Editor, The Times:
So, Saddam Hussein may have had some weapons of mass destruction — poison gas — after all, according to a recent story by New York Times reporter C.J Chivers.
So why didn't the U.S. military publicize this? It would have given an excuse for George Bush's “Ship of Fools” to be in Iraq.
An American origin for these chemical weapons? Well, no surprise there.
To quote George Galloway, when asked how many times he had met Saddam Hussein, “I met with him as many times as Donald Rumsfeld. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met to give him (Saddam) guns and the maps to better target those guns.”
Robert Fisk, from the front-lines of the Iran-Iraq war, reported seeing virtually hundreds of dead Iranian soldiers without a mark on them.
However, just as when he tried to expose the thousands of casualties caused by the Israeli military in Lebanon, there was little interest in what Fisk had to report.
As a sideline, Saddam was also gassing the Kurds but again, since he was wreaking vengeance for the US of A, especially on the Iranians – hold our diplomats hostage will you! So Saddam's excuses were swept under the rug.
Sarin and mustard gas shell supplied by the West? US of A maybe, well certainly Western powers were supplying Iraq with virtually everything it needed. French artillery trucked in by British interests – labelled oil drilling equipment. You name it. Saddam obtained his weapon of mass destruction from all sources – chemical equipment from Germany, tanks, trucks and Kalashnikovs from Russia (incidentally China and possibly Israel were two of the very few countries that were supplying Iran).
So, add to the super screwup that was Gulf War II the injuries suffered by a handful of American soldiers who handled this deadly stuff without proper protection. Strange, for an army that was sent into Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction. They could be ignored. But thankfully no longer. Maybe the truth will come out at last!
Dennis Peacock
Clearwater, B.C.