General Discussion

G_j

(40,569 posts)

93. The US Used Chemical Weapons in Iraq - And Then Lied About It

Fri Jun 14, 2013, 09:33 AM

Jun 2013

Last edited Fri Jun 14, 2013, 10:07 AM - Edit history (1)

if anyone has information to counter this, please share it.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1115-29.htm

Published on Tuesday, November 15, 2005 by the Guardian/UK

The US Used Chemical Weapons in Iraq - And Then Lied About It

Now we know napalm and phosphorus bombs have been dropped on Iraqis, why have the hawks failed to speak out?

by George Monbiot

----
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-forces-used-chemical-weapons-during-assault-on-city-of-fallujah-514433.html

US forces 'used chemical weapons' during assault on city of Fallujah

By BY PETER POPHAM
Tuesday 08 November 2005

Powerful new evidence emerged yesterday that the United States dropped massive quantities of white phosphorus on the Iraqi city of Fallujah during the attack on the city in November 2004, killing insurgents and civilians with the appalling burns that are the signature of this weapon.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Guys, what the fuck is the pushback against tangling with Syria? The line. They crossed THE LINE. [View all] Poll_Blind Jun 2013 OP

Pinterest? Ooooh... Nuclear War.... onehandle Jun 2013 #1

What's your point? AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #9

Once the cost/benefit analysis reveals that more profits can be had, sure. Why not? reusrename Jun 2013 #71

It wouldn't happen with a full-scale war, though(hell, there probably wouldn't be ANY economy.). n/t AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #73

We've passed the point where some folks think they can make money from dropping nukes. reusrename Jun 2013 #74

Minot, N.D. too... Lost for days... Forget about suitcase nukes. freshwest Jun 2013 #75

I don't think so, TBH. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #77

American arrogance: drawing 'The Lines' around the globe n/t leftstreet Jun 2013 #2

+1 L0oniX Jun 2013 #28

I was disidoro01 Jun 2013 #3

We are gonna.... Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #5

Holy shit... SomethingFishy Jun 2013 #8

All the members of Congress, before voting on a "Syrian Resolution" MattBaggins Jun 2013 #12

more billions of dollars flushed down the toilet...why movonne Jun 2013 #57

"now we will have to give up our social security and medicare to finance this farce"...and lunasun Jun 2013 #61

Excellent graphic. Saved for future use. Thanks. n/t Laelth Jun 2013 #81

Unless i missed a recent report, President Obama seems to be holding the line against getting hedgehog Jun 2013 #4

NYT: U.S. Is Said to Plan to Send Weapons to Syrian Rebels Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #7

What weapons manufacturers does Bill Clinton have a stake in? MattBaggins Jun 2013 #14

He's pretty tight with the Carlyle Group. bluedigger Jun 2013 #22

That's all a coincidence, whatever you're getting at. I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #23

I dunno, you tell me Catherina Jun 2013 #26

Don't you be subversive! You're subversing all over the place! This is bipartisanship! nt Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #29

The whole bullshit quagmire know as Iraq was an industrial size gravy spigot MattBaggins Jun 2013 #31

those fuckers are fucking with intel. no way this is an honest appraisal of the situation Whisp Jun 2013 #38

Where McCain's argument falls apart is that Clinton wasn't a Liberal. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #47

I agree. He WAS holding the line quite admirably. Laelth Jun 2013 #82

Eh. Let China buy their guns. aquart Jun 2013 #6

We can't let China get in on this. Then they get the goodies. We can't let them have the goodies. Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #11

They ARE already. aquart Jun 2013 #17

Oil is different. We shouldn't stop them. It'll probably de-commify them unintentionally. Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #21

thx iamsdaaz Jun 2013 #10

Huh? uppityperson Jun 2013 #62

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #13

Warren, this time it's going to be different. I'm telling you. We can change them. I can smell it Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #15

We are not the World's policeman NightWatcher Jun 2013 #16

I agree with you 100% but what better way than a new war front to divert snappyturtle Jun 2013 #50

Oh yes, plus the MIC really wants a 20 war around Iran NightWatcher Jun 2013 #55

Ah, but this does concern us. Laelth Jun 2013 #83

If you don't have a line, then you may have a point! Fantastic Anarchist Jun 2013 #18

Resources: spent vs received. ManiacJoe Jun 2013 #19

Does Syria have anything we want? Of they do. RC Jun 2013 #43

What do we gain from that? ManiacJoe Jun 2013 #48

Control is what we gain. RC Jun 2013 #53

We want Iran's oil. Laelth Jun 2013 #84

Thanks for connecting the dots. ManiacJoe Jun 2013 #102

Geopolitics makes my skin crawl. Laelth Jun 2013 #104

We don't need more war. We don't want more war. geckosfeet Jun 2013 #20

Shut up and eat your peas. Catherina Jun 2013 #27

We can say we have drawn a line. But when the line is crossed as it may have been then what we are totodeinhere Jun 2013 #24

