Iraq claims damage Germany in Arab world-spy chief

Cowards

"In Arab countries it could make us look as if we're the handmaidens of the United States and Israel,"

A German not wanting to be associated with Israel? I'm stunned. /s

Am I the only one who had to work at making sense of the headline?

Ping

Iraq claims damage Germany in Arab world-spy chief

That's crap. I think they mean:

Claims by Iraq Damage Germany in Arab world, according to spy chief

Headline holds contains too many verbs-head cheese. Film at eleven.

Germany had intelligence agents inside of Iraq BECAUSE??? I thought there were no WMD programs and that there was no threat posed. Why spy on them then?

How dare we throw a monkey wrench into their well-oiled appeasement racket. BUSH FAULT!

"In Arab countries it could make us look as if we're the handmaidens of the United States and Israel," Ernst Uhrlau, the head of Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency said.

But being "handmaidens" of Saddam Hussein and Hamas, that's a-okay to the Germans. Good job guys. Maybe you need to tell the Arabs it was America, not the Arabs, that liberated your country in the 40s and spent our precious national treasure rebuilding Germany.

"In Arab countries it could make us look as if we're the handmaidens of the United States and Israel," Ernst Uhrlau, the head of Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency said.

They always trow Israel in there, don't they? As far as I know, Israel has had zero involvement in Iraq but that doesn't stop the Anti-Semites from trashing Israel everytime The US is brought up.

As soon as I started to read the article, curve ball came into mind. As for German soldiers being more at risk within the NATO forces missions in Afghanistan. I take that with a grain of salt. If their in the field they are at the same risk as any other NATO troops.

In the Arab world Germany's history with Jews puts them in pretty good stead.

"The only thing
we didn't supported was an overhasted war, lacking
of legitimation of the UN, lacking of diplomacy."

The UN's say-so does not legitimize a damned thing, particularly when at least 4 of the members of the Security Council were being bought off by Saddam's illegal Oil for Food kickbacks. And yes, German firms and politicians were complicit in that, so that makes your claim that Germany was only helping Saddam in legitimate ways a bit inaccurate.

Also, UN ceasefire agreements with Saddam in 1991 at the end of the Gulf War specified that Saddam's regime had 50 days from the end of the Gulf War to disarm or prove that they had. They never did. As a result, the war by the terms of the 1991 ceasefire was on again 51 days from the end of the 1991 ceasefire. It just took the US 12 years to finish it. How is that "overhasted?"

So the only ones acting illegitimately were the bought off members of the Security Council who refused to uphold UN resolutions and particularly the UN ceasefire agreement. The UN is obligated to uphold those accords. That they refused DELEGITIMIZED THE UN. That the US had to act responsibily when the bought off UN refused was ENTIRELY legitimate under the terms of the 1991 UN Ceasefire Agreements that Saddam violated in total.

"And as a tip for your former minister of defense:
We have aversions to support people who are lying
His speech at the UN councile was the greatest bullshit
i have seen for years. "The Iran has WMDs". Not found till today."

Turns out it is YOU that is the promulgator of "the greatest b.s." with this lie about WMD. It now turns out Saddam did have WMD up until just before the invasion as shown in the new book by General Geores Sada, Saddam's former air vice marshall "Saddam's Secrets." According to the book Saddam spirited out his WMD to Syria in 2002 through a large airlift operation to get them out ahead of the US invasion. Read all about it: http://www.nysun.com/article/26514

Also, we have tapes discovered in Saddam's intelligence files of Saddam and his cabinent talking about hiding their WMD and building a sophisticated nuclear weapons program as late as 2000.

Finally, if Colin Powell's speech was such "b.s.," what do you make of the tapes presented in his speech to the UN, tapes never repudiated as being false, where Iraqi officers are heard warning their troops that UN inspectors were about to arrive and to sanitize their installations of banned materials? I guess they were just making a crank phonecall huh?

Finally, what of the many hundreds of chemical shells we've found in Iraq including buried nuclear centrifuges?

"The Iran bought Yellow Cake (rwa uranium) in Afrika". Bullshit. The afrikan uranium mines are owned
an controlled by state-run european companies.

A) No one said Iraq bought the Yellowcake but that they were seeking to B) Three separate investigations, 1 in a unanimous bi-partisan finding of the US Senate Intelligence committee, one by British intelligence and one by the European Intelligence Agency ALL proved in July 2004 that in fact the Yellowcake claim was correct and accurate, that substantial evidence substantiated the claim that Iraq was SEEKING to buy yellowcake in Africa. The national ownership of those mines is totally irrelevent. They are managed by African operators. Here is an article showing Bush was vindicated on yellowcake: http://www.annistonstar.com/opinion/2004/as-insight-0722-0-4g21r0810.htm

And from the British parliamentary group's Butler Commission report:

"We conclude that, on the basis of the intelligence assessments at the time, covering both Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government's dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that: The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa was well founded."

Finally, you attacked the US for having supported Saddam in the 1980s. Perhaps that was a mistake but Iran looked like a much bigger threat than Saddam did at that time spreading Islamic revolution and of course taking American diplomats hostage. It appeared Saddam could be brought into the family of nation's by siding with him against Iran and providing him with NON-LETHAL military assistance. The US, and Germany, have at various times allied themselves with unsavory characters to bring about a desired result, such as the Roosevelt-Stalin alliance to defeat the Third Reich. This is nothing new.

The important thing is the US disengaged from any constructive engagement with Iraq when it was clear they were not going to be made to see reason through working with them (this is Europe's position in how to deal with tyrannts in the early 21st century, not the US's so it's a little hypocritical to be attacking the US for this now) and that Saddam's Iraq remained a brutal, aggressor nation after Saddam gassed the Kurds and invaded Kuwait. But it sure wasn't long before the memory of the rape of Kuwait faded from Europe's mind before you were all dealing with Saddam again. At least the US remained true to its change in stance against Saddam. So again, it's a little disengenous to attack the US for this when Europe continued to treat Saddam as someone they could do business with right up until they 2003 liberation of Iraq. But then billions in illegal Oil for Food kickbacks to European political and business leaders bought Saddam a lot of goodwill didn't it?

Anyway, I suggest you read something beyond Germany's America hating newspapers to become better informed about these issues you are clearly using an outdated script to speak from. A lot of new information has come out that is vindicating the president more and more each day on his decision to liberate Iraq from the terrorist mass murderer Saddam.

Aren't you glad as a German or European that we Americans weren't prevented from liberating Europe from the Third Reich by the ignorant and America-hating opinions of extreme left wing radicals who think it is never proper to utilize military force to rid the world of psychotic and tyrannical leaders? I hope you are not so naive as to believe that these tyrannts are ever defeated through anything other than military confrontation. If America had been so naive as to believe that in the 1940s and to just hope that "engagement, trade, and diplomatic niceties with the Third Reich would cause them to eventually see sense, you'd still be Goosestepping and saluting Der Fuehrer.