The Orweillian nature of thsi thread astounds me. The logic here astounds me. No one defends France, Russia et al. for selling weapons to Iraq. But to somehow infer that because they might have sold more than the US so what the US did was ok or not as bad is simply rediculous. Are you really assigning levels of guilt dependant on who sold more chemical weapons than the other?!
The selective nature of your little list is also very suspect. According to the Iraq Weapons Dossier Report (remember that 12,000 page document?), several (more than 20) US companies were identified for their involvement in arming Iraq. And that's not just chemical or nuclear programs (like that's somehow not as bad, ok guys). There's Honeywell, Spectra Physics, Semetex, TI Coating, Unisys, Sperry Corp, just to name a few who all helped supply rocket programs as well as conventional weapons and military logistics.
According to the German Press Agency DPA, the dossier report was reduced from 12,000 pages to 3,000 pages and it was this truncated version that was given to Non-permanent members on the Security Council.
Quote:
Substantial construction units for the Iraqi nuclear weapon and rocket programs were supplied with
permission of the government in Washington. The poison Anthrax for the arming of Iraq with biological
weapons stemmed from US laboratories. Iraqi military and armament experts were trained in the U.S.
and there received know-how having to do with their domestic arms programs.
~ Author: Andreas Zumach -Translator: Anu de Monterice
|
Ya know, as much as I'd love to put all my faith in your source, the fact that it was written as part of a war game casts a shadow upon it.
SLM3