Saddams Secret Tapes, Proof of WMDs?

[Idaho]

No it is a reminder to dave that he should try and look at reality before he posts rubbish .
In that case not only were they supplying targeting information to good old Saddam , they tried to blame the Iranians for the gassing of the Kurds .
Soooo......
Tell that to these guys...
http://www.intelmessages.org/images/Kurds01.jpg
http://www.democraticunderground.com...8_gassing2.jpg

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

[rory_20_uk]

Whereas if performed by socialists, they are not atrocities but are activities for the good of the people they are being inflicted on.

A handshake means buddy... what a lovely simple existence you must lead!!

[Watchman]

Whereas if performed by socialists, they are not atrocities but are activities for the good of the people they are being inflicted on.

If you're referring to Orwell here, you obviously don't know all that much of the man.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

If you're referring to Orwell here, you obviously don't know all that much of the man.

I think hes reffering to Idaho.

[Watchman]

Well, that's why it's in conditional.

[Idaho]

Whereas if performed by socialists, they are not atrocities but are activities for the good of the people they are being inflicted on.

A handshake means buddy... what a lovely simple existence you must lead!!

The first witicism I would agree with.

The second is misdirection. Rumsfeld claimed he never remembered meeting Saddam Hussein. Yeah right. You might be a busy man with a range of jobs here and there. But there is no way you would forget going to Iraq to negotiate oil for arms deals with the dictator of that country.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

The second is misdirection. Rumsfeld claimed he never remembered meeting Saddam Hussein. Yeah right. You might be a busy man with a range of jobs here and there. But there is no way you would forget going to Iraq to negotiate oil for arms deals with the dictator of that country.

The misdirection is yours posting that tired old picture.

Now heres a president showing far more affection for a terrorist.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

You filthy American partisan politics are no concern of mine. Now shoo, I'm going to sip some red wine to go with good cheese while listening Vivaldi.

We're not Chirac.

Nah, it won't matter. The left will say we fabricated them. Which would be true if this was the Clinton Administration. What he would have done was strapped a nuke on a camel's back and put a kid in a turban next to it (Kudos to Louis Black).

God I hate Clinton.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

God I hate Clinton.

I'm tired of this. I never agreed with very much of his policy, but he's been out of office for more than a term. Can you please just let him head for history's dustbin without bringing him back up all the time?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Can you please just let him head for history's dustbin without bringing him back up all the time?

Kind of hard to do when he and his wife are constantly in the News. He certainly has plans to move back into the Whitehouse. Oh that he would only head for history's dustbin .

[rory_20_uk]

Politicians have a remarkable way of remembering faults in other politicians for up to 3 generations, but sadly tend to forget terrorists they themselves met / sold arms to etc etc.

Margaret Thatcher met one terrorist who very recently had blown up 50 Russian children in Afghanastan. I'm sure there was some reason for this, but even so her meeting the murderer was Realpolitik gone mad.

I think that Clinton was no better and no worse than many previous Presidents.

[Idaho]

The misdirection is yours posting that tired old picture.

Now heres a president showing far more affection for a terrorist.

Er.. great. What does that have to do with me Gawain? Unless you are just generally dissing US politicians. You are so stuck in your little bipartisan world you can't see that I really don't give a sh*t about Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Nixon, etc. They are/were all corrupt stooges

[rory_20_uk]

Gwain, I thought Clinton has been described as one of the best Republican presidents in recent history...

A politician can show compasion with someone, then run off and have them / their son executed and still see nothing amiss.

A politician hith honour has not been seen for many years.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Er.. great. What does that have to do with me Gawain? Unless you are just generally dissing US politicians. You are so stuck in your little bipartisan world you can't see that I really don't give a sh*t about Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Nixon, etc. They are/were all corrupt stooges

It has to do with that silly picture you posted. Just because a diplomat shakes hands with the head of a state doesnt mean their pals. It probably means as you say their countries are working together. Its called diplomacy. And yes its a dirty rotten bussiness.

[Tribesman]

It probably means as you say their countries are working together. Its called diplomacy.
Ah I see , so helping Saddam when he was using WMDs on the Kurds and then trying to blame the Iranians is diplomacy .
You are right Gawain.....its a dirty rotten bussiness.

[Idaho]

It has to do with that silly picture you posted. Just because a diplomat shakes hands with the head of a state doesnt mean their pals. It probably means as you say their countries are working together. Its called diplomacy. And yes its a dirty rotten bussiness.

So why deny it happened? Why claim no such meeting, deal, etc was ever done. And why do you continue to make excuses for these people?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

So why deny it happened? Why claim no such meeting, deal, etc was ever done. And why do you continue to make excuses for these people?

I didnt I said its a dirty rotten buissness and thats just what I meant. Giving Stalin half of Europe wasnt such a good thing to do either but it was politically expedient. Things arent so simple. I make no excuses. I live in the real world.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Kind of hard to do when he and his wife are constantly in the News. He certainly has plans to move back into the Whitehouse. Oh that he would only head for history's dustbin .

