Rights Group Calls for Cheney Arrest-in Vancouver

[earth_as_one]

Why exactly did Saddam invade Kuwait in the first place? On a whim?

1) Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq and stealing oil
2) Kuwait reneged on a $multi-billion pledge to help Iraq fight a war with Iran during the 1980's.

As a solution to the above, Iraq offered this solution... Kuwait must stop stealing Iraq oil. In compensation for the stolen oil, Iraq wanted two small unoccupied Kuwaiti islands in the gulf to build an oil terminal which could be defended from attacks by Iran. They also wanted the money Kuwait promised during the war and still hadn't paid.

Kuwait refused to compensate Iraq for the oil theft and refused to pay the money they promised during the Iran/Iraq war. (Kuwait made this pledge during the war along with Saudi Arabia, when Iraq started loosing to Iran and they needed money to buy more weapons) In response, Iraq moved troops to the border with Kuwait. Nearly everyone thought at the time that Iraq was just applying pressure on Kuwait.

To defuse the situation, the US sent envoy April Glaspie to Iraq. wikileaks has some new information regarding this meeting, but basically the US screwed up diplomatically. It may have been deliberate. Whether or not the US gave Iraq a green light to invade Kuwait is debatable. The US statements made during this meeting indicated that the US would not interfere in the dispute between Kuwait and Iraq. What isn't debatable is that the US did not clearly say what it would do if Iraq invaded Kuwait. Throw in a few lost in the translation problems and cultural differences and Iraq invades Kuwait.

Here is some background information:
What WikiLeaks REALLY tells us about the Glaspie-Hussein Meeting | Stephen M. Walt

Transcript of the meeting:
APRIL GLASPIE TRANSCRIPT

 

[Just the Facts]

What isn't debatable is that the US did not clearly say what it would do if Iraq invaded Kuwait. Throw in a few lost in the translation problems and cultural differences and Iraq invades Kuwait.

It's also not debatable that the US was more than clear in saying what it would do if Iraq did not leave Kuwait.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

EAO you are a classic apologist.

 

[petros]

It's also not debatable that the US was more than clear in saying what it would do if Iraq did not leave Kuwait.

So why was Kuwait stealing from Iraq in the first place? ****s and giggles?

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

So why was Kuwait stealing from Iraq in the first place? ****s and giggles?

Gee I thought it was because Sadaam declared that Kuwait was actually part of Iraq. Man was I wrong. I bet the CIA made that news quote up too.

 

[petros]

Kuwait was indeed chisled off of Iraq and it wasn't the doings of Iraq. If you're going to steal, expect to to have you knuckles whacked.

 

[EagleSmack]

that definitely 'is' absurd. lol

Well there you go.

 

[earth_as_one]

Gee I thought it was because Sadaam declared that Kuwait was actually part of Iraq. Man was I wrong. I bet the CIA made that news quote up too.

That is how Iraq viewed Kuwait, but that didn't trigger the invasion. Here is the statement which probably led Hussein to believe that the US would not interfere if Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait:

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.

Don't forget, at the time, Saddam Hussein had warm friendly relations with the US because they just fought a war against Iran. This is also after he gassed the Kurds and the US threatened to veto any attempt by the UNSC to impose sanctions against Hussein

 

[Colpy]

1) Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq and stealing oil
2) Kuwait reneged on a $multi-billion pledge to help Iraq fight a war with Iran during the 1980's.

As a solution to the above, Iraq offered this solution... Kuwait must stop stealing Iraq oil. In compensation for the stolen oil, Iraq wanted two small unoccupied Kuwaiti islands in the gulf to build an oil terminal which could be defended from attacks by Iran. They also wanted the money Kuwait promised during the war and still hadn't paid.

Kuwait refused to compensate Iraq for the oil theft and refused to pay the money they promised during the Iran/Iraq war. (Kuwait made this pledge during the war along with Saudi Arabia, when Iraq started loosing to Iran and they needed money to buy more weapons) In response, Iraq moved troops to the border with Kuwait. Nearly everyone thought at the time that Iraq was just applying pressure on Kuwait.

