http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2097.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2098.htm
CIA analyst Stephen Pelletiere (ret. prof at the Army War College)
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
^ Please post your opinion and what you really want to discuss.... also post a summary from the video, not everybody can go through full video.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
The original article by Stephen Pelletiere printed in the New York Times in 2003.
A War Crime or an Act of War?
By STEPHEN C. PELLETIERE
ECHANICSBURG, Pa. — It was no surprise that President Bush, lacking smoking-gun evidence of Iraq’s weapons programs, used his State of the Union address to re-emphasize the moral case for an invasion: “The dictator who is assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.” The accusation that Iraq has used chemical weapons against its citizens is a familiar part of the debate. The piece of hard evidence most frequently brought up concerns the gassing of Iraqi Kurds at the town of Halabja in March 1988, near the end of the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. President Bush himself has cited Iraq’s “gassing its own people,” specifically at Halabja, as a reason to topple Saddam Hussein. But the truth is, all we know for certain is that Kurds were bombarded with poison gas that day at Halabja. We cannot say with any certainty that Iraqi chemical weapons killed the Kurds. This is not the only distortion in the Halabja story.
I am in a position to know because, as the Central Intelligence Agency’s senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, and as a professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, I was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf. In addition, I headed a 1991 Army investigation into how the Iraqis would fight a war against the United States; the classified version of the report went into great detail on the Halabja affair. This much about the gassing at Halabja we undoubtedly know: it came about in the course of a battle between Iraqis and Iranians. Iraq used chemical weapons to try to kill Iranians who had seized the town, which is in northern Iraq not far from the Iranian border. The Kurdish civilians who died had the misfortune to be caught up in that exchange. But they were not Iraq’s main target. And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas. The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds’ bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent — that is, a cyanide-based gas — which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time. These facts have long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned. A much-discussed article in The New Yorker last March did not make reference to the Defense Intelligence Agency report or consider that Iranian gas might have killed the Kurds. On the rare occasions the report is brought up, there is usually speculation, with no proof, that it was skewed out of American political favoritism toward Iraq in its war against Iran. I am not trying to rehabilitate the character of Saddam Hussein. He has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them.
In fact, those who really feel that the disaster at Halabja has bearing on today might want to consider a different question: Why was Iran so keen on taking the town? A closer look may shed light on America’s impetus to invade Iraq. We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world’s largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, there are the Greater Zab and Lesser Zab rivers in the north of the country. Iraq was covered with irrigation works by the sixth century A.D., and was a granary for the region.
Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990’s there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change. Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades — not solely by controlling Iraq’s oil, but by controlling its water. Even if America didn’t occupy the country, once Mr. Hussein’s Baath Party is driven from power, many lucrative opportunities would open up for American companies. All that is needed to get us into war is one clear reason for acting, one that would be generally persuasive. But efforts to link the Iraqis directly to Osama bin Laden have proved inconclusive. Assertions that Iraq threatens its neighbors have also failed to create much resolve; in its present debilitated condition — thanks to United Nations sanctions — Iraq’s conventional forces threaten no one. Perhaps the strongest argument left for taking us to war quickly is that Saddam Hussein has committed human rights atrocities against his people. And the most dramatic case are the accusations about Halabja. Before we go to war over Halabja, the administration owes the American people the full facts. And if it has other examples of Saddam Hussein gassing Kurds, it must show that they were not pro-Iranian Kurdish guerrillas who died fighting alongside Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Until Washington gives us proof of Saddam Hussein’s supposed atrocities, why are we picking on Iraq on human rights grounds, particularly when there are so many other repressive regimes Washington supports?
Stephen C. Pelletiere is author of “Iraq and the International Oil System: Why America Went to War in the Persian Gulf.”
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
The US did indeed believe that Iran had used these weapons as they had no idea that Saddam had the capacity to develop this specific type of weapon. This set off a nearly golbal hunt to see if he could have bought the percursors and equipemnt necessary to construct this new type of weapon.
Thaey found that indeed Saddam had left a trail of evidence that indicated that his biological and chemical weapons program was much further along than anyone had thought. This was the not the first time that Saddams programs fooled intelligence. Later, within a week of the time when Hans Blix (when he was running the IAEA) was going to declare Saddams nuclear program totally peaceful, Saddams son-in-law defected and let the world know that Saddam had a completely cover nuclear program that had not been detected.
