Saturday, September 24, 2005

Who supported Saddam?

Just some ammunition should you ever come across some leftie idiot yelling "America supported Saddam in the Cold War! America supplied Iraq in Iran-Iraq War!" (this theory is very popular among Quebec journalists).

Here are the statistics on just who supported Iraq and how much. The statistics might surprise you.

14 Comments:

At Saturday, 24 September, 2005, Blogger Mark said...

Awesome. Thanks.

 
At Saturday, 24 September, 2005, Blogger Robert McClelland said...

Yes, we've all seen this canard before. The problem with it is that it doesn't take into account the fact that the US either financed or arranged financing for a great deal of the money that Iraq used to purchase those weapons. The US does not directly give weapons to many of these types of regimes. That's why they are all using mostly Russian and Chinese equipment. In fact, even now the US is supplying the new Iraqi army, not with M-16s but with AK-47s. And when the shit hit the fan again and the left once again says that the US armed the new Iraq, rubes like you will once again fall for the absurd nonsense that it isn't true because the Iraqis are using Russian equipment. Wake up, chump.

 
At Saturday, 24 September, 2005, Blogger The Arabian Knight said...

"Yes, we've all seen this canard before. The problem with it is that it doesn't take into account the fact that the US either financed or arranged financing for a great deal of the money that Iraq used to purchase those weapons."

The Graph clearly illustrates the amount of dollar value each country gave to Iraq in that time period. Having studied the Iraq-Iran war carefully I can honestly tell you that nearly all the amount of financial aid Iraq has receieved was from Kuwait (which was a big factor in the lead up to the Gulf War), Saudi Arabia, France and the United Arab Emirates. The US provided SOME military assistance through weapons exports. But nowehere near as much as the countries I have mentioned. Besides, during the Cold War I think it would have been pretty stupid for the US to provide financial assistance to Iraq to buy Russian equipment and allow the Russians to increase their reveneue as well as provide them with Case Study reaserch on the effectiveness of their equipments don't you think?


"In fact, even now the US is supplying the new Iraqi army, not with M-16s but with AK-47s. And when the shit hit the fan again and the left once again says that the US armed the new Iraq, rubes like you will once again fall for the absurd nonsense that it isn't true because the Iraqis are using Russian equipment. Wake up, chump. "

They're supplying them with AK-47 becuase its cheaper for them to give them the old equipment from the Republican Guard then to manufacture and distribute new weapons. Provided all the training and exercises the US military has now done with the new Iraqi army, its litterly impossiible for the US to deny any involvement in the formation of the new Iraqi defense forces.


God dammit man, use some common sense for a change.

 
At Saturday, 24 September, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

there is no doubt that the whole world and persian gulf sheykhdoms supported saddam in 1980s to kill as many persians as he could. Down with Arabs and Saddam

 
At Saturday, 24 September, 2005, Blogger Jarrett said...

Again, another reason for studying history.

I was in an argument on a French language blog about the US; a Bloqist told me that the left hates the US because Donald Rusmfeld fumait des cigares avec Saddam Hussein pendant les années 1980s.

I very calmly pointed out that while Rusmfeld did that for a small period, the French were still fellating the darn guy, and engaged in actual business transactions with him, well into the new millenium.

Then I schooled him in the geopolitical implications of the Iran-Iraq war and explained why just about EVERYONE supported Iraq, and pointed out that if Rumsfeld's hypocricy over ten years was condemnable, then surely consistent support for Saddam from the French and Russians made the left's position even more desipicable.

Robert:

Ever think that the prevalence of the AK, not only in worldwide arms markets, but also in Iraqi military tradition (and, needless to say, multiple arms caches), might make it a more advisable weapon to use? Especially since the AK is widely described as a Soviet knockoff of the M-16 (which is no longer used by the US - I believe they use the M-3). All it means is that the Iraqis get a virtually identical weapon, but for what is undoubtedly a far smaller price to those who have to pay for it.

Now, vis the arms stats cited, find me some kind of evidence which demonstrates the funding and financing options given to Iraq to procure these arms. As I remember, the majority of arms purchases were as a result of the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and therefore, these arms were bought via oil revenue and on credit. Of the major Iraqi creditors, numbers 1, 2 and 3 were Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. In fact, one of the reasons Saddam went to war in 1990-91 was because of the unrequited complaint that after waging a war on behalf of the Arab world, Kuwait simultaneously called its massive share of the massive Iraqi debt load, refused to offer relief, and undercut international oil prices to hurt Iraq's competitive edge.

