Arms entered Iraq through Syrian Firm

[Legion]

Wrong. Mustard Gas and Tabun were known and verified, with suspected Tear Gas, Choking Gas, Arsenic based chemicals, Mycotoxins, and Germ warfare agents.

I don't know i am replying to this at all.

firstly Tear Gas is not a nerve gas. Stop trying to exaggerate its purpose by putting it in the same category with Mustard Gas and Tabun.

secondly Mycotoxins are produced by bio weapons last i checked.

my·co·tox·in ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mk-tksn)
n.
A toxin produced by a fungus

Choking Gasses Natoma...:?

This is what you vision to be an "extensive array"? Again i have fallen victim to your ambiquity. I'd hate to think what you think of western nation's chemical storage...

Again my point rests. This was hardly common knowledge.

huh.... Did or did not UN inspections confirm Iraqi use of chemical weapons in 1984?? God....

Suddenly all the chemical programs become common knowledge because of findings of the use a certain chemicals by Iraq. Like i said, you are inventing.

Who cares what civilians know.

Oh sweet jesus. When you say common knowledge, who am i to assume you are refering to Natoma?

Not a reasonable assumption at all. I mentioned nothing regarding manufacturing. If I meant manufacturing I would have stated manufacturing.

Now i am just confused. You tell me you will directly refer to the subject but you left out exactly to whom your assertions wrt knowing very well. I feel safe in saying you were being deliberately vague.

This is about our governments and intelligence agencies and what they know. Keep assuming and making "believe" statements.

Ah, like area 51 and the alien autopsies...

 

[Legion]

You sound like that judge in Texas that refused to free a man whose dna was tested and it wasnt his semen in the woman that was raped killed for which he was condemend to life in prison. The judge gave the argument "doesnt mean he didnt do it" even tho it was the only evidence at the time to convict him...

You really believe you have evidence as conclusive as DNA evidence in court? Even you have to admitt this implication is completely exaggerated.

Whether Iraq made or imported the wmds it should have produced international condemnation and blockade but it largely didnt. The reaganites were peep on the matter...


In fact importation should have been even more a serious issue for international concertation. As it would have showcased serious probs with proliferation.

Export controls

On 30 March, the US government announced the imposition of 'foreign policy controls' on the export to the Gulf-War belligerents of five chemicals that could be used in the production of mustard and nerve gases. US officials told the press that this had been done in response to an unexpected volume of recent orders from Iraq for those chemicals. They also said that Japan, FR Germany and other unspecified European countries had been exporting the chemicals to Iraq. The British government took action similar to that of Washington on 12 April, adding three more chemicals to the control list (see table). Since then, other European governments have also announced embargoes of varying scope, and on 15 May the Foreign Ministers of the European Community agreed in principle on a common and complementary policy. There are Western press reports of suspicions in Western diplomatic circles in the Middle East that the USSR is shipping intermediates to Iraq through Jordan.

 

[Natoma]

Wrong. Mustard Gas and Tabun were known and verified, with suspected Tear Gas, Choking Gas, Arsenic based chemicals, Mycotoxins, and Germ warfare agents.

I don't know i am replying to this at all.

firstly Tear Gas is not a nerve gas. Stop trying to exaggerate its purpose by putting it in the same category with Mustard Gas and Tabun.

Who made that distinction? All I said was chemical weapons. I made no distinction between "run of the mill" chemical weapons and nerve agent.

Stop... Assuming... And... Or... Fabricating... What... I... Have... Said...

secondly Mycotoxins are produced by bio weapons last i checked.

my·co·tox·in ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mk-tksn)
n.
A toxin produced by a fungus

I know what a mycotoxin is. I listed everything suspected that was listed on the page, if you read the entire thing instead of snipping here and there.

Choking Gasses Natoma...:?

Read the whole damn document. Yes, Choking Gasses is how it was listed. And since you've shown thus far that you can't read, or simply choose not to,

Choking gas: Chlorine,the archetypal war gas, is included in at least one of the lists of Iraqi chemical-warfare agents published this year by Iranian authorities.

