finally!

[jaguar]

I've been trying to rediscover the hard evidence of the US's export of chem/bio weaponary to Iraq for a while, finally tuned up this gem.

According to a Senate Committee Report of 1994, from 1985 through 1989, biological materials were exported to Iraq by private American suppliers pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Amongst these materials, which often produce slow, agonizing deaths, were:

Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord and heart.
Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
Clotsridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
Clostridium tetani, highly toxigenic.
Also, Escherichia Coli (E.Coli); genetic materials; human and bacterial DNA.

This information is from the following report, as mentioned above: "U.S. Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual Use Exports to Iraq and their Possible Impact on the Health Consequences of the Persian Gulf War," Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with Respect to Export Administration, reports of May 25, 1994 and October 7, 1994.

While i'll admit this does not cover chemical weaponary, it's encouraging, i'll keep hunting.

[Undertoad]

Jesus, don't work so hard. I saw the assistant secy of state admit it during a congressional hearing. Then he said

"I fought against that policy at the time, because I don't believe the enemy of our enemy is our friend. We learned that our friends need to have more than a common enemy... we need to share values."

That was a hard lesson.

Is it helpful to recall context? This was part of a global effort to prevent WW3 on the basis of Soviet expansion which, had it extended to the middle east, would have changed things immensely. In the 80s the USSR was suffering terrible economic collapse. The US turned up the heat on them by increasing its military budget. This left them unable to compete and maintain their empire. If they had expanded to the middle east who knows what would have happened. Is it helpful to recall that in Stalin's purges there were 20 million estimated killed. Nobody knows exactly how many because the USSR was a secret, and yes, an evil empire.

We had no clue at the time; in fact many of my college compatriots in the early 80s were starry-eyed about the beautiful USSR and its wonderful central planning. 20 million dead and they all thought Stalin was just misunderstood. Another lesson never to forget.

[hermit22]

Understand, UT, that I agree with you on the context side of things. But I think you also have to view the world through the prism of consequence. And we are now paying the consequences for the actions of our fathers and grandfathers in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s - in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Eastern Europe. (Africa seems to still be the forgotten step-child.)

I'm not about to admit that I know of a better overall position; I know that succumbing to communism definately isn't one of them. On a case by case basis, though, I think we turned a blind eye to the failings and massacres and repression of a hell of a lot of people simply because they weren't communist. (Our strategy was dubbed Anything But Communist, after all, with an emphasis on the Anything.) And when they fell out of their artificially propped power, the world found one more insecure state.

[rant]To add contemporary relevance, I think the decisions of Bush, Jr. are going to have an incredibly lasting impact. The whole foreign policy attitude of the administration is a reflection of some of the worst aspects of Cold War foreign policy - the most glaring and disgusting of which is arrogance. Bush seems to believe that throwing America's weight around should be sufficient to compel the world to follow his path. This worked during the Cold War, but that was because there was a polar opposite doing the same thing - and in a more menacing manner. I don't know where it will be, (think China) but I think another USSR is slowly building itself into a superpower. And Cheney's Pax Americana approach will have facilitated this.[/rant]

[jaguar]

it's one of those little projects that i keep running when i'm bored.
Hermit22 beat me to it on the reply.
It doesn't make it all better and it certainly doesn't remove the undeniable hypocracy about declaring war on someone over something you gave when they refuse to give it back, particulary when you put them in power in the first place.

It paints a pretty ugly picture of US foreign policy, i mean it lurches far right, spporting bloody dicatatorships and Mcarthyism as a response to communism, when the next enemy comes along, terrorism, once again we've got draconian laws coming in and beligerant expansanist foreign policy.

Talking of which anyone read that rather interesting e-mail from a journo at the last WEF? Interesting stuff, paints a rather anti-american sentiment across the board and a very depressed/jittery global leadership.

[Undertoad]

With all those rounds of draconian laws, right-shifts, and blatant imperialism, funny how we are more free today than we were 40 years ago, more liberal than we were 40 years ago, and cover the same area of land as we did 40 years ago.

[jaguar]

more free? Than under a McCarthy regime? Probably, maybe until patriot 2, or 3.....
More liberal? Don't really know what that has to do with it, so the entire western world, your point?

Same area of land? Don't be so black and white. I guess so...apart from the colony in Afghanistan etc, add Iraq soon and the power to bully nearly any nation or organisation, a power that does not go unused.

[Undertoad]

J: "The US is acting like an imperialist fascist regime!"

UT: "But it clearly isn't."

J: "Oh, I meant for MY definitions of the words 'imperialist', 'fascist', and 'regime'."

UT: "Oh! Well in that case, you're a fucking brain-dead idiot."

J: "You mean by YOUR definitions of 'fucking', 'brain-dead', and 'idiot'."

