posted
The U.S. had already ended, when the shah fell, previously massive military sales to Iran. In 1980 the U.S. broke off diplomatic relations with Iran because of the Tehran embassy hostage crisis; Iraq had broken off ties with the U.S. during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
posted
My friend, National Security Archive is a great resource, but it is not yet complete on that era. The day will come and I look forward to the day. I grant the truth issue is important agreed 100%, but if you were to find out Carter talked to Saddy through Sauds it would not have been illegal and how would it affect your feelings of that time period and President. For me it doesn't change it at all except to make me feel greater respect for the man. To me, knowing he tried to get those hostages out with every resource he had.
-------------------- God's peace be with you A salaam a lakum Shalom Chevarim Posts: 896 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
In 1980, President Carter termed Iranian charges of U.S. complicity "patently false." He mentioned Iraq's invasion only briefly in his memoirs, in the context of an unexpected mid-September hostage initiative from a Khomeini in-law, Sadeq Tabatabai. "Exploratory conversations [in Germany] were quite encouraging," President Carter wrote about that approach, but he added: "As fate would have it, the Iraqis chose the day of [Tabatabai's] scheduled arrival in Iran, September 22, to invade Iran and to bomb the Tehran airport. Typically, the Iranians accused me of planning and supporting the invasion."
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Haig's written report contained no other details about the "green light," and Haig declined my request for an interview about the Talking Points. But the paper represented the first documented corroboration of Iran's long-held belief that the United States backed Iraq's 1980 invasion.
rumors and innuendo...
Carter says we won't mind... BFD
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the report, Haig wrote that he was impressed with "bits of useful intelligence" that he had learned. "Both [Egypt's Anwar] Sadat and [Saudi Prince] Fahd [explained that] Iran is receiving military spares for U.S. equipment from Israel." This fact might have been less surprising to President Reagan, whose intermediaries allegedly collaborated with Israeli officials in 1980 to smuggle weapons to Iran behind President Carter's back.
But Haig followed that comment with another stunning assertion: "It was also interesting to confirm that President Carter gave the Iraqis a green light to launch the war against Iran through Fahd." In other words, according to Haig's information, Saudi Prince Fahd (now King Fahd) claimed that President Carter, apparently hoping to strengthen the U.S. hand in the Middle East and desperate to pressure Iran over the stalled hostage talks, gave clearance to Saddam's invasion of Iran. If true, Jimmy Carter, the peacemaker, had encouraged a war.
not evidence rumor...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
The claim of Carter’s “green light” for the invasion was made by senior Arab leaders, including King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, to President Reagan’s first secretary of state, Alexander Haig, when Haig traveled to the Middle East in April 1981, according to “top secret” talking points that Haig prepared for a post-trip briefing of Reagan.
Haig wrote that he was impressed with “bits of useful intelligence” that he had learned. “Both [Egypt’s Anwar] Sadat and [Saudi then-Prince] Fahd [explained that] Iran is receiving military spares for U.S. equipment from Israel,” Haig noted. “It was also interesting to confirm that President Carter gave the Iraqis a green light to launch the war against Iran through Fahd.”
Haig’s “talking points” were first disclosed at Consortiumnews.com in 1995 after I discovered the document amid records from a congressional investigation into the early history of the Reagan administration’s contacts with Iran. At that time, Haig refused to answer questions about the “talking points” because they were still classified. Though not responding to direct questions about the “talking points,” Carter has pooh-poohed other claims that he gave Saddam encouragement for the invasion.
-------------------- God's peace be with you A salaam a lakum Shalom Chevarim Posts: 896 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
and finally?Not surprisingly, Carter administration officials deny they gave Iraq a "green light" for its September 22, 1980 invasion. Yet there is evidence that they did just that. On April 14, 1980, five months before Iraq's invasion, Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security Advisor, signaled the U.S.'s willingness to work with Iraq: "We see no fundamental incompatibility of interests between the United States and Iraq...we do not feel that American- Iraqi relations need to be frozen in antagonisms." In June, Iranian students revealed a secret memo from Brzezinski to then-Secretary of State Cyrus Vance recommending the "destabilization" of Iran's Islamic Republic via its neighbors.
again? this is nothing more than saying we won't stop you... no empowerment at all....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Three American sources confirming it happened. My friend, you want it to be rumor, but clearly as far back as '81 it had surfaced. It happened. Now we aren't going to agree on this. You cognitively need to have Carter not connected with Saddy. He's not directly in either perspective so I am not sure why you cling with such desparation to something that is shrouded in deep, dark NSA files until the relevant persons are dead. That I can accept here could be good and sincere people of Iranian and Americn persuasions that know it's true is enough for me until the day comes when the truth comes to light.