Again my point rests. This was hardly common knowledge.

Tell that to the member nations of the UN.

huh.... Did or did not UN inspections confirm Iraqi use of chemical weapons in 1984?? God....

Suddenly all the chemical programs become common knowledge because of findings of the use a certain chemicals by Iraq. Like i said, you are inventing.

Where did I say all of the chemical programs? I just said it was common knowledge between 1985 and 1989 that Iraq had a chemical program. Why? Because they friggin used chemical weapons. What do I have to do, hold your hand step by step until you figure it out? :?

Who cares what civilians know.

Oh sweet jesus. When you say common knowledge, who am i to assume you are refering to Natoma?

You seem to do a lot of assuming and extrapolating Legion.

Not a reasonable assumption at all. I mentioned nothing regarding manufacturing. If I meant manufacturing I would have stated manufacturing.

Now i am just confused. You tell me you will directly refer to the subject but you left out exactly to whom your assertions wrt knowing very well. I feel safe in saying you were being deliberately vague.

What??? When did I say I will directly refer to the subject? Please quote my words on this.

I... Have... Never... Stated... Anything... On... Manufacturing... Of... Chemical... Weapons... Nor... Have... I... Said... Anything... Regarding... "directly refer to the subject"... As... You... Have... Said... I... Did...

 

[Natoma]

When you want to stop fabricating what I've stated Legion, then we can have a conversation. Until then, this is pointless. I'm spending more time debunking things you are saying I said, falsely I might add, rather than actually talking about the original reason why I even got back into this thread in the first place.

 

[pax]

The crux of the argument was legal importation of germs showcasing support of saddams regime by the US. So he had used chemical and attempted to gain nuclear but wouldnt do anything with the germs we sold him?

And m doctor sis said the germs in already made vaccines are dead and cant lead to any kind of germ production. So that old reverse engineering argument doesnt hold there...

 

[RussSchultz]

The crux of the argument doesn't show "the US" supporting Saddam's regime. It shows private companies legally sold research samples of common agricultural/vetenary germs that affect livestock world wide.

Search for any of those (just make sure you spell it right--one of them only returns hits to obvious cut/paste "research" because of the mispelling) and you'll see what the diseases are, and how much research goes into them.

 

[Legion]

Who made that distinction? All I said was chemical weapons. I made no distinction between

"run of the mill" chemical weapons and nerve agent.

Natoma many countries have used tear gas. I can't imagine why you would have put them in the save category as toxic/deadly nerve gasses.

Stop... Assuming... And... Or... Fabricating... What... I... Have... Said...

Here in lies the problem:
You...made...no...distinction...to...buffer...your...argument.

I know what a mycotoxin is. I listed everything suspected that was listed on the page, if you read the entire thing instead of snipping here and there.

I it and suggested it shouldn't fit in the chem weapons category.

Please note the word suspected Natoma.

Read the whole damn document. Yes, Choking Gasses is how it was listed. And since you've shown thus far that you can't read, or simply choose not to,

Natoma, were they or weren't nonlethal weapons?

Tell that to the member nations of the UN.

Again you were deliberately vague such that you could assertion common knowledge to whom ever you chose when backed into a corner...

Where did I say all of the chemical programs? I just said it was common knowledge between 1985 and 1989 that Iraq had a chemical program. Why? Because they friggin used chemical weapons. What do I have to do, hold your hand step by step until you figure it out?

Omg Natoma. Here again your ambiguity serves you such that you can later define to who it was common knowledge. Perhaps you should have stated that in the first place...

You seem to do a lot of assuming and extrapolating Legion.

Really Natoma? You noticed this over your own antics?

What??? When did I say I will directly refer to the subject? Please quote my words on this.

I... Have... Never... Stated... Anything... On... Manufacturing... Of... Chemical... Weapons... Nor... Have... I... Said... Anything... Regarding... "directly refer to the subject"... As... You... Have... Said... I... Did...

