Why is Saddam on trial?

[wellard]

No charges from the Iran - Iraq war?

Some country with influance must want any embarrasing arms deals it made kept quite

Wellard again nice slam on the good ol USA....altho I didn't see your country bitching about the US taking the brunt of the Cold War..as a matter of fact...I seem to remember having to provide quite a lot of training for Aussie Sailors during the 80's....A great bunch of guys who could drink most Americans, Canadians and UK sailors under the table...but I digress...

The US supplied both Iran and Iraq with arms in the Iran/Iraq conflict..(name a western nation with an arms industry that didn't) not at the same time but at different times when the need for such was called for in the grander scheme of things. At no time has the US been accused of nor convicted of selling chemical weapons to either side. For that particular sin, you have to look to both Germany and France (and now we learn possibly the old Soviet Union). Both countries have in the past been implicated in selling such nasties to middle-eastern entities.

So what was the point of the nasty snide slam on the US? Was it informative? did it reveal any facts that cleared up mis-understanding? Did it in some way bring to light unknown facts? Or was it just meant to be a slap in the face of anyone who happens to believe in that particular country and who may or may not have been part of the System you were taking swipes at? Did it completely and willfully ignore any greater reasoning for said arms deals?

My own evaluation of your comment leans to, just trying to be nasty to one particular person, but your shotgun approach may have caused collateral damage. Why not try a more directed insult than such a broad based bash of the country?

Note: It might not have provoked such a reaction had it not been posted on the eve of our National Holliday commorating our Independance. While I know many on the other side of the Aisle may not care at all about Independance day. It means something for me.

[ 07-05-2004, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[wellard]

I find the trade in WOMD to an evil dictatorship already with a cruel record, In the middle of a war, a disgusting trade by any nation and could only be viewed as giving approval to use them. As you rightly point out this practice was carried out by several nations not just the USA (note the UK would have a lot of influence in currant Iraq and was also the reason I did not point the finger at one country alone) I accept that if country A did not sell then country B would. However countries can lead, they can set an example, sure at a cost but what price has those sales come at over the years? (Financially I mean... not pain and suffering) You could make an economic argument, with only a little hindsight, that the sale of those weapons was a financial disaster long term.

However politically justified at the time, and I use that term with the contempt it deserves, the world of politics tends to turn full circle and is now an albatross to currant mid east politics. And in this context the sale to Iraq of WOMD could prove uncomfortable if replayed in the mass media. Though I believe most information is old news, to be repackaged and represented as a defence in pathetic figure Saddam v Mighty Allies could cause major discomfort to those involved. And yes a lot of news agencies will end up showing the trial in this light. (Though i for will not fall for that)

[Davros]

Umm - Ray - you do realise that Wellard is a "Possie" - don't you .

[Morgeruat]

I find it amusing that his lawyers plan to use the "America gave me the weapons" defense, that failed so utterly with Noriyega(sp?)

[Donut]

Originally posted by MagiK: Note: It might not have provoked such a reaction had it not been posted on the eve of our National Holliday commorating our Independance. While I know many on the other side of the Aisle may not care at all about Independance day. It means something for me.

This side of the Aisle has enough respect to spell it properly! There are others on this side of the Aisle who spell it like you, but they are all French!

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Donut: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Note: It might not have provoked such a reaction had it not been posted on the eve of our National Holliday commorating our Independance. While I know many on the other side of the Aisle may not care at all about Independance day. It means something for me.

This side of the Aisle has enough respect to spell it properly! There are others on this side of the Aisle who spell it like you, but they are all French! [/QUOTE]I must be missing your subtly Donut.

I thought what was meant by "the otherside of the Aisle" was those on the otherside of the political spectrum as that is the common usage of the term as I know it. For example: Democrats are on the otherside of the Aisle from Republicans. Perhap and hopefully it was not used in this context in this instance as it is just crass and tasteless to imply that non-neoconservative Republicans may not care at all for independence day.

Perhaps "Isle" is what was meant? I dunno?

[Davros]

Not looking to take sides here, but I will help you out Chewie [img]smile.gif[/img] . Look at how you spelt Independence and then contrast it with MagiK's spelling of the word on two out of two occasions. For the record, Independance is the name of a record company, a dance company (Indepen-Dance), and the name of an independence movement in Brittany (hence the French connection).

Really I am just demonstrating to Donut that I am observant and can use google too .

[Stratos]

He probably means this side of the Atlantic, i.e. Europe.

I don't know why he bothers to point out the mispelling of Independence, though.

[Chewbacca]

Ah, spelling. [img]smile.gif[/img] Geez, I know I fail at spelling often myself, so I cannot be one to cast a stone for it without taking one myself. Now a perfect speller (or is it spellor [img]tongue.gif[/img] ): can unleash tidal waves of spelling nitpick and all I can do is wear a raincoat. [img]smile.gif[/img]