UT: "No I don't."

[smoothmoniker]

UT, why must your thinking always be so western?












and by western, i of course mean linear, rational, articulate, and accurate.

[jaguar]

Ok, lets go though this.
Secret arrests, unlawful holding of prisoners offshore, use of torture to extract infomation at overseas locations and that's well before we get into Patriot 2...

The proposed law would radically expand law enforcement and intelligence gathering authority; reduce or eliminate judicial oversight over certain surveillance; authorize secret arrests, detentions, and grand jury subpoenas; create a DNA database of individuals who are suspected of association with terrorism or terrorist groups; create new death penalty provisions; and empower the government to remove American citizenship from persons who belong to or support disfavored political groups.

Lets hope you're not in a 'disfavoured political group' UT. I mean bloody hell, it's like they're about to create a court for unamerican activities or something! *coughcough*.

Facist? Secret arrests and unending detention without trial are certainly not a sign of a healthy democracy. Still, not facist yet, all the same. On the other hand, i never used that word.

Ohhhh...that's right, that's for those EVIL TERRORISTS!


Webster has this to say about imperialism:

the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence

If the shoe fits.....

Wading into other soverign nations on a whim that they may be a threat? Only if they don't pose a signifigant threat - otherwise you might lose a soldier or two. Should we start at economic espionage, the invasion of Afghanistan, Vietnam (i'm not going to both going back any further) and soon, Iraq or maybe just the more economic stuff?

To quote George Orwell "The nationalist does only not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not hearing about them"

So take a few words you've tried to put in my mouth like say..."facist" or "regime" along with "fucking braindead idiot".

[Undertoad]

What's more interesting to me is how far you have to go to criticize the US. For all the crap that's happening in the world, how do you choose the US?

You have to walk past half of Africa, humming a happy tune; they have an excuse, they're darkies, so nobody expects them to act civilized. Mugabe seems like a bad man, but maybe he has a well-intentioned long-term plan.

You have to trot around mainland China - no "secret arrests" there to be alarmed about, no sir. No Patriot 2 in China. They always play above board in China.

Hussein, well we assume all his dirty work can be tied back to the US SOMEHOW, so he gets a free pass.

Il, well he's just a *traditional* Commie - it was never in favor to bash those guys, so what's a few million dying, no biggie. And threatening nuclear holocaust - I'm sure it's just that the guy's misunderstood somehow. After all, he's only got at most 2 bombs. Everybody else has a lot more!

Australia, well, there's no fun bashing your own nation.

But the US...! Well THERE is your basic evil-doing country! More evil than all the rest of 'em put together!

The proof:

-- PATRIOT 2 a PROPOSED law written by a single non-lawmaker, that hasn't even been in committee and that certainly won't pass constitutional muster. I'm more against it than you are, but it's not law, and bits of it won't apply even if it becomes law. (The law is very complex in the US and serialized TV shows won't help you understand half of it. Even most Americans are ignorant of most US law.)

-- "Secret" arrests... covered by international news organizations.

-- Gitmo detainees, who are being held in a Caribbean paradise because they are amongst the most dangerous men on earth.

-- Torture, which everyone oddly assumes is happening, except for the experts and former military and intel people who say it's a poor way of getting information.

-- "McCarthyism" although McCarthy happened 50 years ago and remains as completely discredited as the day he was censured by the Senate.

What kind of a stretch do you have to make, to sit there from down under and look around the entire world and say that the US is the one you have to keep an eye on?

The invasion of Afghanistan? Are you insane? How far does your memory go back, like 5 minutes?

I'll tell you what, I WAS not only IN a 'disfavored political group', but I helped to run and manage it and ran campaigns that actively threatened circles of massive power for nearly ten years. And not once -- I was really looking for it -- not ONCE did I find myself even the target of any kind of interest from the status quo. Never mind the secret police and the late-night knock at the door; nobody ever bothered to even telephone me and politely ask me to not do what I was doing. Nobody even sent me a nasty letter. Not even an email.

Hey, y'know what I've just given you? First-person evidence.

Something that always pops into my mind, and I just want to throw it out.

So we <b>did</b> give Iraq weapons of mass destruction. Why is it so wrong for the United States to want to right a past wrong? Why can't the US try and undo a bad thing it's done?

[jaguar]

Why pick the US? Maybe it's the whole lone superpower/global policeman thing. International politics revolves around the United States, as does global stability and security.

Why not lay in to say China or Zimbabwe? Maybe because China does not declare itelf the leader of the free world and Magbye is a tinpot dicatator. Saddam too (yes, instated and amred by the United States, not somehow linked, well and truely linked) is jsut another tinpot dictator.

North Korea? I've been pointing out what a threat they are for weeks - a far greater threat than Iraq will ever pose noone can disagree but of course that one takes the backburner.

