US arms sales to dangerous countries -- seeding the next Iraq?

[rjung]

@xtisme

Basically since every major nation does this (at least I can’t think of a single example otherwise), what you are really railing at and beating your chest over is human kind itself…you are just projecting it on the US to take out your frustration.

It’s the same reason why I get more upset when my child does something wrong than when someone else’s child does – because I expect better from him.

Why do you hate America, xtisme?

@Wesley Clark

What i’m wondering is why no condemnation for other countries?

See above.

[cosmosdan]

[QUOTE]

@Martin Hyde

The tail end of this thread title is highly misleading, as others have already said the United States is one of the least complicit great powers in arming Iraq. The title makes the obviously false and hyperbolic (and Michael Moorish) connotation that the United States basically “created” the military that we destroyed in 3/2003. When in fact that bears little resemblance to the real situation (almost no major equipment the Iraqis used was American.)

you might notice that the OP doesn’t make that claim. It mentions only WMD not where the conventional weapons came from. There’s no question that the US supported Iraq during the Iran Iraq conflict.

As it is, selling weapons internationally just to make a profit financially is highly inappropriate. Despite all the claims thrown around here about how we’ve been doing this to fatten up U.S. companies I’ve seen little evidence that this is true.

I wasn’t speaking of selling arms specificlly. I was responding to the comment about the US propping up dictators. We have supported dictators and turned a blind eye to their brutality so that American companies can profit.
Certainly their are companies getting pretty fat now from the actions in Iraq. Similar to the companies that supplied the military during Vietnam.

In such a world the United States has to engage in things that don’t quite fit with the idealism and propaganda that our founding fathers and subsequent generations have used to create the “American ideal.” Any other choice on our behalf would be nothing short of State-suicide.

And we know that because? It strikes me that those words are propaganda supporting a different ideal. No thanks. I understand that we must look out for our own interests. There’s no reason we can’t do that while still setting certain standards and living by certain principles. If an individual can exist and prosper and make a positive contribution to his society by living according to certain principles and acting with integrity then it must be possible for a society to do it also. That doesn’t mean we are naive about the real world. It means we choose not to deal with corruption, greed and dishonesty, by adopting the same tactics.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

Yes, medical supplies. Consider:

1. The US does not have biological weapons. So we could not sell them to anyone if we wanted to.
2. If we did have biological weapons (which we don’t) they would not be held (and sold by) labs in small quantities.
3. If we did have biological weapons (which we don’t) and we did sell them in small amounts (which we didn’t) then we would have found WMDs in Iraq (which we didn’t).
4. So, as I said, we did not sell WMDs we don’t have to Iraq, who did not have them.

The Iraqi military has Soviet and Chinese airplanes, Soviet and Chinese tanks. Eastern European APC, South African artillery, berets made in New Zealand and French air defense and not a gosh darn major system made in the US.

Find me a photo of a US made system destroy in either invasion of Iraq.

[Eolbo]

@Paul in Saudi

Yes, medical supplies. Consider:

1. The US does not have biological weapons. So we could not sell them to anyone if we wanted to.
2. If we did have biological weapons (which we don’t) they would not be held (and sold by) labs in small quantities.
3. If we did have biological weapons (which we don’t) and we did sell them in small amounts (which we didn’t) then we would have found WMDs in Iraq (which we didn’t).
4. So, as I said, we did not sell WMDs we don’t have to Iraq, who did not have them.

1. The US maintained a large offensive biological weapons program until it was terminated by President Nixon. Thereafter the US maintained research into the field to be abreast of developments and to be able to develop defences. Details can be found here

2. Its cultures of biological pathogens we are talking about. They are grown in labs and you only need to export the cultures in small quantities as they reproduce.

3. The US did sell the pathogens. This is not an opinion, the Riegle report I have already cited lists the specific strains and even gives the export licence numbers. They were used in Iraqi biological weapons. This is also not an opinion. Biological weapons developed from US supplied anthrax strains were found and destroyed in 1991. On page 21 of the biological warfare section of the Duelfer Report it says Iraq “settled on the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) strain 14578 as the exclusive strain for use as a BW.”

4. The US Department of Defense screens exports of sensitive dual-use items useful for chemical and biological weapons. It raised objections to the requested exports to Iraq in 40% of the dual-use applications. Why do you think this would be the case if these were simple ‘medical supplies’? Remember that the Iraqi WMD program had been a global issue as early as 1981 when their use of chemical weapons in the war against Iran became known.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

So since they were in small amounts, the were not biological weapons were they? They were dual use medical items.

Also as you pointed out, there are (imperfect) controls on these things. So we do try to control the sale of dangerous things.

[Eolbo]

@Paul in Saudi

So since they were in small amounts, the were not biological weapons were they? They were dual use medical items.

Also as you pointed out, there are (imperfect) controls on these things. So we do try to control the sale of dangerous things.

We are going to have to agree to disagree on the relative innocence of these ‘medical items’ as I am going to bed Rjung termed it sale of WMDs, I called it assistance to the Iraqi WMD program and have indicated some of the forms this assistance took. IMHO if you supply an unsavoury regime with the pathogens it needs for biological weapons, in full knowledge that said regime is actively developing BW, and said regime then goes ahead and produces BW with your pathogens its disingenuous to claim you are only supplying mere medical supplies.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

Bed time for me too. It is a school night.

The stuff was not meant to be a WMD. Selling WMDs is a big charge, and this case does not prove it. (Or at least I think.)

G’night.

[pdx_craig]

@Martin Hyde

In such a world the United States has to engage in things that don’t quite fit with the idealism and propaganda that our founding fathers and subsequent generations have used to create the “American ideal.” Any other choice on our behalf would be nothing short of State-suicide.

You make it sound as if the US wasn’t a globally dominant power extending it’s reach far beyond mere survival. I wouldn’t say not selling Uzbekistan weapons, for example, can be equated with state sucide.

[rjung]

@Paul in Saudi

So since they were in small amounts, the were not biological weapons were they? They were dual use medical items.

By an amazing coinkydink, earlier this week I was required by my boss to attend a (refresher) course on how to handle exports of United States technology (military and otherwise) to foreign countries.

I won’t bore you with the details, but suffice it to say that – according to the official procedures – exporting anything that has even the slightest potential of being “militarized” for hostile use requires a truckload of clearances, licenses, and government approval, often from Congress itself. We’re talking about regulations so paranoid that a shipment that even briefly passes through a hostile nation is enough to be considered a violation and trigger an investigation.

Given that background, the idea that “medical” anthrax and other biocultures could be shipped to Iraq without anybody considering that they could be turned into WMDs is laughably naive, IMO.