OMFG where in that statement did i mention anything about Manufcaturing of chemicals?

I made this statement refering back to your vague reference of common knowledge.

 

[Legion]

When you want to stop fabricating what I've stated Legion, then we can have a conversation.

Oh my, i will be blessed with your presence then? What a grand incentive.

Until then, this is pointless.

Now, lets be fair, this is more to do with your over all vagueness then any invention on my part.

I'm spending more time debunking things you are saying I said, falsely I might add, rather than actually talking about the original reason why I even got back into this thread in the first place.

Always about you, eh Natoma?

How about you just get to the point and stop your useless meanderings? You think that at least one of Saddam's chemical weapons programs was known of by some one some where at a given time. Thank you for your contribution to this discussion, you may leave now.

Infact Natoma, from now on i will simply ignore you as if i filtered out your statements.

 

[pax]

Well Russ those germs and other things that werent banned pre 91 suddenly became banned post 91. And suddenly the us admin as well as others became worried they could lead to bad things like biological weapons.

So I mean lets get real here... what you are saying even the us and other western countries govs dont believe these products to be innoffensive.

I personaly think the agricultural credits probably did more to support the war effort than anything else as biologics werent used in the iraq iran war. Not to mention a lot of support if not most was probably given secretly. Truth is the us supported both sides in the attrition war. A likely effort to reduce both sides as they were both antagonistic towards israel and eventually even iraq towards the us.

 

[Legion]

Well Russ those germs and other things that werent banned pre 91 suddenly became banned post 91. And suddenly the us admin as well as others became worried they could lead to bad things like biological weapons.

I am not sure if this is true. Did you read the quote i provided you with?

Export controls

On 30 March, the US government announced the imposition of 'foreign policy controls' on the export to the Gulf-War belligerents of five chemicals that could be used in the production of mustard and nerve gases. US officials told the press that this had been done in response to an unexpected volume of recent orders from Iraq for those chemicals. They also said that Japan, FR Germany and other unspecified European countries had been exporting the chemicals to Iraq. The British government took action similar to that of Washington on 12 April, adding three more chemicals to the control list (see table). Since then, other European governments have also announced embargoes of varying scope, and on 15 May the Foreign Ministers of the European Community agreed in principle on a common and complementary policy. There are Western press reports of suspicions in Western diplomatic circles in the Middle East that the USSR is shipping intermediates to Iraq through Jordan.

 

[Natoma]

Natoma many countries have used tear gas. I can't imagine why you would have put them in the save category as toxic/deadly nerve gasses.

Sarin = Nerve Gas
Mustard = Nerve Gas
VX = Nerve Gas

What do they all have in common? They are classified as chemical weapons. What is tear gas? A chemical weapon. I never made any statement anywhere regarding the lethal nature of the chemical weapons.

Here in lies the problem:
You...made...no...distinction...to...buffer...your...argument.

I committed the sin of assumption. I assumed you were intelligent enough to make the leap yourself without having your hand held. God was I wrong...

I know what a mycotoxin is. I listed everything suspected that was listed on the page, if you read the entire thing instead of snipping here and there.

I it and suggested it shouldn't fit in the chem weapons category.

Please note the word suspected Natoma.

Again, I assumed you would be smart enough to realize that mycotoxins and germ-warfare agents are obviously not chemical weapons, but was the entire list of weapons listed on the document at the very bottom, along with confirmed Mustard and Tabun.

Read the whole damn document. Yes, Choking Gasses is how it was listed. And since you've shown thus far that you can't read, or simply choose not to,

Natoma, were they or weren't nonlethal weapons?

You're creating this differentiation. I never made any such differentiation.

Tell that to the member nations of the UN.

Again you were deliberately vague such that you could assertion common knowledge to whom ever you chose when backed into a corner...

You're Paranoid Legion.

Where did I say all of the chemical programs? I just said it was common knowledge between 1985 and 1989 that Iraq had a chemical program. Why? Because they friggin used chemical weapons. What do I have to do, hold your hand step by step until you figure it out?

