Playing Both Sides of the Fence (947 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: -1 on 12 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by d'ohnuts (View user info) at 2004-07-01 09:44:35 EDT
1953 was a busy year for Allen Dulles. Even as he readied the CIA for a coup in Guatemala, his agents were toppling the liberal left government of Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq and paving the way for the Shah of Iran. With Dulles' encouragement, the Shah made the Iranian people an offer they couldn't refuse--join his party or go to jail. Thousands who refused to yield were imprisoned or murdered. During regional elections in 1954, the Shah's agents raided a religious school and hurled hundreds of students to their deaths from the roof. His regime received 100% of the vote that year, in an election which registered more votes than there were voters.
The Shah's subsequent solidification of power led to an iron fisted rule enforced by fear and torture. His secret police agency, SAVAK, was created in 1957 and managed by the CIA at all levels of daily operation, including the choice and organization of personnel, selection and operation of equipment, and the running of agents. SAVAK's torture methods included electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails. Iran under the Shah became a devoted US ally and a base for spy operations on the border of the Soviet Union. But eventually, the Shah was overthrown in 1978 by an indigenous people's revolution that held sway until fundamentalist religious leader Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran from exile and reasserted his power during the 1979 US hostage crisis.
************************************************************************
The last time Donald Rumsfeld saw Saddam Hussein, he gave him a cordial handshake. The date was almost 20 years ago, Dec. 20, 1983; an official Iraqi television crew recorded the historic moment.
The once and future Defense secretary, at the time a private citizen, had been sent by President Ronald Reagan to Baghdad as a special envoy. Saddam Hussein, armed with a pistol on his hip, seemed "vigorous and confident," according to a now declassified State Department cable. Rumsfeld "conveyed the President's greetings and expressed his pleasure at being in Baghdad," wrote the notetaker. Then the two men got down to business, talking about the need to improve relations between their two countries.
Like most foreign-policy insiders, Rumsfeld was aware that Saddam was a murderous thug who supported terrorists and was trying to build a nuclear weapon. (The Israelis had already bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak.) But at the time, America's big worry was Iran, not Iraq. The Reagan administration feared that the Iranian revolutionaries who had overthrown the shah (and taken hostage American diplomats for 444 days in 1979-81) would overrun the Middle East and its vital oilfields. On the theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, the Reaganites were seeking to support Iraq in a long and bloody war against Iran. The meeting between Rumsfeld and Saddam was consequential: for the next five years, until Iran finally capitulated, the United States backed Saddam's armies with military intelligence, economic aid and covert supplies of munitions.
The United States knew from its own satellite imagery that Saddam was using chemical weapons against Iranian troops. When Saddam bombed Kurdish rebels and civilians with a lethal cocktail of mustard gas, sarin, tabun and VX in 1988, the Reagan administration first blamed Iran, before acknowledging, under pressure from congress, that the culprits were Saddam's own forces. There was only token official protest at the time. Saddam's men were unfazed. An Iraqi audiotape, later captured by the Kurds, records Saddam's cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid (known as Chemical Ali) talking to his fellow officers about gassing the Kurds. "Who is going to say anything?" he asks. "The international community? Fuck them!"
The United States was much more concerned with protecting Iraqi oil from attacks by Iran as it was shipped through the Persian Gulf. In 1987, an Iraqi Exocet missile hit an American destroyer, the USS Stark, in the Persian Gulf, killing 37 crewmen. Incredibly, the United States excused Iraq for making an unintentional mistake and instead used the incident to accuse Iran of escalating the war in the gulf. The American tilt to Iraq became more pronounced. U.S. commandos began blowing up Iranian oil platforms and attacking Iranian patrol boats. In 1988, an American warship in the gulf accidentally shot down an Iranian Airbus, killing 290 civilians. Within a few weeks Iran, exhausted and fearing American intervention, gave up its war with Iraq.