I hear you, G-man, but I truly believe that with his wife's negatives, all the GOP candidate has to do is advance a positive conservative theme a la Ronaldus Magnus -- with a good plan for the border -- and she's then consigned to fade-away zone. Going after her like she's a pit bull would play into her hands too well. After that, the world can either acclaim Clinton as the next SecGen or not, he'd still be outta our hair.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I think that Clinton was no better and no worse than many previous Presidents.

Some truth to that Rory, the number of Presidents who'd be candidates for sainthood is pretty small, but remember that impeachment has only happened twice (three if you count RMN) -- you really have to be uniquely good at ticking people off to achieve that.

[Idaho]

I didnt I said its a dirty rotten buissness and thats just what I meant. Giving Stalin half of Europe wasnt such a good thing to do either but it was politically expedient. Things arent so simple. I make no excuses. I live in the real world.

Ok - so you agree that the current administration are liars, warmongerers and hypocrits. Excellent. That was easier than I thought.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Ok - so you agree that the current administration are liars, warmongerers and hypocrits. Excellent. That was easier than I thought.

This applies to all governments and politicians. I hate them all. Some more than others however. Like diplomacy government is a nessicary evil.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I assume, Idaho, that you are of similar opinion about FDR as you are about Rumsfeld. (sp?) After all, that man gave Eastern Europe away, and gave arms to Stalin.

Crazed Rabbit

[rory_20_uk]

Gave East Europe away? Are you insane??? There the Russian army had crushed 40 divisions of the Germans, and the USSR HAD the land! What were the allies to do? Fight for it all? A fight they had neither the arms or the will to do.

He gave arms to Stalin to fight Hitler - did you forget this? Without Stalin, the Allies would have lost the war! (Whether that is a bad thing or not long term is a different point).

If FDR was more cynical, he would have agreed to German demands for a unilateral peace and turn against the Russians as allies across Europe - arguably a very good idea.

Similarly, if FDR was more cynical, aid would have petered off to the USSR to allow them not to fail, but not prosper - bleeding the Germans and the Russians dry. Sadly he was a honorable man, and did not see the deviousness in Stalin until it was too late. Churchill was more aware of the true facts of the alliance, but was definitely the junior partner in the alliance.

[Watchman]

I've been told old Winston's health was seriously failing at the time, which would make it debatable how well aware in general he was of what was going on. That'd certainly help explain why Stalin looks so damn smug in those old Yalta photos...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Gave East Europe away? Are you insane??? There the Russian army had crushed 40 divisions of the Germans, and the USSR HAD the land! What were the allies to do? Fight for it all? A fight they had neither the arms or the will to do.

Your only making my point. They dont do what right but whats expedient at the time. Or do you think giving half of europe to Stalin was the right thing to do?

[rory_20_uk]

Wha? I wasn't saying otherwise!

I firmly believe that realpolitik is the way the world works. I don't like it, but then I am a man of few principles, as they are man made creations and have no place in the heartless universe we live in.

FDR was as far as I am aware an honest man - hence why he did so badly against Stalin.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

FDR was a savvy politician, but he was dying at the time of the last conference and was not at the top of his game.

Churchill was the one who failed to push hard enough for Poland and Czechoslovakia -- countries with whom the UK had made pre-war agreements of support -- but nothing would have kept the Baltic states, Moldavia, Rumania or Poland East of the 1939 partition line out of Soviet hands (their troops were already standing on the ground). Stopping them short of the Elbe would have required the Soviets to believe that we would A) have fought them if they didn't stop, and B) that the nukes would have been used as an equalizer.

I'm not sure either Churchill or FDR (even at his best) were quite that cold-blooded. Truman actually may have been, but was handed the ball only after the defeat of Germany was an accomplished fact and Poland already overrun.

[rory_20_uk]

Russian troops were in Germany and were either in or would be in Chekoslovakia. It was a fait accompli. Churchill had wanted to push to Berlin, but the Americans seemed happy to let the Russians take more of Europe. Churchill had also wanted a second front in the Balklands so that more of Europe would be in the Allied camp. Again this didn't happen as Stalin could see the danger in this.

Stalin was aware that nukes although powerful were small in number, and "knew" that the allies wouldn't nuke Europe. He also knew he could easily out fight the other powers any day of the week. Allies tanks were utter rubbish compared to Soviet and German models. And OK, so we ruled the seas... So what? USSR is predominantly a land based empire.

Churchill not cold blooded? He gave Stalin a map of Europe, drew a line down it, and Stalin agreed. With one exception it became where the Iron Curtain fell (Greece was "saved" by the use of Secret Services).

[Tribesman]

(Greece was "saved" by the use of Secret Services).

I thought it involved a large military deployment , that wasn't quite large enough so it had to be reinforced .
You see its quite hard for a few secret service agents to convince a guerilla group that controlled 2/3 of the country that it must give up its guns and let the pro-fascist guerillas take over .