To defuse the situation, the US sent envoy April Glaspie to Iraq. wikileaks has some new information regarding this meeting, but basically the US screwed up diplomatically. It may have been deliberate. Whether or not the US gave Iraq a green light to invade Kuwait is debatable. The US statements made during this meeting indicated that the US would not interfere in the dispute between Kuwait and Iraq. What isn't debatable is that the US did not clearly say what it would do if Iraq invaded Kuwait. Throw in a few lost in the translation problems and cultural differences and Iraq invades Kuwait.

Here is some background information:
What WikiLeaks REALLY tells us about the Glaspie-Hussein Meeting | Stephen M. Walt

Transcript of the meeting:
APRIL GLASPIE TRANSCRIPT

No, it is NOT debatable. Nobody dreamed that lunatic Saddam would actually invade.........and I read the articles very carefully........Glaspie said the USG had no position on the DISPUTE.......that does NOT translate into the USG has no position on an Iraqi INVASION of a US ally.

Miles and miles of difference there........

Indeed, Glaspie expressed the concern of the USG over the situation......

saddam Hussein was a sociopath that sent his good "friends" home to their wives in cardboard boxes if they disagreed with him.....he heard what he wanted to hear.

Diplomacy is a careful game, one NOT to be carried out publically..........and wars often start because one side FAILS to convincingly say: "IF YOU STEP OVER THIS LINE I WILL KICK YOUR DISGUSTING ARSE SO HARD YOU WILL COME DOWN IN PIECES"

But that would be bellicose, wouldn't it?????

And, if done publically, leaves one side with an unacceptable loss of face...........which, especially when dealing with........borderline personalities like Saddam......could lead to wars of pride.

Explain THAT to the idiot Assange and his brain-dead followers.

as for Kuwait....i'm not sure slant-drilling or failing to pay protection money to a mass murderer counts as reason to abandon them......
\
Could you just ONCE defend a democracy, or one of our allies, instead of constantly defending Iran, China, "Palestine" (whatever the hell that is) Hezbollah, Hamas, and now Iraq.

I REALLY don't understand.

 

[JLM]

Whatever went on between Saddam and Kuwait is small potatoes, he murdered on average between 30 thouand and 60 thousand of his own people for 30 years. He's right up there with Hitler, Stalin and Idi Amin. Bush Jr. did the right thing, Bush Sr. f*****d up. :smile:

 

[Ocean Breeze]

How do you bill America?

Spot on. .

(actually, you don't. america would just throw it in the trash. You (if you can afford it and soon you will be able to) stop doing business with america ...very gradually.

Seeing as how america loves to export everything.......including jobs etc , this would be another version of "export"...
(and totally legal / ethical too. as the last thing one wants to do is play the illegal game america does. )

and to repeat: No need to arrest Cheney. That is old school politics and would have the US tied in nots and out for blood again. (or still ) Just don't buy the book. Don't attend his appearance ........and literally IGNORE him for the insect he is. (apologies to all insects inhabiting this wondrous planet) Would be nice if even the media did not mention his comings and goings. As in not even a blip on the radar. Too much to hope for........but just imagine the "impact" it would have ......and not a nasty word, or assertive act was taken.

The psychology of this would be brilliant. & very effective. The power of making a criminal like him a non entity.

 

[JLM]

Kuwait was indeed chisled off of Iraq and it wasn't the doings of Iraq. If you're going to steal, expect to to have you knuckles whacked.

AAAAAAAAAAAh, just having to put up with a neighbour like Saddam should be worth a few buckets of oil don't you think?

 

[Colpy]

No need to arrest Cheney. That is old school politics and would have the US tied in nots and out for blood again. (or still ) Just don't buy the book. Don't attend his appearance ........and literally IGNORE him for the insect he is. (apologies to all insects inhabiting this wondrous planet) Would be nice if even the media did not mention his comings and goings. As in not even a blip on the radar. Too much to hope for........but just imagine the "impact" it would have ......and not a nasty word, or assertive act was taken.

The psychology of this would be brilliant. & very effective. The power of making a criminal like him a non entity.

A post that actually makes sense!

congratulations! A milestone!