The only possible way you could argue that the US "arranged the financing" of these weapons was if you talked about it buying oil from Iraq; if that's the way you want to spin it, then I'm gonna patiently sit here and wait for you to acknowledge the fact that France and Germany were until very recently the world's largest markets for Saudi and Iraqi oil.

Like I said, history is important.

 
At Sunday, 25 September, 2005, Blogger The Arabian Knight said...

"I was in an argument on a French language blog about the US; a Bloqist told me..."

Jarrett I goota give you props for having the patience to debate with a Bloqist. Those guys are incridibly closed minded when it comes to rational debate. There's just something about being a Quebec seperatist that simply shuts off all rational reasoning among those people. (Not all of them, but quite a large majority of them).

 
At Thursday, 29 September, 2005, Blogger Louise said...

Hey, Jarret, you wouldn't happen to have some links that will give me some of the info you just shared here in your Saturday, September 25th post, would you?

 
At Thursday, 29 September, 2005, Blogger admin said...

hello arabian knight

i have been contacted by people that you have referred people to my blog and i am now checking yours out and really like what i see : ).

would you mind if I post a link to your site at my site?

i can be reached at long_cool_woman_in_a-black_dress@hotmail.com

Great job here!!

 
At Thursday, 29 September, 2005, Blogger admin said...

there is another popular expression in the San Fransisco area, it goes like this: Haight Bush.

personally the idea of the bomb going off around the levies in NO, LA by Farakhan really took the cake

same nonsense, different reason to blame

i saw a fabulous bumper sticker yesterday. It said "if you really wanna piss of a liberal, work hard and be happy".

 
At Friday, 30 September, 2005, Blogger programmer craig said...

Jarrett,

#Ever think that the prevalence of the AK, not only in worldwide arms markets, but also in Iraqi military tradition (and, needless to say, multiple arms caches),
#might make it a more advisable weapon to use?

Absoultely right. There's nothing wrong with an AK. They are very reliable and very effective, and it would be stupid to spend the time (retraining) and money to replace them. Especially since the AK is so widely used, not just in Iraq, but in the entire middle east.

#Especially since the AK is widely described as a Soviet knockoff of the M-16

It's "widely described" wrong, then! The AK-47 was a direct copy of captured german MP-43s, renamed Stg-44 in 1944. The MP designation stood for "machine pistol" (that's what the germans called submachine guns) which was considered inappropriate, so the rifle was renamed "Sturmgewehr" in 1944. Sturmgewehr means, literally, "assault rifle" - it was the first assault rifle. The AK-47 was the second.

STG-44 "Sturmgewehr"

In contrast, the company that designed the AR-15 (Armalite) didn't even exist until 1954, and their design (the AR-15) was not adopted by the US military as the M-16 until the early 60s!

Birth of the AR-15

Not only is the timeline wrong, though, but the weapons are of entirely unrelated designs. No two rifles could have less in common.

#(which is no longer used by the US - I believe they use the M-3).

Same thing. The M4 is a carbine version of the M16. 16" barrel instead of a 20" barrel. Telescoping stock instead of the fixed stock. Flat top with mounting rail, instead of a carrying handle. It's a modified M16, not a different weapon.

#All it means is that the Iraqis get a virtually identical weapon, but for what is undoubtedly a far smaller price to those who have to pay for it.

The AK is not a "virtually identical" weapon. The M16 is one of the most accurate off the shelf rifles in the world. The AK is... not! However, the AK is a very robust and reliable design, and works just as well as an M16 design at the close ranges which are typical in combat.

I agree with your conclusions, by the way, I just have a problem with your arguments!

 
At Saturday, 01 October, 2005, Blogger The Arabian Knight said...

Can't touch this:

Sure. You don't need to ask me though man, just link.

 
At Sunday, 02 October, 2005, Blogger Jarrett said...

Can't Touch This:

Mea Culpa

But, while we're talking about it, I just had to point out this quote:

"Why AK-47s (the Automatic Kalashnikov model year 1947, for those of you who do not know)? Because they are durable weapons that do not need a great deal of maintenance, and Iraqis have been using them for years and know how to maintain them. Patraeus told an anecdote about walking into a training class in which an American sargeant was teaching a room full of Iraqis how to clean an AK-47. He interrupted the sargeant and asked the students how many of them already knew how to take apart the rifle, and virtually all of them raised their hands. He asked several of them to prove it, and two or three quickly stripped and rebuilt their weapon. The class moved on to the next subject."

 
At Tuesday, 04 October, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love your work Arabian Knight...keep going!!!

Farnaz

 
At Thursday, 15 July, 2010, Anonymous Anonymous said...

借錢 借貸 票貼

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home