*****************************************************************************
The party most responsible for Saddam's rule in Iraq is none other than the United States. The Reagan administration invested $50 billion in Hussein and his army during the Iran-Iraq war between 1980 and 1988. Much of this money was used to produce chemical weapons. Although Hussein's use of such weapons was condemned by the international community, he gained further Western support following Iranian attacks of precious Kuwaiti oil tankers in 1987.
If the idea of American hypocrisy sounds surprising, I'd like to remind you of the Iran-Contra scandal, among the biggest cover-ups in world history. While the United States was showing its full support of Saddam's questionable activities in the Iran-Iraq war, it was engaged in illegal arms sales to Iran.
So before you vindicate the U.S. government and deny its responsibility for Iraqi suffering, first think about who created the monster in Baghdad.
User Reviews
Submitted by Daniel_b (user info) at 2008-08-25 17:54:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Hahahahha
whoever you are... nice job in pissing off jakeybaby.
Submitted by TheSpook (user info) at 2005-01-26 13:00:53 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
At least people like what I post, dipshit.
Submitted by stevendurel (user info) at 2004-12-22 14:09:57 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
HEY LOSER! READ AN ARTICLE BEFORE YOU RATE IT!
http://www.ubersite.com/m/53814#1035130
Now you know how it feels to have someone -2 your work without reading what you've written.
Submitted by dohnuts (user info) at 2004-07-01 13:21:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Hey, thanks itchy. You actually missed a couple I used, and listed one I didn't.
But I appreciate the effort. Sometimes, I actually have to work at my job, and "Ok boss, but can you wait just a second while I post the links to the information I posted on Ubersite so no one gets their panties in bunch over my cutting and pasting" probably wouldn't have gone over to well.
Too bad you missed the point: We were giving weapons to Iraq and supporting Hussein in his war against Iran, at the same time we were illegally selling weapons to Iran. Why were we selling weapons to Iran? They were supposed to be our sworn enemy, so much so that we were willing to support the brutal dictator Hussein in order to combat them.
Submitted by whataefag (user info) at 2004-07-01 13:05:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
"So before you vindicate the U.S. government and deny its responsibility for Iraqi suffering, first think about who created the monster in Baghdad."
Exactly. I don't think, however, that very many people vindicate the U.S. government. Well, that is to say, nobody with a brain. But it's phenomenal the amount of treachery the government has led itself into. That first blurb about the 1950s shah scandle was extremely well written.
People are idiots. Governments are made of people. Sorry about that.
Submitted by AlahAckbar (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:46:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by StinkyPants (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:27:20 (#)
Ranking: 2
More proof that reagan, bush, et all are a bunch of dumbass douche bags.
More proof that stinkypants has no intellegence. WHO THE FUCK DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE SUPPORTED IRAQ IN THE 80's? What are you, 12?
Submitted by bignasty (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:32:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by StinkyPants (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:27:20 (#)
Ranking: 2
More proof that reagan, bush, et all are a bunch of dumbass douche bags.
Stinky pants can suck my balls too.
Submitted by StinkyPants (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:27:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
More proof that reagan, bush, et all are a bunch of dumbass douche bags.
Submitted by AnchorMan (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:25:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Cut and paste.
Submitted by itchy (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:23:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
home.iprimus.com.au/korob/fdtcards/EurMEast.html
www.thirdworldtraveler.com/ Global_Secrets_Lies/dictators.html
www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
www.hyperorg.com/blogger/mtarchive/002208.html
I also thought Alah Akbar's comments about WWII were apropos.
Submitted by bignasty (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:11:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
you...suck my balls
Submitted by AlahAckbar (user info) at 2004-07-01 10:06:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Yeah, and it can be summed up like this.
The enemy of my friend is my enemy.
The friend of my enemy is my enemy.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
BTW: we all know that. You know what else! WE GAVE WEAPONS TO SADDAM TO FIGHT IRAN! AHHHHH. How could we ever give weapons to someone and then they become our enemy! *cough USSR WWII cough*
Dumbass.
Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-07-01 09:53:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Nice cut and paste.