-------------------- God's peace be with you A salaam a lakum Shalom Chevarim Posts: 896 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You cognitively need to have Carter not connected with Saddy bull...you don't know what you are talking about..
what i do need is good references... you posted none... i am sick of all the rumors the internet spreads...
i check and double check...
Carter did not support the war... support in my book is funding... he may very well have whispered OK go ahead, but that is not support...
based on your sources? the GOP (and these are people Bush has appointed right now) was dealing directly with the Iranians before the election, do you stand by that too? cuz that's pretty friggin bad..
cutting deals like that to get in office.... you believe that?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Carter did not support the war... support in my book is funding... he may very well have whispered OK go ahead, but that is not support..."
So why does it hurt you so that he gave the okay? I notice you changed the rules there. You decided to define what support means. If it helps you accept the truth that Carter gave the okay, that's as close to agreeing as we're going to get. The quote I just posted is from the photo of the report and the green light was given. We both agree it was not material.
-------------------- God's peace be with you A salaam a lakum Shalom Chevarim Posts: 896 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
Member Rated: posted 07-03-2006 11:39 PM Come on Glassman- this source is a joke. Check it out guys. Look at some of the crap this site prints: ABOUT OUR BRAVE TROOPS IN IRAQ!
US Collusion with Iraqi Death Squads US Apache Helicopter massacring Iraqis Fallujah: US War Crimes There's more:
"Just before the U.S. forces attacked Qaim last 29 August, a thriving town of 150,000 people in western Iraq, they cordoned it off, cut electricity, water and food supplies. Then they indiscriminately and disproportionately blanketed the town, from the ground and from the air, with artillery shells, cluster bombs and napalm bombs with the full knowledge that civilians, particularly women and children, would be killed."
Is this support of our troops? Remember the party line is we support our troops but not the war. How is this supporting our troops? And this one really ticks me off:
"This November marks the one-year anniversary of the fascist destruction of the vibrant city of Fallujah, where more than 6,000 innocent men, women and children were deliberately massacred by U.S. forces. The city, where some 50,000 civilians stayed in their homes, including men aged 15 to 55 years (prevented from leaving before the attack), was savagely attacked with chemical bombs, fire bombs (fuel-air bombs), napalm and other non-conventional weapons (WMD)".
Your response -
actually? i didn't read that junk till you posted it... gloablresearch has quite few articles that are crap, now that you point it out? i don't agree with much of what they post.... but? they do have a right to post their views don't they? do you have any idea how many pages i googled and skimmed thru yesterday looking for a single link to find out how many counties in Ohio had diebold voting machines? LOL i didn't bother to look thru the whole gloabreseacrh website... but i see you did a tleast part of it...
posted
Oh and my response - no name calling, confusion, but no name calling and an open mind
"I take you at your word when you say you used to be a republican. But man you must have made a heck of a transformation to have wound up reading this junk. I don't know what to think about you Glassman. It's too bad because I was having a good time debating on this site without the usualy shouting and name calling. Now I don't know man, I think I will go back to the food thread for a while.
Have a good 4th of July Glassman. And remember we are celebrating only because of those that died for our freedoms. GOD BLESS ALL OF OUR TROOPS!"
posted
Well boys in the interest of fairness, it would appear that Glassman has retired for the night and I don't think we should continue the discussion until he can respond. Sorry it took me so long to find that link Glassman, I did not mean to post it after you went to bed.
Very enjoyable discussion tonight. I enjoyed exchanging ideas. Wish it wouldn't have taken hours but that is the price we pay to discuss ideas.
is clearly and plainly from a country that defines itself as our enemy.... and it is clearly an article thumbing it's nose at US Americans... it says effyou ...so i told you where to get off...
New information, coming out of events related to the recent invasion of Iraq suggest that Saddam did not act alone.
there's your source: and we are fighting Iran in Iraq right now....
this is not some political game... people are dying...and more will... hezbolah is the fist of iran...
