"He Gassed His Own People!" Or Did He?

Great Debates
141

I’m a little surprised at the path this debate has taken. I suspect that whether or not Saddam gassed the Kurds or anyone else would be of little relevance to many of us if these decade-old actions were not being cited as a reason for going to war now.

Even if Saddam gassed the Kurds back then, does that justify invading Iraq today?

Unfortunately, IMO, all of the other “reasons” similarly fall short, both individually and cumulatively.

Folks seem to acknowledge that Iran used gas during the Iran-Iraq war, and say use of such weapons - even against military targets - constitutes a war crime. Well, let’s invade Iran as well, as long as we’re in the neighborhood.

And the administration says the only conceivable use of WMD is offensive. Well, they seem to be providing a pretty good deterrence against us invading N. Korea.

Then we have the tubes…

And Iraq is the only nation that engages in torture. Yeah. Right!

And folks have pointed out that Pakistani cooperation during conflict might leave the Kurds worse off than they presently are with the no-fly zones.

I really don’t wish the Kurds - or anyone else - ill. But their historic mistreatment falls far short, in my mind, of justifying going to war.

142

Yeah, and my definition of a chair involves cats. :rolleyes:

Jeez, chemical weapons are a WMD by any standard. His is obviously skewed.

143

Looking at the progress of this thread, I gotta think I didn’t frame the issue very well. We go some guys arguing the single incident, other folks arguing how it reflects on GeeDubya’s credibility, and still others arguing that Saddam is an evil, evil, man. In fact, these themes are not mutually contradictory.

Scylla argues that Saddam gassed his own people on other occassions, therefore GW is telling the truth, for all practical purposes. I feel he exploited this particular incident without any real certainty, but never really considered that it mattered whether or not he committed gas attacks on other occaisions. As far as I was concerned, it didn’t. Still others of us want to get into definitions of WMD’s.

Too late to fix it. Should have thought it through better. Live and learn.

144

**

Bush said Saddam gassed his own people.

Pelletiere and yourself have arbitrarily decided that Bush is referring to Hjalba with this statement. He is not, and you are both lying when you attempt to hold him to this standard.

It is stupid to do so, as well as dishonest because casting doubt on Hjalba in no way mitigates any of the other incidents in which Iraq used poison gas on Kurds.

Similarly, attempting to argue about what the circumstances were in which Iraq gassed Kurds does nothing to bely the fact that Iraq did gas them on a number of occasions.

I simply maintain that the fact that Iraq gassed it’s own people means that Bush was not lying when he said that Iraq gassed it’s own people.

For you and Pelletierre this has little to do with your desire to bash the President, and the fact that what he said was true isn’t going to stop you from pretending he was lying.

When you put forth propositions that you know to be false you are lying, when you do so to falsely impugn another that is even worse. To falsify arguments in order to cover up genocidal actions simply so you can talk shit about a guy you don’t like is up there as one of the scuzziest actions I’ve seen on this board.

Indeed.

145

And Scylla responds with the grace and tact that has made his name a byword amongst the posters.

Well, ok, want to be that way about it?

The paragon you expend so much energy on has, in fact, lied. The Report that Never Existed was a lie. That’s L I E. Lie. Whether I’m the slimiest bag o’ crap that ever walked like a man is another issue. He lied. When he’s not lying, he’s shading the truth. On this particular occasion, he came as close to the truth as he’s ever likely to get: pretty close to a half truth. And a half truth repeated a thousand times doesn’t get any bigger.

But it’s all ol’ elucidator is it? Just little ol’ me doesn’t share your faith. Wanna bet?

Ah, good ol MediaWhores Online. Right there when I need them, ever faithful. Lets take a little peruse of the most recent CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll on ol’ GeeDubya’s…whats the word…credibility?

Question: in its UN presentation, the Bush administration is very or somewhat likely to:

knowingly present inaccurate information…49%

conceal evidence against the Bush position…58%

Who do you trust more on Iraq?

Powell…63%
Bush…24%

Now this was, as you may recall, before you began shrieking “LIAR” at the top of your lungs, the real crux of my position.

Why you persist in wasting your intelligence, not to mention your nearly bottomless capacity for bile, on this man escapes me.

Lo, it is written: That whatsoever shall go around, therefore shall it come around.

Live and learn.

146

Bullshit. It’s so simple there’s no way to spin it without lying.

Iraq has gassed the Kurds more than once. Bush’s statement was fair and accurate.

