|
The New York Times has published a remarkably in-depth look at U.S. casualties from dealing with pre-Gulf War chemical weaponsquote:From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule. Those are just a few choice snippets, this entire thing really is worth reading. Cable news is probably going to be buzzing with the whole 'we found WMD and they covered it up' narrative, but this isn't exactly news. Republicans trotted out a declassified report on hundreds of chemical shells in 2006 and later in 2010, Wikileaks report gave more evidence. The story here is how much the U.S. loves to screw the troops over and bury important issues.
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:05 |
|
|
Sounds like someone is building a case for an invasion/boots on the ground yet again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Comstar posted:Sounds like someone is building a case for an invasion/boots on the ground yet again. Yeah I was just thinking that. We are literally going to hear that America needs to go into Iraq again because of WMDs that exist-don't exist-okay they exist because Patron Saint Reagan gave them to Saddam are now in the hands of ISIS. Rand alPaul fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
Did you guys read the article? It seems like a damning indictment of the US Army, and not like a piece promoting Iraq War 3. No where did I feel during or after reading it that it implied that going back was a good idea. If anything, the level of incompetence or outright disdain that the Army seems to show towards troops affected by these weapons is one of the biggest signs that we should not go back under any circumstances. Between the fact that Western companies, including the US, were involved in the manufacture of many of the weapons, and that we refused to reveal details of what was found, the level of incompetence or delusion is hard to fathom. In addition, some of the quotes from the troops highlighted the irony of it all, being that our original rationale for going was to destroy weapons of mass destruction. If anything, the ending line about how the weapons are now in possession of ISIS proves the point, which is that we should not be interfering over there because every single time we do, it comes back around.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
I'm not really seeing any "damning condemnation". For all the incidents it described, I didn't really see much to fault the military for other than secrecy, and it's not like full disclosure at high levels would've really helped anything - just look at all the individual soldiers in that article who admitted to purposely not reporting the presence of known chemical weapons just because calling in specialists to dispose of them properly and safely was too much of a bother. On the other hand, the timing of this article is certainly suspect. This stuff has been largely secret for over a decade, and then within weeks of ~the terrorists~ capturing significant territory in Iraq, it's big news, complete with a note to the effect of "by the way, ISIS has these chemical weapons now" every few paragraphs? It's hard to believe no one involved had the intent to lay a foundation for potential future US military action in Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:05 |
|
|
Antigen v2.0 posted:Did you guys read the article? It seems like a damning indictment of the US Army, and not like a piece promoting Iraq War 3. No where did I feel during or after reading it that it implied that going back was a good idea. If anything, the level of incompetence or outright disdain that the Army seems to show towards troops affected by these weapons is one of the biggest signs that we should not go back under any circumstances. Between the fact that Western companies, including the US, were involved in the manufacture of many of the weapons, and that we refused to reveal details of what was found, the level of incompetence or delusion is hard to fathom. In addition, some of the quotes from the troops highlighted the irony of it all, being that our original rationale for going was to destroy weapons of mass destruction. If anything, the ending line about how the weapons are now in possession of ISIS proves the point, which is that we should not be interfering over there because every single time we do, it comes back around. The US military treating its soldiers like poo poo is really not a new thing, it happens in every single conflict. It isn't news the US gave those munitions to Iraq. That was well known for a long time, Reagan loved Saddam and Saddam loved Reagan. It's ironic as hell the US covered up finding them, but that's because the US claimed Iraq was producing bombs on the back of mobile trucks, and all sorts of ridiculous things highlighted under the Colin Powell speech to the UN. That they found where the Reagan skeletons were buried and covered it up is more humorous than anything. Still, it will be used by warhawks to demand boots on the ground. Don't underestimate the war machine's ability to spin anything into a call to arms, and the American public has already reversed itself on Iraq and now "demands action" against ISIS, so yes the public is gullible enough to buy the WMD boogeyman again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 19:43
|
|