France vs US aka: Who Really Armed Iraq?

This thread is a spin-off from another. The quoted post below is from that original thread located here

Originally posted by Alchy
The gazes were used to kill some Kurd and Chiites, so no more gaz... but no one has ever found the Anthrax Reagan sold him in 1986.
Reagan signed the accord to sell Saddam MDW and many army items in 1986. And now, no one know were those weapons are!!!
We know that he didn't used them in Koweit, that's all.
Good job CIA that control nothing, and G. Bush lobby that produced the weapons.
And did he bought other weapons to any one else, and what other weapons, they look for so long, did the lobby (G. Bush) sold him?

Being a good for nothing is a perfect weapon to sell a war to America and control the world! (sorry for your money (in fact America doesn'y pay much of it's pocket in that war, oil price does it, so the world, don't believe you get poorer because of the war cost!) and soldiers, but many other strangers also die and pay for that war, at least with the price of oil that pay the war, when it is not freedom and health or job... thinking to many journalist and biographs, politics of any country, humanitarians, but also fishermen and else of France and elsewhere that can't continue with such a price of oil...)

Alchy,

Your rampant Anti-Americanism would be funny if it wasn�t so indicative of French culture today, and just plain wrong. For reasons that I can�t fully fathom, France has become an elitist, country of Les Hypocrites. The fact is that France sold plenty of weapons to Saddam. French President Jacques Chirac has long been a friend to Iraq and Saddam Hussein, and dictators worldwide. Not long ago, Chirac and France even pushed for the European Union to drop a ban on weapons sales to China that was established after the 1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square. Not surprisingly, the vote was 14 to 1 against dropping the ban, with France of course being the only country to vote �oui.� Thus the insistence that the US is somehow an evil presence in the world is rather ironic coming from the French.

If one is to condemn the American�s for supplying weapons to Iraq, then France MUST be held to the same standard. Below is just a SMALL listing of the weapons that France sold to or helped Iraq to procure.

WMD�s:
Biological:
Iraq�s declaration of it�s weapons program in December of 2002 to the UN, acknowledged that it�s biological weapons programs used 17 different germ samples, including anthrax and the bacteria needed to make botulinum toxin, that were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection of Manassas, Va., and France�s The Pasteur Institute to build it�s biological capabilities! However, one should also take into account that in the 1980�s, when these cultures were shipped to Iraq, the world was a different place, and shipments of biological specimens to �academic research labs� were fairly commonplace. In the late 80s and early 1990s, new strict rules were emplaced to restrict the sale of these items, once the extent of Iraq�s biological programs was realized. Once again, if you�re going to hold the US accountable for the later use of those specimens, then you must hold France responsible as well.

Nuclear:
I find it rather convenient how you consistently forget that it was France (and Russia) that helped Iraq build their two nuclear power plants. Once again it was, then Prime Minister, Jacques Chirac that helped seal the deal. France then sold two uranium reactors to Iraq for those nuclear plants. Oddly enough, it was that same uranium that Saddam later attempted to have refined into weapons grade fissile material.

Other Military Arms and Equipment:
France along with Russia and China armed Iraq with massive amounts of military equipment. From personal supplies for soldiers, to brokering deals for rocket fuel, France played a major part in creating Iraq�s military capability. Below are just a few of the items France personally sold to Iraq:

133 Mirage F-1 Airplanes
Gazelle Attack Helicopters
400 Exocet AM39 air-to-surface missiles
200 AS30 laser guided missiles
Roland surface-to-air missiles
Matra SNEB 68-millimeter rockets
155mm Howitzers
Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs)
Night-Vision Goggles and Sights
Trucks
Radios

Not to mention the parts to keep the planes flying, and the vehicles running.

So you see, it is one thing to debate the nature of the war, and whether or not the US was justified in preemptively striking Iraq. It is another thing entirely to insinuate that the US �armed� Iraq in order to �control the world� If one draws that conclusion from the facts, then by the same deductions, Chirac must be considered the new Napoleon.

