Bringing peace to Iraq. : Melbourne Indymedia

It is now abundantly clear that there is only one legal and moral option available for bringing peace and stability to Iraq and to stem the growth in Islamic militancy and the attendant growth in guerilla warfare against western countries.

1/ A UN sanctioned multi-national peace-keeping force must be convened and deployed to Iraq.

2/ Upon the deployment of the UN force, the immediate withdrawal of all militant insurgents from the illegal "Coalition of the Willing" occupation.

3/ "Coalition of the willing" to pay reparations for physical damage to Iraqi infrastructure and compensation to the Iraqi people for all forms of loss and suffering.

4/ Such payments to be commensurate with those amounts awarded by the US legal system for similar atrocities if they had occurred in the US.

5/ Companies and personal from countries that participated in the "Coalition of the willing" shall be excluded from all tender processes for the reconstruction of Iraq unless specifically and explicitly approved by a democratically elected Iraqi parliament.

Prepared by the BKMC Department of Homeland Security.

6/ "Coalition of the willing" shall foot the UN bill as well.

And a note to the UN along the lines of "sorry about that...and thank you" would be a nice touch too.

"...A UN sanctioned multi-national peace-keeping force must be convened and deployed to Iraq..."

What bk really mean is a peace-making force. Because as our super-wise bk knows, a UN force hasn't been able to bring peace to any region it has entered into that...ummm... didn't already have peace peace in the first place.

However, big Kof ain't too keen on his dudes going to Iraq, what with aid guys being bombed and all:

"For the foreseeable future, insecurity is going to be a major constraint for us. And so I cannot say right now that I am going to be sending in a large U.N. team."

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040414-010336-6554r.htm

How bk thinks the sky blue hats will "...stem the growth in Islamic militancy..." is anyone's guess, what with Iran pumping them full of cash and arms in an attempt to expand a shiite caliphate (I wonder what the Sunnis have to say about this let alone the Kurds).

A meal of Mogadishu anyone? Or do you prefer a sprinkle of Srebrenica?

And coalition military wouldn't form part of this "force" in the bk world? I can just see those crack Kenyan counter-insurgency troops stemming the Iraqi power vaccuum.

Allahu Akbaar.

Well Tank, this is where you need faith in your fellow man. Despite what Donald, Rupert and co. tell you it's not an "Arab/Muslim thing". You have to assume that Iraqis want peace and prosperity and will assist in the process. I suspect you've been reading too much of your own and Rupert and co.'s publicity.

I mean it's not like the UN are going to be viewed as an invading colonialist alliance like the "COW" is it? The UN won't be there to install a puppet regime like the "COW" is trying to do. I think Kofis reticence hinges on his suspicion that the "COW" will try to keep hanging round like a bad smell. You can imagine the carnage orchestrated by the "COW" if they could divert blame and attention onto the UN. I think you'd find, with the smelly old "COW" gone, Iraq would come up smelling like roses.

I also think we should look to the example of East Timor as a inspirational and comparable model. Indonesian rule was never accepted and the occupation became untenable. It was never an option short of complete genocide of the East Timorese.

When you say "a UN force hasn't been able to bring peace to any region it has entered into that...ummm... didn't already have peace peace in the first place. " are you saying that INTERFET only bought peace to E. Timor because it was peaceful already?

And, when the INTERFET force arrived the local resistence didn't turn on them did it? What are they idiots? No that tag is reserved for the likes of the greedy capitalist vultures who thought, with their lustful eyes bulging out of their heads and salivating at the prospect, they could steal by force, control over Iraqs oil.

Similarly Tank puzzles at how such a strategy might contribute to "...stem the growth in Islamic militancy...". I'd have thought principled and honest foreign policy in western countries would be a nice start to harmonious international relations. It's paid off for most nations with a few notable exceptions. I mean deceptive and corrupt meddling and manipulation in the autonomy and governance of foreign countries tends not to help in building honest and equitable relationships for some reason. You don't subscribe to that nonsense about "they hate our freedoms" do you? They hate that we don't respect their freedoms, their rights, their choices. Sure they're not perfect like us but who appointed us as the worlds moral authority and arbiters on everything anyway? If we're patient they'll soon see that the sun really does shine out of our arse.