Atrocities, schmatrocities! George Washington cannibalized 2 British generals and a drummer boy. Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #25

Interesting point on the rebel issue. MattBaggins Jun 2013 #35

They don't care anymore about Syrian Christians than they did Iraqi Christians. Religion is just freshwest Jun 2013 #76

We have always been at war with Assad, despite what you may believe you've heard kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #39

You're right! We have always been at war with Eastasia and allied to Eurasia eridani Jun 2013 #54

Curious to think that the sky is the same for everybody, in Eurasia or Eastasia as well as here.... lunasun Jun 2013 #67

Terrorists and TRAITORS. sibelian Jun 2013 #90

The line that got crossed was that Assad started winning after a long spell of losing. kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #30

I was having deja vu over Iran/Iraq war earlier. reusrename Jun 2013 #72

I say ...give Syria to Monstanto. L0oniX Jun 2013 #32

^ This. And if Monsanto wants to patent Syrians afterward, we can expedite that. nt Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #34

GMO their asses! L0oniX Jun 2013 #36

And if they want to have kids they better pony up the appropriate licensing fee. Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #96

Russia is going to get deeply involved in sending weapons to the Syrian military newmember Jun 2013 #33

I sincerely hope that Russia vetoes the US decision. David__77 Jun 2013 #40

The administration can do this without UN approval newmember Jun 2013 #42

I refer to a military veto, not a diplomatic one. David__77 Jun 2013 #45

Understood but I don't see Obama backing down on this newmember Jun 2013 #51

It's about more than Syria, obviously. David__77 Jun 2013 #52

It's sad to think but we don't matter newmember Jun 2013 #56

Please feel free to escalate a U.S. involvement Loudly Jun 2013 #37

What's My Line? Fuddnik Jun 2013 #41

This felt like another "Third Way Manny" post. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #44

No good alternatives totodeinhere Jun 2013 #46

the problem is you don't want to introduce a new product until the fall Snake Plissken Jun 2013 #49

In the face of a reported over 90,000 dead in this outrage, I think that Syria has not reached a marble falls Jun 2013 #58

I'm so suprised,I don't know what. Chaco Dundee Jun 2013 #59

Fuck the line donco Jun 2013 #60

Me thinks... ReRe Jun 2013 #63

Sure giving them more weapons so others will give the other side more Cleita Jun 2013 #64

Syria's sweet oil and sweet pipeline Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2013 #65

get those organs in your mouths and blow tiny elvis Jun 2013 #66

How do you know politicians aren't doing shit? They go to war and waste money. Simple. MichiganVote Jun 2013 #68

AMURICA! FUCK YEAH!!!!1!!!ONE bobclark86 Jun 2013 #69

Love that movie! Initech Jun 2013 #70

Bullshit bluedeathray Jun 2013 #78

Nah. Per BBC, the evidence is that Sarin was used, not that Assad used it. ucrdem Jun 2013 #79

Is this really about the President and the United States saving face? Laelth Jun 2013 #80

Yeah all indications point to this Harmony Blue Jun 2013 #85

Clinton inferred that Obama would be a "Wuss" if he didn't start to intervene... KoKo Jun 2013 #87

It appears to me that Obama has been fighting back against the dogs of war for some time. Laelth Jun 2013 #88

True enough...Obama doesn't have backing enough to resist the PTB's Policy... KoKo Jun 2013 #94

The Democratic Party has always had both hawks and doves. Laelth Jun 2013 #98

Indeed..but LBJ's handling of Vietnam didn't work out so well for him or us...and KoKo Jun 2013 #99

For further clarification. Laelth Jun 2013 #100

I wonder if the line was established simply so that it could be crossed. sibelian Jun 2013 #91

Very good questions. Laelth Jun 2013 #92

I want to know the chain of custody on those samples and how many are purported to... Poll_Blind Jun 2013 #95

People just don't want more wars Yo_Mama Jun 2013 #86

fuck war spanone Jun 2013 #89

The US Used Chemical Weapons in Iraq - And Then Lied About It G_j Jun 2013 #93

Yes, indeed and anyone whose been on this site since early 2000's knows KoKo Jun 2013 #97

+1 JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #101

It's even more important than a Double Dog Dare!! Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #103

Someone must teach the guys who wear the black hats that if the line is indepat Jun 2013 #105

Calling his bullshit almost 80 days in advance. Am I prophetic or is the president predictable?! Poll_Blind Aug 2013 #106