Omg Natoma. Here again your ambiguity serves you such that you can later define to who it was common knowledge. Perhaps you should have stated that in the first place...

You're Paranoid Legion.

You seem to do a lot of assuming and extrapolating Legion.

Really Natoma? You noticed this over your own antics?

You're Paranoid Legion.

What??? When did I say I will directly refer to the subject? Please quote my words on this.

I... Have... Never... Stated... Anything... On... Manufacturing... Of... Chemical... Weapons... Nor... Have... I... Said... Anything... Regarding... "directly refer to the subject"... As... You... Have... Said... I... Did...

OMFG where in that statement did i mention anything about Manufcaturing of chemicals?

I made this statement refering back to your vague reference wrt to your reference of common knowledge.

My statement is an overarching response to your prior attempt to state that I said that Iraq was manufacturing it's own chemical weapons when I made no such assertion, as well as your "You tell me you will directly refer to the subject" assertion. Again, I thought you would be able to figure that one out without me picking over every last letter and verb and noun to parse it down. God do I have to chew your food and make mashed 'nannas for you too?

 

[RussSchultz]

Well Russ those germs and other things that werent banned pre 91 suddenly became banned post 91. And suddenly the us admin as well as others became worried they could lead to bad things like biological weapons.

Thats the nature of dual use products, isn't it? You assume that what you use it for is acceptable, until you find out its been abused. Just like prescription painkillers, guns, the guy dating your daughter, etc.

I will completely agree its duplicitious to only become sanctimonius when the mad dog attacks your friend, but its a far cry from the tired rally cry of "the US armed Saddam" that started this whole discussion.

So, can we finally agree that:
1) there's no proof, or even evidence to suggest that the US government actively supported Saddam in getting or using chemical weapons
2) or even apparently provided much conventional weaponry
3) Its a shame the US government turned a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons in the Iran/Iraq war

?

 

[Natoma]

When you want to stop fabricating what I've stated Legion, then we can have a conversation.

Oh my, i will be blessed with your presence then? What a grand incentive.

Even when you try to make a rebuttal you just can't. I asked you to stop fabricating what I've stated, and all you can say is "i will be blessed with your presence then?"

You do of course realize that you just admitted to fabricating the things I've stated.

Until then, this is pointless.

Now, lets be fair, this is more to do with your over all vagueness then any invention on my part.

What is the mature thing to do when we don't understand something someone has said? Do we assume? No. Do we ask for clarification instead? Yes.

I'm spending more time debunking things you are saying I said, falsely I might add, rather than actually talking about the original reason why I even got back into this thread in the first place.

Always about you, eh Natoma?

When you're making lies about what I've stated, then yea it is about me. Especially when you have no proof whatsoever to back up your claims. But go ahead and keep fabricating.

How about you just get to the point and stop your useless meanderings? You think that at least one of Saddam's chemical weapons programs was known of by some one some where at a given time. Thank you for your contribution to this discussion, you may leave now.

Infact Natoma, from now on i will simply ignore you as if i filtered out your statements.

Obviously it was known. I linked to the damn document that stated matter of factly that the UN knew about Saddam's chemical weapons at least as early as 1984.

How in the world you can ignore this obvious proof is mind boggling.........

 

[pax]

Ya legion I did... And a very modest attempt that was... which in no way compares to post 91 sanctions.

Russ we can agree somewhat but varying degrees. I really dont accept the idea we didnt knoew pre 91 that he was both a rabid anti semite and psychotic criminal mass murderer. I certainly can accept some civilians like you guys to not know but the us and other govs I certainly wont let off the hook that easily.

 

[Legion]

Thats the nature of dual use products, isn't it? You assume that what you use it for is acceptable, until you find out its been abused. Just like prescription painkillers, guns, the guy dating your daughter, etc.