But first things first we must stop the senseless slaughter of innocent Iraqis by the illegal and immoral "COW". To that end I must stand behind my proposal and, for the safety of Iraqis and the soon to be deployed UN operatives, propose a seventh point:

7/ Nationals from "COW" nations are not to paricpate in the UN peace mission.

Given that TNI support for East Timorese militia was starved, INTERFET's job was less dangerous than that of a copper in late-night Lakemba.

But funny that, though. One particular "COW" provided the vast majority of modern military expertise to the Fet. Maybe bk remembers who that was.

If he doesn't, Samudra and Muklas certainly did. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/10/1044725719934.html

But since "...it's not like the UN are going to be viewed as an invading colonialist..." I guess that's ok.

Send in the hats!

"China is shocked at the devastating bomb attack on the United Nations (UN) headquarters in Iraq, Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said in Beijing Tuesday.

China condemns the violent attack meant for the UN staff, Kong said, extending condolences to the victims and sympathy and solicitude for the sufferers in the blast."
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-08/20/content_256539.htm

Don't worry about about the hardware Tank! As an act of contrition the "COW" boys will foot the bill and provide the bloody stuff if necessary.

And don't worry about getting numbers of bods either. Pakistan alone could provide enough delinquent Muslim youf for the job.

And that bomb at the UN HQ in Iraq, see what I mean about getting mixed up with a bad crowd like "COW". Crikey, those "COW"boys might even have done it themselves for psy-op/propaganda purposes. You just never know with those "COW"boys, they're a dodgy and bad mob.

Geez, and that tone of panic Tank. Anyone would be forgiven for thinking that

A/ you believe that you were going to have to pay for this operation yourself, and

B/ that the sun really does shine out the "COW"boys arses, and

C/ that the rest of the world still lives in tents. Have ya ever been past Lakemba spentarse?

Oh sorry, that slipped out. I'm seeing mutated spinifexi everywhere these days. For some reason.

I disagree with the UN being a solution to any problem. Look at the people who run the UN. The leaders of the most powerful nations in the world. Thier role in thier countries is to represent the needs of the ruling capitalist class. The class that creates these wars in the first place.
If people have any opposition to imperialism they must realise that it is an inevitable syptom of capitalism. And the role of the UN has nothing to do with peace it's about:

A/ Providing a figleaf of legitimacy for imperialist military intervention

B/ Ensuring there is at least some co-operation between competing nations (so we don't have another WW2)

C/ Keeping the richest and most powerful states on top and enabling them to exploit poorer nations more effectively (this ties in woth point B)

Valid criticisms gilbert, but, in the absence of perfection, what organisation has the capacity to fulfill the function of peace-keeping in post invasion Iraq? The Melbourne University Liberal Club? Black Flag? Mutated Spinifexi Inc.?

I do agree though that the UN has a long way to go before it could truly be considered democratic and transparent. It must be doing something right though if the Seppos want to sink it.

bkm(c),

I also suggest that elements of the former Ba'athist regime should be held accountable, both legally and financially, for the crimes they committed against the Iraqi and Kurdish peoples during the period of Saddam's regime.

The Anfal genocide is a particular case in point.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/

As a self confessed National Socialist, you should be aware of how this process works.

I think anyone who worked to PREVENT the overthrow of the Ba'athist regime should be prosecuted as a war criminal and for crimes against humanity.

For example, Bob Brown, Noam Chomksky, and perhaps the governments of France and Russia who were the regime's chief weapons suppliers in the Saddam era.

Russia alone supplied 98 per cent of Saddam's weapons.

As Abbas Khalaf the Iraq ambassador to Russia said:

"All our economic infrastructure, energy industry, defence industry, agriculture and 98 per cent of our military equipment are of Russian origin. If the sanctions are lifted, Iraq would have no choice except close cooperation with Russia."

http://squawk.ca/lbo-talk/0208/0743.html

Russia was formally alied to Iraq while Mr Putin was in charge of the KGB, so clearly culpability extends to the present government of Russia.

Certainly, collaborators with the regime such as the so called "human shields" and those presently collaborating with Ba'ath "resistance" fighters, such as John Pilger and Tariq Aly, are accessories to the regime's crimes.

Bkm(c) himself acknowledges the scale of these crimes in the following;

"....At this link that you cite http://www.iraqfoundation.org/hr/2002/cdec/19_iraq.html it states "with victims believed to range between 250,000 and 290,000 over the past two decades, among them at least 100,000 people who are believed to have perished in the Anfal campaign against the Kurds" ..."