-Cypher

In compiling this post, I used a number of sources both online and off., plus liberal use of Google and Yahoo searches for the terms France or French, Iraq, weapons, and sales. A few of the sites and articles are listed below:

www.janes.com...
intelweb.janes.com...
www.globalsecurity.org...
www.fas.org...
www.fas.org...
www.fas.org/asmp/library/asm/asm42.pdf
www.stimson.org...
www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2003/01/22/MN175128.DTL
[url]http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/iraqgermsusfrance.html
www.dailytimes.com.pk...
www.washingtontimes.com...
www.newsmax.com...

France and the USA are both responsible for selling weapons, germs and plans to saddam. So was Germany, the UK and others.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
France and the USA are both responsible for selling weapons, germs and plans to saddam. So was Germany, the UK and others.

- 100% correct ECK.

If I recall Reagan supplied the credits and deliberately pointed Saddam at France, the UK and the rest of Europe as sending US planes etc etc was not only illegal then but the Iranians might have called foul as he was supplying them with US kit through the back-door thanks to Ollie North & the CIA and their illegal treacherous actions.

Even Reagan (or at least his advisors) knew you couldn't be seen to openly back both sides....even if the actual policy was to help them maintain the pointless slaughter stalemate.



[edit on 18-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

jeez come on guys!!

France and the US are as bad as eachother when it comes to Iraq. They both supplied weapons and supported saddam's regime. The US took it one step further and also helped out the Iranian's against the Iraqi's.

I'll tell you who really armed Iraq : Russia. Those commies are the ones where Iraq got the vast majority of it's military equipment. Let's blame them!

thanks,
drfunk

Yes, weapons seller are all the same. Nicolas Sarkosy, french minister, is compleatly for Bush politic and war. He sells security too and made everything creasy and not undertoodable with his laws in France. He managed to do nothing and each time everybody told him it was stupid but he acted and we can move less and less (thinks to Chirac!)
Our countries are going to get poorer, all our countries. And they want it. Remember that the world is too little for so many Chinies, Indies... who will have cars soon and will pollute like us (and more espacially America which is 5% of the earth people and 25% of the pollution).
Oil is important, Iraq is 25% of the oil in the world and is control by G. Bush Lobby. Saoudi, control by G. Bush lobby, is 1/3 of the oil in the world. G. Bush lobby control the devellopement of China and India and the world!!!!

A good war in the world, a good war for the richer and most protect (this realy doesn't mean the american people) is what is to happen.

Bush and all his friends, Skull and Bones, Free Massonery international, need a world war to keep watch over the world.

America is the biggest weapon seller of the world and sold as much weapons to Iraq than USSR or Europ. France sold a few weapons to Saddam compared to USA.

The weapons sellers works together and for money and power.

America brought no freedom at all in Iraq, only chaos and hate. Nothing was inteligent in the invasion of Iraq.

Do we live in the same world and can you ear the earth that tell you Bush is a dictator, a murderer, a Christ funker, or are you like all people of dictatures, ready to die for a war made for one man and his friends of the dark side of the Skull and Bones and the Free Massonery?

Bush (the lobby, Cheney, Pearl, David Rockefeller...) has succed in everything he wanted to. He is not the good for nothing he say he is to anybody. He is also not a religious, one may read the bible to understand that so easily.

It's kind of ironic to see peopel from the US (as I am) accusing other countries of selling arms to bad guys. I think that's practically the basis of our country. Most of these extremists were our creation, most of their arms were supplied by us, but yet we point fingers at everyone else? Isn't that jsut a bit wrong? We won't even get into the Iran Contra scandal.

ECK, you missed the point of the post (imagine that) The point was NOT to condemn France for selling arms to Iraq, but to show how France, a major opponent of the war, was JUST as, if not more, complicit in arming Iraq in the first place. Moreover, it was DIRECTLY in rebuttal to those, Alchy included, who continue to insinuate that the US� perceived �imperialistic� goals are primarily responsible for allowing Saddam to become a threat in the first place. The object of my post was to show once and for all that to use US arms sales to Iraq as a justification for such biased claims, especially by the French, is outrageous in the face of France�s own arms deals. I did not include weapons sales from countries other than the US and France because they were not commented on in the original post, and quite frankly I thought my point could be made without them. If my thread name was misleading I apologize.