 

[Just the Facts]

Here is the statement which probably led Hussein to believe that the US would not interfere if Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait:

Where's the statement that probably led Hussein to believe that the US would not interfere if he didn't do an about face and leave Kuwait? Which part of "This will not stand, this aggression against Kuwait" was giving him trouble?

 

[petros]

I REALLY don't understand.

No ****?

AAAAAAAAAAAh, just having to put up with a neighbour like Saddam should be worth a few buckets of oil don't you think?

If you neighbour moved your mutual fence over 10ft and began plugging into your outdoor power plug would you bitch to city hall or whack him over the head with a 2X4?

 

[JLM]

No ****?

If you neighbour moved your mutual fence over 10ft and began plugging into your outdoor power plug would you bitch to city hall or whack him over the head with a 2X4?

You mean after I just sat there watching him move the fence? :lol:

 

[Ocean Breeze]

No, it is NOT debatable. Nobody dreamed that lunatic Saddam would actually invade.........and I read the articles very carefully........Glaspie said the USG had no position on the DISPUTE.......that does NOT translate into the USG has no position on an Iraqi INVASION of a US ally.

Miles and miles of difference there........

Indeed, Glaspie expressed the concern of the USG over the situation......

saddam Hussein was a sociopath that sent his good "friends" home to their wives in cardboard boxes if they disagreed with him.....he heard what he wanted to hear.

Diplomacy is a careful game, one NOT to be carried out publically..........and wars often start because one side FAILS to convincingly say: "IF YOU STEP OVER THIS LINE I WILL KICK YOUR DISGUSTING ARSE SO HARD YOU WILL COME DOWN IN PIECES"

But that would be bellicose, wouldn't it?????

And, if done publically, leaves one side with an unacceptable loss of face...........which, especially when dealing with........borderline personalities like Saddam......could lead to wars of pride.

Explain THAT to the idiot Assange and his brain-dead followers.

as for Kuwait....i'm not sure slant-drilling or failing to pay protection money to a mass murderer counts as reason to abandon them......
\
Could you just ONCE defend a democracy, or one of our allies, instead of constantly defending Iran, China, "Palestine" (whatever the hell that is) Hezbollah, Hamas, and now Iraq.

I REALLY don't understand.

Does "democracy" include invading another nation on the basis of LIES......for the purposes of doing a regime change ( ILLEGAL( and installing a US friendly gov't in the region , while slaughtering over a million of its population?? Is THAT the kind of "democracy " you want defended???

It is NOT about defending anyone.It is about evaluating and discussing the various actions taken and questioning their legality and the MOTIVES behind them.

IF you really believe that the US invaded and is occupying Iraq for the benefits of the Iraqi people...... it is time to drink a different brand of Kool Aid. As IF it was merely about removing a despost leader , the US would have been out of there some time ago. You see any signs of the US actually LEAVING..........as in closing all those new military bases it has constructed there.?? Sure it mentions bringing back a few troops now and then and acts like that is a big deal. Smoke and mirrors is all that is.

 

[JLM]

Seems like a lot of hue and cry about Cheney..............worst thing I heard about him was he's a bad hunter! Mind you coming from Wyoming there's not much excuse for that, he should be able to hit a gopher between the eyes at 100 yards.

 

[petros]

You mean after I just sat there watching him move the fence? :lol:

If the neighbour down the block is standing at your door keeping you in the house i guess all you could do is watch until the guy from down the block left. Then you can whack him over the head and burn down the fence.

 

[EagleSmack]

and to repeat: No need to arrest Cheney. That is old school politics and would have the US tied in nots and out for blood again. (or still ) Just don't buy the book. Don't attend his appearance ........and literally IGNORE him for the insect he is. (apologies to all insects inhabiting this wondrous planet) Would be nice if even the media did not mention his comings and goings. As in not even a blip on the radar. Too much to hope for........but just imagine the "impact" it would have ......and not a nasty word, or assertive act was taken.

.

Three weeks on the NY Times Best Sellers List!

Ouch!

IF you really believe that the US invaded and is occupying Iraq for the benefits of the Iraqi people...... it is time to drink a different brand of Kool Aid. .

Meanwhile in Libya...