I have found the fears surrounding "dual use chemicals" to be rather interesting. They remind me of the "assault rifle" scare in the mid to late 90s. Do you happen to remember said issues Russ? There really wasn't anything different about a civilian Assault rifle to merit being banned. However, because of its name people reacted. I believe this matter was post Columbine though.

I feel much in the same about dual use chemicals. I imagine a lot of chemicals can be used to create and ever growing arsenal of new chem weapons. Much like the Assault rifle garnered fear by its name dual use chemicals have acquired some special emphasis in the media. I don't necessarily see anything terribly unusual about them. Many of them have been apart of the world market for some time. They simply acquired the title when it was discovered they could be used to make weapons from. Again, i'd imagine many chemicals people don't refer to as or think of as dual chemicals can be used to make weapons.

I will completely agree its duplicitious to only become sanctimonius when the mad dog attacks your friend, but its a far cry from the tired rally cry of "the US armed Saddam" that started this whole discussion.

I do find it odd people will single out the US when France was in negotiations to build Iraq a nuclear "research" facility...

I think Pax misunderstood why i mentioned the French negotiations in the first place. I honestly do not know what the French government's intentions were in building and rebuilding nuclear reactors in Iraq. I can't see how anyone could jump to the conclusion the French government was trying to provide Saddam with nuclear weapons by re/building reactors despite the evidence Saddam had chemical weapons programs. However, the indymedia are willing to over look the posibilities of this centering their objections around rather dubious allegations as to the actions of American companies and or the American government. Obvious hypocrisy.

 

[Legion]

Ya legion I did... And a very modest attempt that was... which in no way compares to post 91 sanctions.

But it does indicate concern and the fact not all impositions took place post 91.

Again, post 91 is when large amounts of information concerning Saddam's chemical weapons programs emerged. I can see why there was such reaction to outrage. I do not see them as covering their tracks in the matter by putting forth drama.

Russ we can agree somewhat but varying degrees. I really dont accept the idea we didnt knoew pre 91 that he was both a rabid anti semite and psychotic criminal mass murderer.

As i have learned from my prior mistake i will ask now what you mean by "we"? Who are you implying knew?

I certainly can accept some civilians like you guys to not know but the us and other govs I certainly wont let off the hook that easily.

I think you are allowing for slight paranoia Pax. I don't mean to insult you, but i think you are taking this to far.

 

[Natoma]

And i will undoubtly refrain from speaking to you. I don't mind that you call me a liar. You are nothing to me Natoma. Nor do you have any form of importance to me in my life or the lives of anyone else in this thread. You are simply, a homosexual, with over inflated sense of self.

Quit dodging and just give him the direct quote.

Exactly. This is what Legion accused me of saying in that other thread.

1) Iraq was capable of manufacturing it's own WMD
2) I would stay on topic
3) There is no difference between the lethal nature of Tear gas and Mustard Gas
4) I made a differentiation between Nerve Gas and Chemical Weapons
5) Information regarding Iraq's WMD programs in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s, before 1984, was viable
6) Since I said "common knowledge", I meant civilians, even though I repeatedly spoke about the UN, i.e. common knowledge at the UN
7) Other countries definitively manufactured WMD for Iraq

I want quotes where I stated any of that. Not allegations of saying those things. Not implied meanings. Flat out quotes, just as I asked in that other thread. And you know what? I'm going to post this same post in the other thread to and take it out of this one.

Just as Legion said I was referring to some "Anonymous Authority" earlier in this thread where I made no such statement, I want him to show me quotes where I made any of those 7 statements he said I made above.

I'm bumping that other thread to continue this there.

This is precisely what I'm talking about. When Legion has nowhere to go, he brings out the "Well I'm not going to talk to you anymore." instead of backing up his claims with these supposed statements I made.

p.s.: Legion you made public accusations and statements attributed to me that I did not make. Why should we take it to PM to resolve this? Why should you post your IM information so people can come to you if they think you're wrong?

Why can't you vet this publicly since you had absolutely no problem accusing me publicly? You're so absurd.