Sminkeypinkey, your right, ECK is factually correct. However, what he, you and others leave out, is that the sales of arms to Iraq and Iran did not happen in a political vacuum. At the time that the US sold arms to Iraq, no one knew the nature of Saddam Hussein. One could argue that his coup should have been an indicator of his propensity for violence, but hind sight is 20/20. But I digress� Iran was at the time, one of the most destabilizing forces in the Mid-East. It would have been na�ve for the US to look blithely away as Iran, a fundamentalist Islamic state, increased its power and influence in the region unchecked. Iraq on the other hand was a secular state, opposed to the fanaticism of Iran, and thus a natural ally for the US .

As for the sale of weapons to Iran; Again one must look at the politics of the time. The sale of TOW anti-tank and HAWK anti-aircraft missiles were to secure the release hostages. Did it go against President Reagan and the US� policy of not dealing with terrorists? Absolutely! Was it illegal? Yeah, probably. Did it empower Iran? Not really. At best, it allowed them to stop the Iraqi armor�s 1986 counter offensive, and fight Iraq to a stalemate. Now, having absorbed all of that, put it into the larger context of the cold war, a war which was fought between the Americans and the Soviets through their backing of opponents in conflicts worldwide, and the political nuances of the tumultuous Mid-East. Then, when you�re done doing that, add into the consideration the driving politics of the Arab world in the late 1970�s and 1980�s. Take ALL of that into consideration first, and then MAYBE you can start to argue about the correctness of any president or prime minister�s foreign policy.

Snoopy, I�m sorry you feel the way you do about your own country. However the fact is that it is a fallacy to just look at arms sales and who supported who, and then construe that one side or person is BAD. These things happen on a world stage, with more factors and players than most realize. If would be wonderful if the US could afford to wash their hands of all whose objectives or tactics are not morally acceptable. Unfortunately in the real world, it is much too often a choice between the lesser of two evils, and in order for the US to look out for their citizens best interest, they are sometimes forced to side with someone who may later become an enemy. This does not mean that they support the cause of their temporary ally, it just means that for the time being their aims coincide.

-Cypher

Originally posted by Alchy
The gazes were used to kill some Kurd and Chiites, so no more gaz... but no one has ever found the Anthrax Reagan sold him in 1986.
Reagan signed the accord to sell Saddam MDW and many army items in 1986. And now, no one know were those weapons are!!!
We know that he didn't used them in Koweit, that's all.
Good job CIA that control nothing, and G. Bush lobby that produced the weapons.
And did he bought other weapons to any one else, and what other weapons, they look for so long, did the lobby (G. Bush) sold him?




wait wait didnt someone from his country use the anthrax in the US in one of the pre 9/11 terrorist attacks I thought I heard something about some being released here in the US or in that subway where ever it was ....I may be wrong but be kind when you say so after all Im just an insane fool who woke up today to confuse the world

If one is to condemn the American�s for supplying weapons to Iraq, then France MUST be held to the same standard. Below is just a SMALL listing of the weapons that France sold to or helped Iraq to procure.

Why do you condemn someones dealings with a country that you illegally invaded? Conservatives are trying to change the subject of their failure in iraq, trying to manifest non-existant problems with a nation that is one of our key allies. Seriously, america is in no position today to be condemning any country that chose not to go on our 200 billion dollar failure. At least we still can have some faith left in certain countries with a conscience.

Originally posted by krackel
Why do you condemn someones dealings with a country that you illegally invaded? Conservatives are trying to change the subject of their failure in iraq, trying to manifest non-existant problems with a nation that is one of our key allies. Seriously, america is in no position today to be condemning any country that chose not to go on our 200 billion dollar failure. At least we still can have some faith left in certain countries with a conscience.

I wasn't trying to blame Iraq I was saying is it possible it was resold and found its way to one of the attacks shortly after reagan sold it in the first place