http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/press.htm
quote from source>>>
National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 139 of April 5, 1984, "Measures to Improve U.S. Posture and Readiness to Respond to Developments in the Iran-Iraq War," focusing again on increased access for U.S. military forces in the Persian Gulf and enhanced intelligence-gathering capabilities. The directive calls for "unambiguous" condemnation of chemical weapons use, without naming Iraq, but places "equal stress" on protecting Iraq from Iran's "ruthless and inhumane tactics." The directive orders preparation of "a plan of action designed to avert an Iraqi collapse."
<<<
seems like US were shaking hands and everything was "heckuva job"
but you know who supported who -
ok ...go ahead tell me my source isn't reliable...rofl!!
Can ya see who's shaking hands in the picture? Do we know if the unknown is something we want to know? You Bet!
2006-11-06 07:20:39 · 7 answers · asked by omnimog 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
1983 is some while ago. Most of us realize who the US supported and aided during all of the wars fought back then. You supported the country that benefitted you. My main concern is with the recent troubles and those countries such as Russia, France etc, supporting people like Saddam Hussein for cheap oil. The greatest betrayal is that of our supposed allies in my opinion.
America doesn't need any help from terrorists to explode, our politicians bickering and nasty no holds barred arguments, are tearing us apart from within. Soon we'll self implode, the morals and values we all hope to portray are being flushed down the toilet daily.
2006-11-06 07:45:04 · answer #1 · answered by thebattwoman 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. even although the violence is undesirable in Iraq a minimum of now the human beings have freedoms they'd not have ever had till now. a great sort of the violence in Iraq is coming from outdoors impacts that decide directly to earnings means in an risky u . s . a .. interior the long-term they are going to be greater effective off. i'm no longer a struggle supporter because of the fact i do no longer likely experience we could consistently be doing a lot to assist Iraq yet I do belive they're greater effective off now.
2016-12-17 05:15:14 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not surprised, the U.S. gov'r put him into power-so those ppl are almost as responsible as he is. They didn't know he was going to become a dictator but they didn't stop him earlier. Oil isn't enough reason to support a evil dictator and everyone who supported him and encouraged him is responsible for his terror.
2006-11-06 08:19:12 · answer #3 · answered by Annie 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The people of Iraq should decide not the UK or AMERICA and if he is put to death then Iraq should do the deed
2006-11-06 07:59:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How lame.
Diplomatic protocol requires that you shake hands.
2006-11-06 07:26:25 · answer #5 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, there are also those who gave him his arms and money.
2006-11-06 07:25:24 · answer #6 · answered by romulusnr 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
good comment
2006-11-06 07:21:46 · answer #7 · answered by david w 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