Iran is trying to buy time to build nuke weapons and this article is part of their propaganda campaign to make Americans wonder, how did they put it? It is my firm belief that if the average American voter knew of these acts by their leaders, tragedies like this war would not be repeated.
yeah, that's what popped my cork on you last night, and you had it coming...
cuz Iran has declared itself our enemy...
my article? was in a journal that had many other articles that i don't agree with... but? the article that i posted the link to was not full of fluff or chit..
it talked about affadavits.. it quotes people directly by name... it cover motions filed in court... it covers congressional testimony...
i told you i was gonna hold you acountable on your references and citations...
JW, i don't wanna NUKE iran...
i am against nuke proliferation...
i am UNAFRAID of doing what we have to do to maintain long-term world NUKULAR peace...
that includes telling dubya i don't want him to have nuke bunker busters..
and? as i have been trying to tell yuo?
sadam wanted to invade iran with or without our permission .... he did it because they were politically disorganised... and he was an opotunist.... if carter said he could go? i could care less..
Reagan is the one that provided support... those are the facts... sadam also thought he was greenlighted on the kuwait invasion... obviously he was mistaken...
i scrutinize your posts because i think you are disingenuous...
your topic titles are insulting and inflammatory..
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glassman - on my sane days, which believe it or not is 99% of the time, I do not want to nuke Iran either. But once in a while I do get frustrated and blow my stack, and say many things I later regret.
I think we've milked about all we can out of this one boys.
-------------------- Thanks Matto. Thanks Juice. Posts: 2945 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
JW.. you can nuke iran but you cannot talk about nuking DPRK.. why? just because it has nuclear weapons.. to some that plausibility just gives another reason to develop nukes..
-------------------- All my posts are based on my own opinions and not to be taken as buy/sell recommendations. Posts: 961 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Johnwayne: Oh I don't want to nuke anybody. I have weak moments, like all of us.
hehe.. guess a weak moment similar to the one felt by Truman
[ July 22, 2006, 14:39: Message edited by: ruskin_muskin ]
-------------------- All my posts are based on my own opinions and not to be taken as buy/sell recommendations. Posts: 961 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
there's your source: and we are fighting Iran in Iraq right now....
Cute Glass, except the last evidence I presented was from the Secretary of State commenting in a TOP SECRET document in the NS Archive, from Secretary of State saying that in conversation with one of the principals named in the Carter Iraq connection, there was confirmation that Carter gave a "green light" to Iraq for invasion.
There it is case closed. You don't really have trouble with the sources, you have trouble with the factual information. Simply an historical correction and I endured five hours of name-calling. I posted with integrity information known since 1981 to national security officials and that document points that out. For those who haven't seen it, check out the source that ended the debate this morning on the bottom of page 4 of this thread.
In the end when we adjourned last night, we agreed that Carter offered no material support but that a green light message was given through Prince Fahd to Saddam Hussein. That was not made formal in treaty or arms agreement until Reagan, but the historical record should show Carter was the first Chief Executive to enter into communication with Saddam. And why? Because I believe it was a tough call, but Carter did it to make a last ditch effort to bring the hostages home. I do not think it was a political stunt, I think Carter did what he felt was necessary to get our citizens home. And ultimately that is what I ask of a president. One big reason I wish this president today would have just worked with other powers to get Saddam exiled with money and no right of return.
I mentioed it because until we are ready to confront our history throughout the world, and some of the terrible things we did in the name of the Cold War, we will never be seen as honest brokers in peace negotiations. We have to learn what our history was, warts and all, if we are to have credibility.
-------------------- God's peace be with you A salaam a lakum Shalom Chevarim Posts: 896 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I mentioed it because until we are ready to confront our history throughout the world, and some of the terrible things we did in the name of the Cold War, we will never be seen as honest brokers in peace negotiations. We have to learn what our history was, warts and all, if we are to have credibilit
lets talk more about how your sources say the Reagan team was dealing with Iran before they were even elected...
that's more interesting.. that shows people selling their own country for political power...
Carter is a dem... im not... i toldja that before i could care less...
i love the poor poor pitiful me act you put on after you start a topic with Religio-phobia and racism in the party that used to fight for civil rights
you just ain't right boy...
we are sending NON nukular bunker busters to Israel today.. i hope one has Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's name on it...
as long as there's no nukes? i say "let the bodies hit the floor"...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh Sure your not a demeocrat Glassman. You've got stark raving republican written all over your posts. I have seen you do nothing but trash every republican you ever talked about. I know you voted for Bush Sr. Right. And I voted for Dukakis . What is it Bdgee said here last night, If it wks like a duck.....
-------------------- Thanks Matto. Thanks Juice. Posts: 2945 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
