SBCY Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I'm not sure that's the case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein. Now you can argue the accuracy of Wikipedia because it's open contribution but it is strictly monitored and poured over by academics and leading authorities in specialised areas of topics. Ohh dear . I suggest you update a wiki page your self and see how easy it is ( depending on if it's not locked ) It only takes a Link . That's all . Saddam was armed and funded by the UK , USA , France and Germany . You can take that fact too the bank . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBCY Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 just read the link http://www.command-post.org/archives/002978.html. Saddam's Iraq was a Soviet client state, and his armoury reflected that. Almost everything was Soviet, French, and Chinese. The USA did not have any diplomatic relations at all with Iraq between 1967 and 1983, when in a bit of a rush, fearing Iran might win the Iran-Iraq war they finally started giving Saddam some support, but none of it ever came anywhere near to the amount of support Iraq had previously got, from the Soviet Union and others. Which hole is this coming from ? Saddam was helped into power by the CIA . But like I said you should read up before typing away . Last year secret documents were FINALY published proving thatcher gave Millions too Saddam_ http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/52add2c4-30b4-11e1-9436-00144feabdc0.html#axzz23qm4o3yd Margaret Thatcher supplied 78 different types of military equipment to the Iraqi regime. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/31/thatcher-secretly-armed-saddam-against-un-mandate/ But any way Like I said before its the same pattern of behaviour . Arming terrorists and dictators is the norm . And then they have the cheek too suggest we are at war with the same groups they are arming . George Orwell 1984. Comes too mind . Any one ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Ohh dear . I suggest you update a wiki page your self and see how easy it is ( depending on if it's not locked ) It only takes a Link . That's all . Saddam was armed and funded by the UK , USA , France and Germany . You can take that fact too the bank . They seemed to have an awful lot of AK47s, Russian tanks and planes for a country armed by the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Territory and natural resources don't involve big money and big business then? Tribal and religious rivalries would not end in civil war/foreign intervention/overthrowing governments if they weren't cultivated and enabled for the benefit of international powers. Behind every conflict there are people profiting from it. Well of course there are. Do you think that arms manufactureres give away their weaponry? One reason why Russia and China want no intervention in Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Mainly though, claim to territory,tribal rivalry,and need for power and possession,with natural resouces being a natural reason why Countries would put their own interests first. Not that i don't acknowledge that religion has probably been been responsible for most wars in history,but i doubt that without religions they're wouldn't still be wars. The costliest war of all time was fought for expansion of population, wheat and oil and a mad man's obssessions with "racial purity" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 They seemed to have an awful lot of AK47s, Russian tanks and planes for a country armed by the west. Not for want of trying. Sometimes western arms dealers managed to break the USSRs monopoly, just not as often as they would have liked. The british managed to sell them some armoured personnel carriers, the french sold them mirage fighters, and hundreds of advanced (then) battle tanks. Iran operates Grumman F-14 Tomcats! Arms traders aren't fussy as long as the money is good and there are no comebacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Not for want of trying. Sometimes western arms dealers managed to break the USSRs monopoly, just not as often as they would have liked. The british managed to sell them some armoured personnel carriers, the french sold them mirage fighters, and hundreds of advanced (then) battle tanks. Iran operates Grumman F-14 Tomcats! Arms traders aren't fussy as long as the money is good and there are no comebacks. I think you'll find that the American aircraft that Iran has are pretty much obsolete. Their F-14 Tomcats are the versions manufactured in the mid to late 70s. The other aircraft is the old F-4 Phantom going back to the 60s. No doubt these aircraft were sold to Iran when the Shah was in power and an ally of the west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleksandr Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 The Christians living in Syria ARE the decedants of the very first Christians. Some of them still speak the original language of Jesus . Then that makes it a good two millennia then, like I said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mort Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 closed for review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.