by certain things that made it difficult for us, citing the use of chemical weapons, possible escalation in the Gulf, and human rights." " <END QUOTE> Yes, Benn's claim that Rumsfeld went to Iraq to sell chemical weapons to Saddam is quite obviously a lie. Where in your link is such a claim supported? I never claimed that Rumsfeld did not visit Iraq or that the US did not help Iraq.

Sorry, your post was worded obliquely; I realized after reading another post
that you were referring to the subjects they discussed, not that he did
indeed visit Iraq. Other than that, the point still stands that Rumsfeld
knew and did nothing about it.......talk is cheap, it doesn't cost him
anything to say that he disapproves, but they didn't actually do anything
about it, right? We all know better than to judge a politican by his words
over his actions by now. - Gerry Quinn