>Dude - check your facts. Does the term "Marsh Arabs" ring a bell? They were practically exterminated by the Iraqi government.
>So we, the US , kills a 100,000 Iraqi civilians to make up from some unsource allegation from Zion-Evangelical-War-Monger (ZEWM-TV) US TV? ARe you relying on the same people that told us Iraq had WMD and 911 Links? It's time to quit listening to those guys!
>
http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/01/iraq012503.htm

>Or how about the Kurds that were nerve-gassed?
>Heres a souce indicating Iran gassed the Kurds during the Iraq Iran War:
>http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5257.htm
>
I'll rebut that with this one:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/gas.htm

Regardless of whether it was done to drive the Iranians out of Halabja, or to surpress the Kurds, it is still a despicable act. It was clear in the Iran-Iraq war that both governments weren't reluctant to use every weapon they possesed.

>Of course we all need to know where Iraq got the gas, right - well they got it from Dubya's dad, Cheney and Rumsfeld:
>The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs sold by a CIA front organisation in Chile, the report says.
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,866873,00.html
>
What is your point here? At the time of the Iran-Iraq war, Iran was a clear enemy of the US. Since that time, Iraq became one as well. What do you want -- an apology? Maybe when France and Russia apologize for selling banned weapons to Iraq.

Meanwhile have fun with this: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1115053/posts

>Care to explain the mass graves that are being found there now?
>There was the Iran/Iraq War. I think it's been shown that alot of those mas-graves are contemporary to that. Thats common enough infor for you to google yourself!

If you think for a minute that the Baathist regime reformed itself and stopped that kind of behavior after the first Gulf War, we should just stop this discussion right now. You mention beheadings, I counter with mass graves, and you dismiss it as not being relevant? Care for something a little more current?
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Human%20rights%20abuses%20in%20Saddam's%20Iraq

>Or the behavior of the Iraqi Army in Kuwait?
>I do remember a congressional hearing where a woman LIED about being "ravaged" by Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait. She lied! Don't believe TV or Poilticians MAN!:)
>
You assume I watch TV. Try this: http://www.indict.org.uk/crimedetails.php?crime=Kuwait

>Speaking of which, I'd like to hear your defense for THAT invasion.
>I cannot defend it - but I - like you can make judgements (as long as we dont watch ZEWM-TV). I think Kuwait owed Iraq money (google it yourself), but; the US did give Iraq the OKAY to invade:
>http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/april.html
>
That's a bit of a stretch. From http://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/iraqkuwait.html:
Two days before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly testified before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee that the United States has no defense treaty relationship with any Gulf country." The New York Daily News editorialized on September 29, 1990, "Small wonder Saddam concluded he could overrun Kuwait. Bush and Co. gave him no reason to believe otherwise." (quoted in [1]).

>What is a Demonic Regime?
A metaphor.

>Why? Because the oil-for-food program was making them insanely rich. The French, Russians, and Chinese all protested, because they were getting rich too. And the UN is actively thwarting outside investigations into this farce.
>So were a lot of American companies, like Duba's boss, Cheney's Haliburton - agin - google this one yourself.

But not to the extent of the other major players. C'mon, you are comparing millions to billions and coming up with equal blame.

>Obviously you took the blue pill!:-)
What, because I don't believe the same as you?

>But the fact of the matter is the GOVERNMENT of Iraq was a dangerous and unpredictible machine, run by someone teetering on the brink of insanity with deep enmity towards the US.
>So you're suggesting this is a fall back position when we have to defend our actions in a War Crimes Court? Murder is Murder. If your asessment is correct, then you're neighbor could do in a friend's family...

Again, you are comparing dissimilarities.

>The constitution does not sanction murder (last time I read it) based on guesses, [mis]perceptions or PR from ZEWM-TV. Before we can kill we got to have proof.
That proof - and I'll grant that it turned out to be flawed - was posited for all the world to see by Colin Powell in front of the UN. If Hussein had cooperated with the UN inspectors as he was required to do (also by UN sanction) then perhaps he'd still be in power, free to shoot any of his countrymen in the back of the head he wanted to.

>In fact - we have out killed any alledged killings proported to Sadam.
>
I beg to differ on that. I don't know where you are getting your casualty figures, but from everything I have read, we have yet to come close to the amount of death and destruction that Hussein has been responsible.

>And next time, instead of making statements and slogans about Iraq, post some links - its no fun arguing with a sweat shirt banner:)

Have fun with the ones I gave you. Statements like "Zion-Evangelical-War-Monger (ZEWM-TV) US TV" make me think you are pretty solidly under your foil hat, though.