Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did I just learn that Saddam do NOT kill all those Kurds according to the senate intelligence

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:19 PM
Original message
Did I just learn that Saddam do NOT kill all those Kurds according to the senate intelligence
committee? That is the last hold out that right wingers say that "justifies" the war in Iraq.


Letterman: Let me ask you a question was there more heinous, more dangerous violence taking place before in Iraq, or is there more heinous, dangerous violence taking place now in Iraq?

O'Reilly: Oh, stop it. Saddam Hussein slaughtered 300,000 to 400,000 people, all right, so knock it off It isn't so black and white, Dave it isn't, 'We're a bad country. Bush is an evil liar.' That's not true.

Letterman: I didn't say he was an evil liar. You're putting words in my mouth, just the way you put artificial facts in your head!

Dave concedes at the end that he has "no idea what he's talking about", but added that neither does Bill. It seems Dave was on to something. A fact check of Bill's assertion that Ansar al-Islam worked with the approval of Saddam Hussein's government is wholly unsupported by the Senate Intelligence Committee report (.pdb) released a few moths ago that is the most definitive work to date on the glaring differences between pre-war rhetoric and post-war reality.

(For a breakdown of O'Reilly's disingenuous claim (i.e. lie), read the rest of this story)

The Senate Intelligence Committee writes on pages 71-72 that Saddam had virtually no control over the northern Kurdistan region of Iraq, that there were flaws that "undermined confidence in the reporting" of such a relationship and that Ansar al-Islam that was not "a branch of al Qaeda." Furthermore, Saddam's regime had no contact with the group other than to possibly infiltrate it to gather intelligence. The report concludes on page 110: "Postwar information reveals that Baghdad viewed Ansar al-Islam as a threat to the regime and that the IIS attempted to collect intelligence on the group."

In other words, not only does Bill grasp at straws to justify the unjustifiable namely, a working relationship between Saddam Hussein and terrorist groups that legitimized invasion he mischaracterizes a relationship that is highly dubious at best and completely non-existent at worst to do so. It's amazing that Bush-supporters still try to use these unsubstantiated claims in order to somehow validate the all-out, guns-a-blazing, disastrous war we have waged.

The report also shows that not only did Saddam not have a relationship with al Qaeda, he distrusted them so greatly that he even tried to capture Zarqawi shattering the Bush administrations most potent conspiracy theory. For anyone who hasn't read the the reports conclusions, they're absolutely shocking in that it conclusively show that all pre-war claims were bogus including Niger yellow-cake, aluminum tubes and Atta-in-Prague the were the "strongest" pieces of evidence indicating a WMD program and Saddam-al-Qaeda link.

Farleft has the full transcript
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. There was an intelligence report that quoted some
source saying that it wasn't the Iraqi forces that killed the Kurds during the Anfal campaign. It was pretty much raw data.

There were many other reports saying the opposite.

The final analysis was that Saddam's guys were responsible for the Kurdish deaths.

But if Iraq didn't do it, that's just one more reason that can be used to attack Iran, isn't it?

Link to Farleft, and save people 10 seconds of Googling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Sorry I thought I had put up the link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. That was when Iraq was an ally of Reagan and Poppy Bush.
It is every bit as false as the WMD reports coming out of the current junta/administration.

WRH is also a hate site and shouldn't be cited for anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. scott ritter found evidence that the Iranians gassed
iraqi/kurdish villages. as for saddam, he probably did use gas but there maybe no forensic evidence that he did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-29-06 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Predates Scott Ritter...
IIRC, a Canadian newspaper report back in 1988-89 that it was unclear if the Iraqi's or the Iranians gassed the village, and that in any case, it may have been a case of "friendly fire" from the Iraqi's.

Think about it -- you have a hostile army in front of you, so why would you waste precious munitions on a bunch on non-combatants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Subsequent investigations by human rights
organizations have established Iraq's guilt beyond any kind of reasonable doubt.

And Halabja was not the only Kurdish village that Saddam gassed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. There is a TON of evidence that Saddam
gassed Kurdish evidence--including forensic evidence.

There is no credible evidence that Iran did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Got a link?
No offense, but without some source documentation, your opinion isn't credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. This has been discussed ad nauseam here, but here's
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Thanks...
I can't guarantee that I'll read it all, but thanks for the information.

If I had a link to the alternate view, I'd post it, but I've been Googling with no success.

All I remember is that a Canadian newspaper cast some doubts as to whether the Iraqi Army was responsible. In particular it noted that the agent used in the attack was one more commonly used by the Iranian Army (they were both gassing each other fairly regularly). But as I said, I can't find the article any more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
5. Well the DIA says Iran....
from http://foi.missouri.edu/polinfoprop/warcrime.html


The accusation that Iraq has used chemical weapons against its citizens is a familiar part of the debate. The piece of hard evidence most frequently brought up concerns the gassing of Iraqi Kurds at the town of Halabja in March 1988, near the end of the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. President Bush himself has cited Iraq's "gassing its own people," specifically at Halabja, as a reason to topple Saddam Hussein.

..cut..

And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas.

The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent that is, a cyanide-based gas which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. It has been established that Saddam had no
Al Qaeda relationship; of course this was a lie used by Bushco. If the truth whether Saddam was responsible for the gassed Kurds is ever revealed and it proved that Saddam was not responsible, it would be just another lie spouted by the Bush administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BikeWriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-29-06 07:35 AM
Response to Original message
8. Could you give us another clue as to where to find this?
I've never heard of "Farleft".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-29-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. Was this before or after he killed the Kuwaiti incubator babies?
If Junior and his presstitutes are flogging it, you can be sure it's trumped-up bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 23rd 2014, 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC