SO you don't deny the following happened:
"A letter written in 1995 by former CDC Director David Satcher to former Senator Donald W. Riegle, Jr., points out that the U.S. Government provided nearly two dozen viral and bacterial samples to Iraqi scientists in 1985--samples that included the plague, botulism, and anthrax, among other deadly diseases. According to the letter from Dr. Satcher to former Senator Donald Riegle, many of the materials were hand carried by an Iraqi scientist to Iraq after he had spent 3 months training in the CDC laboratory. "
You just question the *intent* of the US in giving these diseases to Saddam?
By 1985, he had already committed some serious atrocities. And they were the first choice of the US govt, to deliver these deadly strains?
Jeez, kinda naive of us. We could have given them to any of the 300 nations on earth. We chose to trust diseases to a murdereour dictator at war.
Do you believe this, Bruce?
What in the world was Reagan's admin doing giving ANY KIND OF CHEMICAL WEAPON to saddam?
Don't feed us the bullshit about "but... medical reasons!" or "We don't know it was the same gas that killed thousands".
What the hell was Reagan/Rumsfeld doing giving any chem weapons to saddam? Hell, he was at war with Iran. And the day he entered office, he had publicly executed hudreds of potential enemies on national TV to make his point that dissension would not be tolerated.
Reagan gave him WMD anyway. Can anyone please defend this action? thanks!
Your foolishness precedes you. Where in this document does it prove the US armed Saddam with chemical weapons? Where is the mustard gas you allege?
As for the biological agents, let's revisit what I have posted before on this issue:
The truth to this popular lie? As a US Senate inquiry found, America's Centers for Disease Control and the non-profit American Type Culture Collection did send Iraq biological materials in the 1980s, thinking they would be used there as they were in other countries - to develop treatments for animal and human diseases.
These were sent not to "military laboratories", but mostly to universities and health officials, who secretly passed on some to scientists working on Iraq's WMD. You know, on the weapons this same film also claims "never" existed. Have you read this yet, Rob? Do you understand that concept? The Americans were proven to have acted responsibly, and to some extent, naively. Keep in mind Saddam stole these biological agents from the scientist they were given to (with the intention of actually
saving lives). This is not the same as deliberately arming a madman to fight Iranians, or indeed, murder his own people.
You have absolutely no proof the US gave Saddam mustard gas, or for that matter, any other chemical weapon nor WMD. This, as in Ribonucleic's case, has been your argument from day one.
I implore others reading this to also research
The UN's and
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's findings on this matter.
I find it intriguing we now have Rob admitting Saddam had WMD, and yet rejects this as a purpose for invading Iraq in the first place. I assume, Rob, you have some evidence suggesting you knew beforehand (unlike the rest of the world) that this was the case.
Also laughable is that we now find you going for the proverbial jugular with Saddam now, labelling him (correctly, I might add, even if spelled wrong) as a 'murdereour (sic) dictator'. All, it seems, it takes for you to change your mind on a person like Saddam (who you have written off here before as someone who shouldn't be pursued by the US) is how you can skew the facts to make the US seem evil.
