Rumsfeld backed Saddam even after chemical attacks

Rumsfeld backed Saddam even after chemical attacks
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
24 December 2003


Fresh controversy about Donald Rumsfeld's personal dealings with Saddam Hussein was provoked yesterday by new documents that reveal he went to Iraq to show America's support for the regime despite its use of chemical weapons.

The formerly secret documents reveal the Defence Secretary travelled to Baghdad 20 years ago to assure Iraq that America's condemnation of its use of chemical weapons was made "strictly" in principle.

The criticism in no way changed Washington's wish to support Iraq in its war against Iran and "to improve bi-lateral relations ... at a pace of Iraq's choosing".

Earlier this year, Mr Rumsfeld and other members of the Bush administration regularly cited Saddam's willingness to use chemical weapons against his own people as evidence of the threat presented to the rest of the world.

Senior officials presented the attacks against the Kurds - particularly the notorious attack in Halabja in 1988 - as a justification for the invasion and the ousting of Saddam.

But the newly declassified documents reveal that 20 years ago America's position was different and that the administration of President Ronald Reagan was concerned about maintaining good relations with Iraq despite evidence of Saddam's "almost daily" use of chemical weapons against Iranian troops and Kurdish rebels.

Read more of the article here

if US papers would pick this up. It totally destroys the argument that we went into Iraq because Saddam was such a bad, bad person.

The phoniness and hypocrisy are SICKENING.

what gets me is their gall with playing us like fools.

Proliferation was the name of the game in the '80s -- the U.S., U.K., and several European nations aggressively ignored their arms-export controls to cash in on the Iraq-arming bonanza. What almost all media, even The Independent, fail to note, is that these enterprises were absolutely illegal -- if Saddam is prosecuted, so should the many people who violated anti-proliferation laws to use him as their blunt instrument in the Middle East.

alternatives to what was percieved as a "global" threat (Iran).

Now, those same governments may be posed with the possibility of Iran playing the "moderate" to Iraq anarchy.

Ugh, that damn Orwellian twist again.

published stories regarding this during the last week

Rummy Dummy and the Reagan cabal could also be charged with crimes against humanity as accesories to the crime???

Just wondering!

There is a pic circulating on the internet actually showing Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein. The pic has been out for a long time. Let's see Bush spin this pic !

So What! I'm sure you could find Photos of FDR being "buddy buddy" with Stalin. If you look back @ history Our enemies of today could be our Friends tomorrow and of course our Friends today could be our enemies tomorrow. We all need to keep this in mind.

If Rumsfield supported and possibly even helped Saddam gassing his own people, and Bush believes that gassing your own people is wrong (and hasn't it been used as part of the justification for the attack when no WMD were found) then shouldn't Rumsfield be fired at the least and possible even tried for war crimes?

What did the world do with those who helped the Nazis kill their own people?

the shadow government over time here, something we can do something about by publicizing the facts of Iraqgate, Reagan/Bush/Thatcher, Iran Contra, BCCI, etc.
http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/hidden/teicher.htm

http://www.rememberjohn.com/talibantexas.html

http://www.populist.com/02.17.burns.html

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

BTW, welcome to DU!

Rumsfeld told Saddam it was okay to use chemical weapons. Any freepers lurking nearby ?

be popping up. I wonder what he will take the fall for on his way out.

And don't forget Ronnie gave arms to Iran to keep from having his own hostage situation.