See this admission at;

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/61170_comment.php

- ironically, this was part of an attempt by bkm(c) to discredit opponents of the Ba'athist regime who claimed much larger numbers of casualties.

Go to the link and see for yourself.

People like bkm(c) did NOTHING to defeat Saddam, except recycle his lies and propaganda whilst posing as "peace activists"

They now wish to disguise their complicity in his crimes by phoney expressions of concern for the victims.

For an insight into See bkm(c)'s actual views, see his comments on the "redeeming feature of national socialism" at;

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2003/10/56201_comment.php

See his comment;

"Jews who cannot establish a direct connection with Palestine prior to 1881 should be invited to emigrate..."

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/60956_comment.php

- and at the Lunar Watch website where he enjoys prominence as a latter days Nazi appologist

Hello spentarse old chap. How's the Crisco supply holding out? Cellared a few have ya?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Did you read this bit I wrote entitled "Your brain is fucked Crisco."? It deals with most of the nonsense you spout about Iraq.

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/66736_comment.php#66918

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You know how funny we think it is when you get mad, well I've devised a little game that I'll call "parse the parsnip" ( I agree, it is just a little parsonmonious).

The idea is to spot new pseudonyms that you use and add them onto the list and post it after your new "anonymous" comment. D'you like it? I'll start...(I won't use all the ones I know as the game is open to everyone)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Crisco up your butthole

zvinger

spinifex

Rebecca Wolstonecroft

ed fusco

popcorn

lesbian and proud

zero point seven per cent

Chris Parsons
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

take it away baby!

"... It deals with most of the nonsense you spout about Iraq..."

That reminds me.

One other issue bkm(c) fails to confront (i.e deliberately ignores) is the probable ineffectiveness of any future UN protection force in Iraq.

Given that such forces were virtually useless in Rwanda, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere, being either totally ineffectual or so under-resourced they quickly became hostage to local warlords like Slobo Milosovic and Hutu militias and the like, it is easy to understand why a malignant moral pervert such as bkm(c) would urge their involvement in Iraq.

The idea of a catastrophic regional political collapse in a state bordering on Israel doubtless appeals to the Jew-baiting race hate criminal in him.

"being either totally ineffectual or so under-resourced "

Won't be a problem Crisco, The "COW"boys are footing the bill. Remember? So they won't be able to tightarse the operation like they did those other ones you mentioned.

Nah, with the "COW"boys shouting this'll be the most luxurious peace-keeping mission ever. Halal caviar in the mess, silk sheets etc etc. No expense spared.

Luxury.

BTW, did you see that marvellous article by P-I-L-G-E-R that brian cross posted. Just marvellous, spot on.

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/67121.php

"....Won't be a problem Crisco, The "COW"boys are footing the bill. Remember? ...."

They sure are;

"US President George W Bush signalled support today for an interim government to take power in Iraq on June 30, saying the plan under development by a UN envoy is "broadly acceptable to the Iraqi people"....."

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/17/1082055665493.html

Racist sum like bkmc did NOTHING to overthrow the fascist regime of Saddam Hussein - except cheer on the "resistance" afterwards.

Oh, and a few idiots on the left did things like fake their own abductions......

While I disagree with the thrust of bkm(c)'s proposals (I have a similar attitude to gilbert on this, which I'll expand on later if this thread doesn't completely degenerate) at least he's made proposals.

Do you have any proposals of your own for ending this war, Rebeccaifex?

Wrong again spentarse. At present the "COW"boys don't intend to pay for their invasion. They are expecting to charge the victims for it!

