Actually, if you bothered to find out some information on this particular subject and did some reading you would find that Russia was the no. 1 arms seller followed by that other virtuous nation, France. Russia, seven billion; France, billion; USA three hundred million. Does that absolve the USA? No, but it does make it pretty clear who profited most. Furthermore, there is very strong evidence now that Russia (and less strong evidence for France) was still selling weapons after the sactions were in place!

Next point, oil for food and the sanctions regime were imposed by the UN. Many countries supported them, but none of the permanent members blocked the sanctions at any stage. Plus, it is now emerging tha Kofi-Annan's son was a key player in avoiding the sanctions and helping Saddam Hussein stay in power.

The BBC, not widely known for their support of the war or Bush, broadcast a documentary before the war that looked into this very issue. They found that the Iraqi regime was not spending the money it had on the medical aid that was needed. They had over five hundred million sitting in an account for medical supplies that Saddam would not allow the organization to use!

One last point, why were sanctions the right thing to do in South Africa (where the regime was nasty) but not in Iraq? The left called for sanctions in one, and their removal in the other. Is this a double standard or just plain anti-Americanism for its own sake.

Edited by NickinOX (30 Oct 2004 3:07am)

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

I did read your post and nowhere did you specify WMD, you stated weapons. Weapons are amrs. You did not even bother to properly read your own post. Furthermore, Russia provided the shells and artillery used to fire the mustard gas when Iraq killed an estimated 183,000 in chemical weapons attacks, the most famous being at Falluja. America provided anthrax and bottulism serum. It is not certain where the mustard gas and sarin came from, though America is as likely guilty as France, Russia and Germany. Of course Germany constructed the underground storage facilities for the chemical weapons that Iraq owned. Mind you Iraq is none of their faults are they are not America.

Edited by NickinOX (29 Oct 2004 10:05pm)

Seth

A point that has been often made on this board is that America armed Iraq. America provided some money, but the bulk came from France and Russia. I have never disputed that America assisted. The point I have made is that America is constantly the focus when other countries: France, Russia and to a lesser extent Germany are to a much greater degree culpable of arming and supporting Saddam, for the entire period his regime stood, even after the UN brough in strict sanctions against the exporting of weapons to his regime. France and Russia's massive responsibility is often ignored in favour of bashing the USA.

JCCreedy talked about weapons without specifying if he was talking weapons in general or WMD. There is a big distinction as the USA provided almost no weapons, but did provide about three hundred million in aid to buy them. This is notwhere near the seven billion + provided by Russia and France. I have already listed what toxins America provided, and Russia, France and Germany provided stuff too. Russia is almost certainly the source of the mustard gas used in the attacks at Falluja. Where is the indignation on this boeard for thier behaviour? In addition, Iraqi weapons scientists trained in all the above countries as well as the UK!

Edited by NickinOX (29 Oct 2004 11:43pm)

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Nick

You're right, all the countries you mentioned contributed to Saddam's weapons capabilities in one way or another.

But the US must take most responsibilty for building up Saddam as a bulwark against Iran, which was seen by the US as a greater threat during the Iran/Iraq war.

No nation is innocent, but the US - as the only superpower - must take responsibility to set an example. Otherwise they can't lecture the rest of the world about "democracy" and "freedom" while supporting brutally oppressive dictatorships when it suits their strategic interests.

Edited by Seth (29 Oct 2004 11:43pm)

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

The biggest supporter, both politically and economically of Iraq over the last thirty five years has been Russia. They provided almost all of his armies equipment, except some of the radar and anti-aircraft which came from France. They trained the army, navy and air force. They provided advisors for the whole of the war with Iran. America provided some limited financial and political support. Considering what they spent elsewhere it is a drop in the ocean for them, hence I use the term limited. For example, America provides Egypt, since the settlement with Israel, with 2/3 of the money it provides Israel, or about two billion per year! Russia provided more than 10 times the cash amount than the USA did. France provided almost exactly 10 times the cash America did. Germany built the underground storage facilities for the Iraqi nuclear and chemical programs (bombed by Israel), and nuclear power program used French and Russian scientists! This is why I get so worked up, when America is blamed as though it is to blame. It does bear some responsibility, but France and Russia are by far the chief culprits.

Of course, America was not the only superpower when the arming of Iraq took place. It was also only when America militarily threatened Iraq in the 1980's that Iraq made peace with Iran.

Edited by NickinOX (29 Oct 2004 11:56pm)

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

You are nuts, simply.

Edited by mattwebb (02 Nov 2004 1:36pm)