Brilliantly, sadly observed

[ish mailian]

As far as I understand the Iraq-Iran War (Karsh), the so-called Superpowers
at the time, did not encourage a conflict as it would be counter to their
separate, competitive, though at times, mutual advantages. What they
encourage once the War got underway, was a stalemate. And that's,
essentially,  after a protracted and bloody war, is what they got.



On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:42 AM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:

> Your saying that the US supplied weapons and intelligence to Iraq, and
> encouraged Iraq to wage war on Iran as early as September 1980, or earlier?
> If you are correct it would need to be earlier, right? Were these weapons
> Soviet weapons, parts, and were the advisors experts in Soviet weapons?
> Iraq had built a sizable military with Soviet weaponry. We know that
> weapons and parts and advisors form over a dozen countries, including, of
> course, Germany's Chemical weapons, flood the war later, but how did the US
> encourage and support Iraq at the start and leading up to the conflict?
> That is, before September 1980? Can you tell me where I can read of this
> astonishing history? So many documents and, of course, lots of intelligence
> from both sides we discovered by the US when it invaded Iraq, was it in
> these discoveries that the history you speak of is to be found?
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>
>> We supplied weapons, advisors and as the global superpower fully endorsed
>> it. If we had not done so it is highly doubtful that Saddam would have
>> started it.
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:14 PM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > What US policies in particular led to the creation of ISIS?  1)we ok’d
>> the idea of seizing land through war by provoking and helping the Iraqi war
>> on Iran
>> >
>> >
>> > We ok'd it?  How about the fact that the two nations were generally
>> hostile toward one another for a long time. How about Islam? The Bath party
>> was rightfully fearful that Khomeini would stir up rebellion in southern
>> Iraq. How about territorial disputes, especially the conflict over the
>> Shatt al-'Arab River.
>> >
>> > The dispute over the Shatt Al-Arab waterway threatens once more to
>> derail the peace talks between Iraq and Iran, and could ultimately end the
>> truce between the two countries. However, as this historical account shows,
>> the controversy involving this shallow, 127-mile-long strategic waterway
>> has been the subject of treaties signed in 1843, 1937, and 1975, and
>> continues to loom as an intractable problem.
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.wrmea.org/1989-april/the-shatt-al-arab-obstacle-to-iran-iraq-peace.html
>> >
>>
>> -
>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20151202/0b7a9f37/attachment.html>