Really I don't know why I bother with you when you are so stubbornly determined to remain ignorant.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"In January the Pentagon formed its own planning group, under the leadership of Douglas Feith, to study what it should do with Iraq's oil after the liberation of Baghdad. Within a month this group learned just enough about oil economics to retreat in horror from the neo-conservatives' earlier proposals. Initially, officials at the Pentagon and the White House assumed that they would be able to recoup the costs of the war by dipping into Iraq's oil revenues. If they needed more money, all they had to do was to open the pipeline taps. "

http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000559.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"These are not small sums for a country only earning $15bn a year from oil exports. Yet they represent only a tiny fraction of the costs that the US had been hoping could be covered by Iraqi oil exports. No one knows exactly how much the invasion of Iraq will cost the Pentagon, but the Bush administration’s own estimates begin at $100bn (see Iraq: misreading the vital signs). The Congressional Budget Office guesses that the price of maintaining US troops in Iraq will be between $12bn and $45bn annually. Iraq’s outstanding foreign debts, which total over $110bn, would need $5-12bn a year to service. Once US officials discovered this, they began lobbying to have these debts, held largely by Arab states, Russia and France, forgiven after the war. Outstanding claims against Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait total about $300bn, although the United Nations agency responsible for collecting them does not think Iraq will have to pay more than $40bn - again, because the US is beginning to lobby Kuwait to drop its indemnity (2). No one knows how much humanitarian assistance will cost - but even in peacetime Iraq imports $14.5bn of food and medicine each year."

http://mondediplo.com/2003/04/03oil

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The U.S. Export-Import Bank is engaged in an “ongoing conversation” with administration officials and the government’s contractors over a proposal to fund some near-term rebuilding costs, said David Chavern, the bank’s deputy general counsel. The Ex-Im Bank, a federal agency, would recoup its loan through the future Iraqi oil sales. "

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0803/082803h1.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-consp.htm

First of all, lets get this clear. The war was never about liberation. It was always about exploitation, militarism and imperialism. The Iraqis know this, so should we.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/07/news/companies/halliburton_iraq_con/

So it's not really a debate whether or not the US will foot the bill. The reality is that contracts are being handed out to corporations with ties to the Bush regime. Even if the White House does hand over some money to rebuild Iraq, the cronies who work there and thier fellow ruling class scum will get the money back by profiting from the exploitation of Iraq's people and natural resources. It works for them because it was the average Americans who payed for the war through thier taxes in the first place. It's just another was of transfering wealth from the poor to the rich.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=3468

As soon as the US forces had invaded the first things they consolidated where the oilfields and the pipelines. This shows where thier interests lied. Not in saving people, but in saving the precious oil. The Iraqis knew that, and some fought back.

http://www.iraqinationalnetwork.net/news/2003/bnov/5_contracts.html

But the real reason the US went to war was not to get some oil, or necessarily even win some rebuilding contracts. It was to further spread thier military dominance of the world.

As for the UN as a solution. All that means is that the US has to share military control and oil profits with other nations. Well, capitalism has never been about sharing.

OK Gilbert, but who is going to fill the void when the invading colonialists withdraw? They can't be allowed to stay, that would only reward anti-social psychopathology.

So if they left, the vacuum created would be ideal for a 'law of the jungle' style "reconstruction". Most likely victors would be the remnants of Saddams regime or similar stand-over thugs. More of the same?

So...who has the resources to fill the peace-keeping roll while civil and governmental institutions and infrastructure are rebuilt?

Presumably the initial goal is a secular approximation of "democracy" and after that...

I think this idea that if all western control was withdrawn from Iraq it would descend into chaos is wrong and (i'm sorry) quite racist.

The reality is that the people of Iraq are demanding democratic elections be held now. Not at a time determined by the US or the UN. They are attempting to organise democracy themselves, in thier own communities and are being prevented from doing so by the US forces.

http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/letter1225.php

What we need now is for Iraqis to be given the right of self determination. Resources should be sent to help build Iraqi trade unions and allow them to reconstruct the country without foreign intervention.

We should support organisations and political parties that stand for a democratic, independant and secular Iraq. Do whatever we can to make sure thier message gets to the Iraqi people.

http://www.wpiraq.org/english/

The reality is that the longer the west intervenes in Iraq the less likely it is that Iraqis will succeed in thier struggle for democracy.

The UN is manifestly and demonstarbly incapable of "peace keeping" without massive US support.

Yesterday's little shoot out between Jordanian and American Police on tour with the UN "peace keepers" in the former Yugoslavia is merely the latest, albeit statistically modest demonstration of the UN's tragi-comedic incompetence in that regard.

Proposals for multi-national forces comprising Arab states are always being cited at IMM as examples of leftist "wisdom", too.