Trust me. I regulary bash Australia. Immigration policies? Lackey foreign politics? Our role in Asia(or whether we have one)? Structuring of domestic spending...

Caribbean paradise? I'll lock you in a cage on a desert island and see if you think it's a paradise then. BUT OF COURSE! They're TERRORISTS, the MOST DANGEROUS PEOPLE ON EARTH!!! QUICK! Lock them up and throw away the key! Well we're not actually sure of that, for all you know your mother is in there, we have no details of who, what they've done, what law they've broken......but they're TERRORISTS!!! So it's ok.....

McCarthy may have been 50 years ago, and since discredited, but it still happened didn't it. On the other hand it caused some great science fiction, primarily because it crushed nearly innovative sociopolitical thinking. Worth noting McCarthy was one guy too, somehow that one got though. Something to do with paranoia and hysteria about a big threat. You guys still on orange or didn't another 6 come over the border from Canada this week?

torture? People seem to think it's happening because the US seems to have this tendancy to ship people so say...Syria for a while. The stuff i've read (i'll find a source later, i'm using wireless at a cafe which is charged by the minute, i'm typing this offline) It seems the setup is you've got the suspect and a couple of cops in one room, and a couple of guys relay the questions in and out, that way no US offical is officially aware that they're torturing th guy to get answers.

What would you call what happened in Afghanistan? A war? A campign? An invasion? Whoops thats a dirty word 'coz it suggests it's not now an entirely autonomous state utterly uninfluenced by the US nor kept afloat by the US. What's Iraq going to become? The 21st centuary version of the 19th centuary Bristish Client State.

I don't deny that the invasion of Afghanistan was justified but imperialism is such a dirty word these days i know. It fits though, what else do you call it? Throwing your weight around?

But you've given me unbacked undetaied anecdoatal evidence, pardon me, all charges dropped, i'll get back to my dissection of the latest defence white paper.

Worth a read: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/3/2/113123/1408

[tw]

Originally posted by dave
Why is it so wrong for the United States to want to right a past wrong? Why can't the US try and undo a bad thing it's done?

When US and other nations provided materials for those WMD, it was not wrong. However now that those WMD are illegal, it is the UN's job to address the problem. And the UN is doing just that.

If the UN decides to authorize an Iraqi invasion, then so be it. That is not questioned. What is wrong is when the US president says we will attack another sovereign nation without a Constitutional declaration of war and without UN authorization. Also just as bad are Cellar Dwellar who endorse such actions.

And so we return to the George Jr administration concept of pre-emeption. Does the US now have the right to attack any nation only because it might be a threat? From that same document is the first justification for such action - that the US should not let any other power become a competitor.

As Hermit22 notes:

The whole foreign policy attitude of the administration is a reflection of some of the worst aspects of Cold War foreign policy - the most glaring and disgusting of which is arrogance.

Pre-emption takes arrogance to a new level - facism. To encourage this new attitude, the administration even encourages hate and fear - so that draconian laws such as Patriot 1 and Patriot 2 will be enacted.

[Undertoad]

How you treat terrorists is a large part of whether or not you get to deal with MORE terrorists.

During the mid-1980's, multiple US citizens were taken hostage in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a terrorist group which received support from Iran and Syria. During this period, three Soviet citizens were taken hostage by Hezbollah for a period of one week. The reason why the Soviet hostages were released promptly was due to a single KGB operation. Within several days of the kidnappings, the KGB seized a leader of the Hezbollah, castrated him, stuffed his testicles into his mouth, shot him in the head and left his corpse at a Hezbollah base with an ominous note that if the hostages were not released immediately more of the same would occur. Although the method by which the KGB carried out the assassination was horrendous, the operation brought about the rapid and safe release of all three Soviet hostages.

And it's noteworthy that thereafter Hezbollah didn't muck with Russians. Not only did it end this particular incident, it also prevented any others from taking place.

(from USS Clueless)

Ah, sunny Cuba. 3 squares, 5 prayers a day. It ain't 72 virgins, but hey, it ain't so bad.

[smoothmoniker]

What would you call what happened in Afghanistan? A war? A campign? An invasion? Whoops thats a dirty word 'coz it suggests it's not now an entirely autonomous state utterly uninfluenced by the US nor kept afloat by the US. What's Iraq going to become? The 21st centuary version of the 19th centuary Bristish Client State.

There are worse things than being kept afloat by the US.

There are worse things than having a strong nation shepherd a weak one until it can stand as a functioning autonimous democracy.

There are worse things than being invaded by a foreign power who's primary objective is to remove another foreign power and reinstate your national identity.

There are many stops along the path from brutal dictatorship and fundamentalist state to functioning democracy. Nation building and client state are among the least repugnant.

-sm