04-12-2003, 06:05 AM
Ok, let us just assume that this is correct and the US was "gullible or naive enough to trust Iraq" (BTW I never thought the DOC and the DOD to be acting overly naive; maybe only on what the outcome of military actions could be...). Further let us assume that the US's clear support for Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war did not play any role in this. So let us ignore reports about help from US military advisory for Iraq in this period of time (which could be wrong).
Under these assumptions (and they are big ones!) I still fail to see why the USA has the moral high ground in this issue which was my initial concern. If the Americans delivered key parts of CW or BW to a war faring country like Iraq, a country driven by a cruel dictator (this was common knowledge even back then because of the way Saddam came to power), then they have their share in guilt. Even if the export of those materials was a "naive" error.
Again my disclaimer: I do not claim that other nations are innocent. And this is not the slightest bit an argument against the war since "having moral high ground" is not this important for waging wars. There are real arguments against the war but they have nothing to do with American exports in the 80's.
Bye,
ergates
Under these assumptions (and they are big ones!) I still fail to see why the USA has the moral high ground in this issue which was my initial concern. If the Americans delivered key parts of CW or BW to a war faring country like Iraq, a country driven by a cruel dictator (this was common knowledge even back then because of the way Saddam came to power), then they have their share in guilt. Even if the export of those materials was a "naive" error.
Again my disclaimer: I do not claim that other nations are innocent. And this is not the slightest bit an argument against the war since "having moral high ground" is not this important for waging wars. There are real arguments against the war but they have nothing to do with American exports in the 80's.
Bye,
ergates