And they are good examples of "left wisdon" in a curious sort of way - completely ignoring, as they do, the obvious fact that the largest, most powerful player in the region, Iran, is not even Arabic and so plainly keen to over-run the region that the sudden appearance in Iraq of, say, a large Jordanian, Syrian or other non- Shi'ite force would almost certainly result in a civil war with each and every side enjoying the backing of large, foreign powers.

At least all the idiotic comparisons of Iraq with Vietnam would become relevant.

Fer Chissakes - what do you think this bullshit with Sadr is if not an Iranian backed coup attempt with an expendable patsy at the "head" of the "uprising".

Multiply that by how many ever "multi-national Arab" or "non western) elements you want to add to the equation.

So, imagine if the USA pulled out - and some idiot (Gilbert for example) dropped in a few contingents from the Indian Army or Algerian Army or Senegalese National Defense Force or whatever to take their place on the grounds they were sufficiently ethnically quaint to impress St Kilda Cafe Society.

The Iranians would be eating them halal style by brteakfast tommorrow.

And - as whenever this sort of thing happened in the past - Bob Brown, Naomi, Noam, and the entire 0.7 per cent of the electorate they represent - would be running around like chooks with their heads off demanding the US "intervene on humanitarian grounds".

Until they actually DID intervene, then they'd be demanding they "end the occupation"

See Rwanda, Serbia, Bosnia, Sudan, Somalia, Korea, etc, ect

If there was a genuine Shiite uprising in Iraq, the coalition would be toast.

Therefore;

We should keep going until "the job is done" as they say. with the mainstream Shiites on side.

The US and UK have the resources and power on the ground to regulate the various competing forces at play, and the idea of a national convention and secular constitution with bona fide transfer of sovreignty is not only plausibe, it's Iraq's only chance.

the alternative is to split the place into three smaller, though possibly regretably more vulnerable, states.

I'd love to see a free Kurdistan - but it won't happen for another fifty years and not without bloodshed.

Gilbert, simply acknowleging that the west can bring sufficieit power to bear on the conflicting elements in the region is NOT relegating the PEOPLE of the region to some kind of inferior status.

Stop being so stupidly racist.

"The UN is manifestly and demonstarbly incapable of "peace keeping" without massive US support."

Oh yes of course. If it weren't for the Americans the rest of the world would still be living in CAVES.

IDIOT!!!

Bury your face in your fluffy lace pillow and bite before you wail you arselicking lame wanker nancy boy goose moron kook pencil neck geek humungous clown.

"Gilbert, simply acknowleging that the west can bring sufficieit power to bear on the conflicting elements in the region is NOT relegating the PEOPLE of the region to some kind of inferior status."

The US and the UN created most of the problems in the first place. Why would they be able to fix it. US backing (among other nations) meant Saddam Hussein was able to maintain power for all those years despite popular opposition to his rule. Followed by 10 years of UN sanctions on Iraq which eventuated with the deaths of a million people. To top it all off, the US wages bloody war on Iraq killing tens of thousands of people and shoots them when they demonstrate for democracy and censors the press. And people say that the Iraqis are ingrates when they want them to leave.

The reality is that you ARE racist. You think that westerners are the only people capable of creating democracy, as if Iraqis are somehow incapable of running thier own lives despite the fact that they are trying to but being stopped by the brutal US forces.

So when an Iraqi demonstrates on the street and he/she gets shot at by US marines, do you support that? Is that the path to democracy?

http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Iraq/043003_us_soldiers.htm

When a trade union tries to organise for workers rights but it's office gets trashed by US troops do you support that? will that bring democracy?

Or maybe you don't know what democracy means. Democracy is a "government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives." When the US are killing the people yet governing the country it doesn't look much like a democracy does it? And when there are no elections and when the people try to organise them only to have them cancelled by the US forces and puppet administrators simply placed in the positions it just looks more likely that the US was never concerned with democracy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42905-2003Jun27?language=printer

http://www.progressive.org/webex03/wx120403.html

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=democracy

It's all falling into place. Pretty soon the President will announce that he is adopting the bkm(c) plan wholus-bolus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bush seeks support for UN resolution on Iraq handover

Just a day after he tried to reassure the world of America's plans for Iraq, President George W. Bush has been talking to international leaders to try and build support for the new United Nations resolution on Iraq. The President was also gauging reaction to yesterday's speech, in which he spelt out his five-point plan to restore stability to the country.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1116271.htm

"...US backing (among other nations) meant Saddam Hussein was able to maintain power for all those years despite popular opposition to his rule...."