These are the reasons that Scott Ritter and Hans Blix were no longer believed. Saddam had a track record of successfully hiding advanced programs. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Thaey found that indeed Saddam had left a trail of evidence that indicated that his biological and chemical weapons program was much further along than anyone had thought. This was the not the first time that Saddams programs fooled intelligence. Later, within a week of the time when Hans Blix (when he was running the IAEA) was going to declare Saddams nuclear program totally peaceful, Saddams son-in-law defected and let the world know that Saddam had a completely cover nuclear program that had not been detected.
These are the reasons that Scott Ritter and Hans Blix were no longer believed. Saddam had a track record of successfully hiding advanced programs. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...
Well he was pretty justified giving his son in law a traitors death then.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
So anyone who spills the beans on covert nuclear programs deserves a death sentence? Doesn't say much for those who claim Iran and others have only peaceful programs.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
By that standard Mordechai Vananu or whatever he was called should have been executed for revealing that Israel had developed nuclear weapons?
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Semi, Why cannot Iran, Iraq or any other country for that matter should be stopped from developing nuclear technology? Forget the peaceful or military purpose. All nations have the right to pursue any technology they think will help them economically, militarily etc.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
That is a huge gulf between the West and Muslims. The West is convinced that too many nukes will simply make an exchange of nuclear weapons more likely. Muslims see nukes as a symbol of power and prestige.
Easy to say that they will bring you prestige when you are uneffected. By the way, do the prevailing winds in Pakistan come from Iran? If Tehran were nuked in retaliation, would the fallout cloud hit Karachi?
Ah, forget about it, who cares.... Thinking with your testicles is more fun......
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Kaleem, how about because for starters they are a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Because they promise they aren't developing them for military purposes.
Can they be trusted any better than Saddam who used WMD on his own people?
What are the Iran's clerical leaders goals with nukes? Destruction of Israel? They have already stated that goal.
Shia domination of the ME? What would SA and other sunni countrires do if Iran got nukes?
We need less nukes, not more. And especially not in a region where testosterone and religious fanatacism are more responsible for policy than are brains.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Semi, do you really believe that Iran will do that? If you do, then Bush has done his job and very well I must add. It is all a power struggle, Iranian president needs the popular sentiment to stay in office (much like Bush did in 04). He will say anything to keep the sheeple on his side.
As long as we are talking about reduction, how about asking Israel to comply with the treaty you mentioned and we will talk about Iran after that.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
OG, how is that different from the arms race between US and Russia.
Ah, forget about it, who cares.... Thinking with your testicles is more fun......
OG, Did we (as in US) think about the consequences before accepting Israel as our lapdog? You see we are paying the price every day with our blood and money. Ah, if only the brains were available for the US leadership, we will not be in this predicament.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Precisely!
When the Soviet Union collapsed, nukes were left unguarded, scientists were available to the highest bidder, and the US was left with the bill to destroy ageing weapons that had become unstable and unreliable.
What about this F**cking scenario do you not understand?
We should learn from history not repeat it.
You become a superpower based on your economic leadership, and the long term ability to sustain a competitive economy. The collapse of the USSR is absolute proof that nukes do not make long term credibility.
Iran, and other Muslim states cannot buy credibility. When the oil money is gone, what will happen to Saudi and Iran? They will blow away like sand. Nukes will not change that one bit. Nukes will make that decline more dangerous.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
The US military find no WMD in Iraq, so Saddam's son-in-laws were lying and Scott Ritter and Hans Blix of the UN were proven right after all. Though, the the United States Defense Intelligence Agency did conclude that Iran not Iraq gassed the Kurds in Halabja.
Re: Did Saddam Gassed the Kurds?
Just another conspiracay theory or whatever.Saddam did gas kurds,but United States did'nt have a problem with it.Infact American cia was responsible for bringing saddam into power.They used him to topple the ruler of iraq before saddam because he had close links with the soviet union.They backed him up again when he went to war against Iran.Saddam's only mistake was that he invaded Kuwait not that he killed shiahs and kruds.