Republicans Helped Stage Iraqi Chemical Warfare Attack on Iran

Republican Intelligence gave Iraq tactical information which helped them unleash a chemical attack on Iran that apparently makes the recent attacks in Syria look like an ajax scrubbing.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articl...rica_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran?page=0,0

Seems the Reagan Bush admins were willing to partake in some pretty devious methods to see to it their political agendas were fulfilled.

They knew full and well the Iraqis were using chemicals on Iran, as early as 1984, but continued to supply Iraq with the fuel- money and weapons for its war machine. Attempting to cover their asses all the way.

In 1987, CIA satellite imagery showed that Iran had found a giant gaping hole in the Iraqi lines, and were covertly building an arsenal, amassing large numbers of troops and weapons to break through and take the city of Basrah.

Central Intelligence concluded that if Iran succeeded in taking Basrah, they would likely win the war.

Reagan's policy was for Iraq to win at all costs.

Upon reading the report given to him by the DIA, Reagan wrote a note in the margin, "An Iranian victory is unacceptable."







In 1988, just after Bush's election a decision was made at the top level of government.

The DIA was authorized to give Iraq the crucial satellite information they would need to ensue a vicious chemical attack that left hundreds, if not thousands of Iranians dead, crippled and mutilated.

The decision to give Iraq the key information they needed for victory most certainly required approval from both the National Security Council as well as the CIA.





Dig in boys, this one's eyeballs deep in political quagmire, and has more curves than a bag of rattlesnakes.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran–Iraq_war
 
Big deal?

It was a democrat (Truman) that ordered the military action that led to the largest single loss of civilian life, an estimated 150,000 - 250,00 died from the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

War is hell.
 
Sure Arnie, I'd be happy to discuss it.

But would you first mind narrowing your question a bit?

If you had the answer already, you could supply that too.
 
Quote from Hoofhearted:

Sure Arnie, I'd be happy to discuss it.

But would you first mind narrowing your question a bit?

If you had the answer already, you could supply that too.

You're dodging again, Hoofy. That's becoming a habit.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

You're dodging again, Hoofy. That's becoming a habit.

Not dodging Tsing.

The question was broad.

Just not wanting to waste our time covering redundant information.

Perhaps you can figure out specifically what he is after, from the contents of his question, and answer it as well.
 
Quote from Hoofhearted:

Not dodging Tsing.

The question was broad.

Just not wanting to waste our time covering redundant information.

Perhaps you can figure out specifically what he is after, from the contents of his question, and answer it as well.

Dude, he asked you for Obama's policy on Syria. If it's too broad, then top level it for him. I could probably do it in three sentences if I wanted to.
 
Quote from Hoofhearted:
Reagan's policy was for Iraq to win at all costs.

Upon reading the report given to him by the DIA, Reagan wrote a note in the margin, "An Iranian victory is unacceptable."

We continued to help Iraq despite their "accidental" targeting of the USS Stark in 1987 that killed 37 soldiers as well.

It seems obvious that the US government would have preferred both sides lose the Iran/Iraq war, but Iraq at the time was considered the lesser of two evils until they invaded Kuwait.
 
Quote from Hoofhearted:

Sure Arnie, I'd be happy to discuss it.

But would you first mind narrowing your question a bit?

If you had the answer already, you could supply that too.

Its not a trick question. What is Obama's policy regarding Syria?
 
Back
Top