Among other nations? And WHICH nations might they be, Gilbert? And to what degree?

What Gilbert MEANS is this;

"While we have previously stated that the US 'armed and backed' Saddam, we have often had our attention drawn to the fact that this is a lie and that overwhelmingly Saddam was armed and backed by his actual formal ally, the USSR (98 percent) and subsequently upon the collapse of the Soviet union by the CIS, China, France and practically everyone else EXCEPT the USA - and that even Australia contributed more in actual support for Saddam throught its food exports than the USA and that it is a matter of dcumented record that the USA could not have supplied more than 1 per cent of all Iraq's imports in total. But never mind, we'll just go on telling the same stupi lie over and over and over and over because that's what we do here at Indymedia Melbourne..."

http://squawk.ca/lbo-talk/0208/0743.html

Abbas Khalaf the Iraq ambassador to Russia said:

"All our economic infrastructure, energy industry, defence industry, agriculture and 98 per cent of our military equipment are of Russian origin. If the sanctions are lifted, Iraq would have no choice except close cooperation with Russia."

http://squawk.ca/lbo-talk/0208/0743.html

That's what you meant to say, isn't it Gilbert?

Whenever the Manly marauder get's in a tight fix he sticks his zvingers in his ears, his tongue out, ignores responses and reverts to his 'one size fits all' irrelevat response. And it goes like this....

I can't hear you blah blah blah I can't hear you nya nya nya nyaah

The bits he "accidently" leaves out...

That figure is based on "killings and disappearances". So what number fled the conflicts? No doubt some of the "victims" that spentarse added to his tally ended up trying to "queue-jump" into Australia.

Interestingly the Anfal campaign (against Kurds) occurred when Saddam and the US were still great mates. What did the US do about this atrocity? They did stuff all (besides trying to blame Iran) and most likely it was chemical weapons that they had provided that were used anyway.

The execution pits and mass graves of Saddam existed but not on a scale to match spentarses fevered imagination. The greatest toll on human life in Iraq over the past two decades is a result of the US orchestrated siege and invasion. The mass graves are the civilian cemeteries.

...and let's not delve to deeply into the reliability of the source (Mr Chalabi & co?)

melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/61170_comment.php#61570

~!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Your brain is fucked Crisco.
by bkm(c) Wednesday April 14, 2004 at 11:43 PM

"Abbas Khalaf the Iraq ambassador to Russia said: ..."

The Iraqi Ambassador to Russia? Hmmm, no agendas there, no-one to please, no troubled waters requiring a liberal dose of oil. Completely impartial! I wonder if he's related to Comic Ali?

And the source of the article was a 'Russia Business List'.

Scintillating scholarship Crisco! I'm inspired, can I've a go?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Who Armed Iraq?

By Paul Rockwell

"According to the December declaration, treated with much derision from the Bush administration, U.S. and Western companies played a key role in building Hussein's war machine. The 1,200-page document contains a list of Western corporations and countries – as well as individuals – that exported chemical and biological materials to Iraq in the past two decades.

Embarrassed, no doubt, by revelations of their own complicity in Mideast arms proliferation, the U.S.-led Security Council censored the entire dossier, deleting more than 100 names of companies and groups that profited from Iraq's crimes and aggression. The censorship came too late, however. The long list – including names of large U.S. corporations – Dupont, Hewlett-Packard, and Honeywell – was leaked to a German daily, Die Tageszeitung. Despite the Security Council coverup, the truth came out."

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15322

Who armed Iraq?

By Andy Oppenheimer

"An investigation of US corporate sales to Iraq, headed by Republican Congressman Donald Riegle and published in May 1994, listed some of the biological agents exported by US corporations with George Bush's approval as head of the CIA and later as vice-president under Ronald Reagan. The Iraqis are reported to have acquired stocks of anthrax, brucellosis, gas gangrene, E. coli and salmonella bacteria from US companies. "

http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jcbw/jcbw030417_1_n.shtml

I could go on all night...

Don't miss this one though,

http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/specific_data_index.html

or this

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

and this

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=4685

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On second thoughts, you're still serving up the same sloppy shit spentarse.

You're fucking pathetic. Break out the Crisco and drown your sorrows you sad sack of shit.

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/66736_comment.php#66918