If Bush’s statement was fair and accurate, then you are wrong to pretend that it isn’t. Worse than than the fact that you are making a false accusation is the fact that in doing so, you are trying to argue that these horrible genocidal attacks are not happening. It’s like trying to argue the holocaust didn’t happen. It’s a crime against the people who died to try to pretend it never occured.

You are wrong to engage in this disinformation.

Live and learn. **
[/QUOTE]

147

I’d rather think ‘Gassed his own people’ is disinformation.

‘During the Iran-Iraq war, there was a military campaign against the Peshmerga, who were cooperating with the Iranians. In this campaign chemical weapons were used and Kurdish civilians died during these attacks. The use of chemical weapons is considered a warcrime.’

That would be a fair and accurate statement.
The other one is a tendentious slogan. IOW, propaganda.

148

I am utterly digusted by the intellectual hypocrisy and dishonesty displayed by certain left-winfers in this thread. I cannot believe you’re arguing based upon the supposed difference between civilians of a non-Persian ethnicity living peacefully, if unhappily * in Iraq* and Palestinians living in a non-incorporated zone not under direct Israeli control (not under Israeli control at all without the use of force).

By their standards, we in the US could shoot them damn furriners since they’re not happy living here. :rolleyes:

149

The New Republic weighs in.

On the case of Iranian gas being used:

  • Second, even if the victims died of exposure to blood agents, this would be perfectly consistent with the claim of Iraqi responsibility. A 1991 DIA report, since declassified, concluded definitively, “Iraq is known to have employed … a blood agent, hydrogen cyanide gas (HCN) … against Iranian soldiers, civilians, and Iraqi Kurdish civilians.” Nonetheless, it is far more likely, according to the standard accounts of the attack on Halabja, that mustard gas and the nerve agents sarin and tabun–and, some doctors examining survivors have speculated, perhaps VX and the biological agent aflatoxin–were the instruments of Kurdish murder, which the Iraqis were known to possess. For example, Human Rights Watch noted that survivors excreted blood-streaked urine, “consistent with exposure to both mustard gas and a nerve agent such as Sarin.” *

On the fact that some Kurds were fighting alongside Iran:

  • This brings us to the biggest problem with Pelletiere’s argument: If the Kurds were legitimate battlefield casualties, why is it Saddam subsequently felt the need to slaughter nearly 100,000 more of them? Pelletiere writes that any other examples of Saddam’s chemical deployment on Kurdish victims “must show that [the dead Kurds] were not pro-Iranian Kurdish guerillas who died fighting alongside Iranian Revolutionary guards.” But even if Saddam’s goal was to root out traitors, it’s inconceivable that all or even most of the residents of the dozens of Kurdish villages Saddam subsequently razed were treacherous peshmerga, or that Saddam believed this to be the case. *

Iraqi officials admitting to the fact:
Saddam’s cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, entrusted to carry out the Kurdish slaughter, was caught on tape at a Ba’athist meeting in May 1988 boasting about the Kurds, “I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? Fuck them!” (Human Rights Watch believes the tape is mislabeled, recording a conversation that really took place in 1987–i.e., before Halabja.)

150

Bullshit. Show me a quote where I stated any such thing. Double dog dare you.

You’re welcome to your opinion, however ill-formed.

If that is so, pray enlighten one so feebly gifted: is it wrong to employ lies, half-truths, and bathos in order to urge as skeptical people to war? This paragon of virtue, whom you defend with such limitless invective, might he not be considered “wrong”? Given your strict standards of honesty, which you are ever eager to flail and berate me for, where does our Fearless Leader stand in your esteem?

The surf splashes around your ankles, and you swear the ocean does not exist. Yet the tide, it comes in…

151

State Department Spokesman James P. Rubin, March 16, 2000 (under President William J. Clinton)

152

Let’s sing our new (inter)national anthem.
TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM
TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM
TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM

TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM
TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM
TEEE DUMM, TEEE DUMM

:smiley:

153

2 problems with that one, can’t carry a tune in a bucket ,and numero two-o, I have no clue as to what you’re referring.

154

Dunno if this has been mentioned yet, but Chatterbox notes that Iraq has not admitted culpability, and that the NYTimes is wrong about Tariq Aziz’s admission:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2078168/

I would say that even if it’s valid to say that Palestinians are pretty much countrymen of Israel as much as the Kurds are of Saddam, the situations really cannot be easily compared. The Kurds were in unified, armed rebellion, and they and people who were clearly non-combatants were deliberately attacked and murdered em masse with chemical weapons. The terrorists in Israel act a few people at a time, not as a unified armed force, and Israel has not tried to kill people em masse, let alone an entire town.