From the NYTimes on Iraq...

[uh Clem]

I hope this helped.
You can argue that halabja is not casus belli.
Or that Saddam presents no threat to the West.
Or that the US is hypocritical.
But to argue that the Iraqis didnt do this IS close to holocaust denial. That large numbers of "peace" sites copy this drivel only calls their own moral integrity into question.

Whatever the Halabja attack was, it wasn't so bad that it caused the Reagan or Bush41 administrations to change their policies towards him. They were more than happy to help cover up the gas attack and even to deny publicly that it ever happened.

Saddam Hussein was the same scumbag in 1998 when **** Cheney was doing business with him. If what Cheney says about Saddam is true, then by his own actions he's guilty of treason.

Nothing that this administration says about Iraq can be trusted or taken at face value. They are liars, and must be treated as such. Like a stopped clock, they might be right from time to time, but it's strictly by coincidence.

Hence, the indignation & the table-pounding on the part of the war crazies is laughable at best and a moral disgrace at worst.

[monkspider]

Good article Ge. It brings an interesting new issue to the table.

[Urban Ranger]

The main point of the article is not whether Saddam gassed his own people. The main point is Duyba is eager to attack Iraq to plant a puppet regime, he is just trying to look for an excuse.

[lord of the mark]

More info on why Pelletiere is wrong

"The supposed factual basis for this conclusion is that the Halabja victims had blue lips, characteristic of the effects of cyanide gas--which Iraq was not believed to possess. Cyanide gas, a metabolic poison, would indeed produce blue lips, but they are far from being a specific indicator of its use. Nerve agents, which are acetylcholinesterase inhibitors that cause respiratory paralysis, would also turn victims' lips blue."

from human rights watch report, quoted in WSJ online

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sandman


This apparently reputable website dismisses the threat from aflatoxin: http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/bw_ii/bw...0-%20Aflatoxin

Thank you. The link confrims my point - aflatoxin has NO battlefield use.

The link presents limited evidence that it is not toxic long term either, but does not claim that this is certain, nor that the Iraqis believe there is no long term effect.

Seems clear to me the Iraqis want it for genocide.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
The main point of the article is not whether Saddam gassed his own people. The main point is Duyba is eager to attack Iraq to plant a puppet regime, he is just trying to look for an excuse.

take another look at the headline of the article