 

[Natoma]

1) Iraq was capable of manufacturing it's own WMD

Please show me where i asserted you said this. Remember the topic of the conversation was Iraq's capacity to develope WMD and our involvment in their development by the provision of biology and chemical samples with direct intent. It is rather common knowledge now that Iraq did infact have the capacity to develop WMD. It has been said they had the most advanced chemical production capacity of all the middle east. My contention with your statements has mainly been over your assertions of common knowledge in the past. We hadn't the knowledge of the extent of Iraq's chemical capacities until well after 1990. Futhermore, nothing has been presented illustrating anything by private sector involvment.

I rightfully assumed when you stated Iraq's ownership of Chemical weapons you meant people knew of Iraq's possession of chemical weapons. I took this to be you saying with this knowledge we shouldn't have provided then chemicals which could be turned into weapons being that having chemical weapons some how implies a capacity to develope them. Hense i challenged this notion and to what degree these matters were common knowledge.

You stated:

Oh my, and yet you say Saddam's chem weapons manufacturing was common knowledge?

I stated when I entered this thread:

Just skimming. One quick note that I found that isn't true. Legion, in 1985-1989, it was well known that Iraq had an extensive array of chemical weapons and a very advanced weapons program.

I never said Saddam manufactured chemical weapons. I said that it was well known saddam had an extensive array of chemical weapons and a very advanced weapons program. Nothing about Iraq making its own weapons.

You will find no quote from me where I stated Saddam was capable of manufacturing his own weapons, or that it was common knowledge that Saddam was capable of manufacturing his own weapons.

What happened is this. I said that it was common knowledge that Saddam had chemical weapons and an advanced weapons program. You asked me to provide proof of that, or was it just hearsay.

I wrote:

http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/research/factsheet-1984.html

One of the chemical-warfare instances reported by Iran, at Hoor-ul-Huzwaizeh on 13 March 1984, has since been conclusively verified by an international team of specialists dispatched to Iran by the United Nations Secretary General. The evidence adduced in the report by the UN team lends substantial credence to Iranian allegations of Iraqi chemical warfare on at least six other occasions during the period from 26 February to 17 March.

For starters. This was quite a simple google. "Iraq Iran War Chemical Weapon"

Tons of links. This was just the one at the top of the list. Have fun. Frankly I thought this was a well known fact. Guess not.

Who was it common knowledge to from the get go? UN sources. That ruled out your "interpretation" that I meant civilians.

Of course I asked you to find the quotes where this was written. Not your interpretations. Not your "implied meaning" bs. Hardcore quote. On to the next one now.

 

[Natoma]

2) I would stay on topic

If i did infact accusse of you being off topic it was more than likely do to some vague comments you were making.

You stated the following:

Now i am just confused. You tell me you will directly refer to the subject but you left out exactly to whom your assertions wrt knowing very well. I feel safe in saying you were being deliberately vague.

I have been unable to find anywhere in this thread where I said I would "directly refer to the subject."

If you can find it, go right ahead. Please do. I'm waiting. On to the next one.

 

[Natoma]

3) There is no difference between the lethal nature of Tear gas and Mustard Gas

Again, you provided a list which included Tear Gas and Mustard Gas in the same category. I contested this. Even if you were simply quoting from a list of known chemical weapons in Iraq's possession i'd still challenge the notion Mustard Gas and Tear Gas should be included in the same category of weaponry. Tear Gas, being nonlethal, hardly carries the same implications as Mustard Gas. Remembering that the original topic surrounded the transmission of chemical weapons (and or their precursors) know as WMD i'd say the inclusion of Tear Gas is a tad bit superfluous.

You stated the following:

Natoma many countries have used tear gas. I can't imagine why you would have put them in the save category as toxic/deadly nerve gasses.

Natoma, were they or weren't nonlethal weapons?

I have been unable to find anywhere in this thread where I made a distinction between lethal and nonlethal WMD, or made a differentiation between nerve gasses and "regular" chemical weapons. That was your distinction.

If you can find it, go right ahead. Please do. I'm waiting. On to the next one.