Transparency. Better late than never.

[Scooter2112]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0

Just sayin'.

Very looooong read, and I admit that I didn't read every word. Would have been helpful many years ago to have this information, and I'm still not sure why it wasn't mentioned. Perhaps its stated somewhere towards the end of the article.

***Mods - Not intended to be political or partisan, but I understand how these things evolve around here. So if you want to dump this thread, that's understandable. And accept my apologies for bringing it to light in the first place. ***

Edit - I reported this thread to the mods after creating it to give them a sort of "First rights of refusal". Just to be on the safe side.

 

[martin H]

Interesting. If it had been 1918, I'm pretty sure the average field soldier would have had a good idea how to recognize and handle a mustard gas shell. Apparently not so 90 years later. Is that a sign of progress or not?

 

[Scooter2112]

Interesting. If it had been 1918, I'm pretty sure the average field soldier would have had a good idea how to recognize and handle a mustard gas shell. Apparently not so 90 years later. Is that a sign of progress or not?

Good question.

Sort of haphazard by todays standards of what I would guess to be proper disposal protocol.

The article did sort of point to the probability that this kind of thing was meant to fly under the radar and not raise too many curiosities.

 

[Otto tune]

Would have been helpful many years ago to have this information, and I'm still not sure why it wasn't mentioned.

Didn't fit the narrative of the day. Remember the criticism of the time. "Bush lied, people died." Now, they are still saying, "Yeah we found WMD's, but they're old, so they don't count."
...and the beat goes on.
Now, someone who, in 1998, "KNEW" Saddam had chemical weapons is running for president (not to mention any names) so we can now support that view. "Hey, look what we just found!" News is political.

 

[Mark C]

News is political.

And so are a lot of your annoying posts.

 

[Bobby Mahogany]

Obviously some Americans knew Saddam had chemical weapons.
They sold them to him...

 

[HenryHill]

So they could use them on the Iranians.

There's plenty of good reason for the ME to hate our fvcking guts; we've been hypocrites. Not us, us; us as in our government.

Then we go all apeshit that he used them on his own people.

We didn't care when we sold them.

 

[LowThudd]

So they could use them on the Iranians.

There's plenty of good reason for the ME to hate our fvcking guts; we've been hypocrites. Not us, us; us as in our government.

Then we go all apeshit that he used them on his own people.

We didn't care when we sold them.

Yup. That is why I try not to support companies that made a profit of the chems, Like Conoco/Philips Formerly Philips chemical and petroleum. I don't care how cheap their gas is.

 

[SWeAT hOg]

'You broke it, you bought it.'

 

[LtDave32]

Didn't fit the narrative of the day. Remember the criticism of the time. "Bush lied, people died." Now, they are still saying, "Yeah we found WMD's, but they're old, so they don't count."
...and the beat goes on.
Now, someone who, in 1998, "KNEW" Saddam had chemical weapons is running for president (not to mention any names) so we can now support that view. "Hey, look what we just found!" News is political.

Only if you make it that way. There's plenty of news that isn't political whatsoever. Talking about foreign issues, and if Saddam had chem weapons isn't "political". Saying things like "Bush lied, people died" IS political, and most definitely against the rules. I would assume you already know this, but couldn't squash the urge to post it anyway.

We're not going to tolerate it anymore. Those are the rules. They will be adhered to.

 

[SteveGangi]

.....

 

[SteveGangi]

edited out ... never mind

 

[VictorB]

Oh boy.