Posted on 10/13/2002 8:12:17 AM PDT by icantbleaveit
Outrage as Iraq views UK arms
Peace campaigners angered as Saddam's top brass
'rub shoulders' with British firms at weapons bazaar
Jason Burke, chief reporter
Sunday October 13, 2002
The Observer
A British Minister will lead a major sales drive by UK weapons
and military technology firms at an exhibition attended by
high-ranking Iraqi military officials this week.
The news has sparked outrage among arms control
campaigners and groups opposed to military action against Iraq.
'It is absurd that we are gearing up to fight a war against these
people and simultaneously rubbing shoulders with them at an
arms bazaar,' said Martin Hogbin of the Campaign Against Arms
Trade.
Around a dozen British firms will be displaying equipment such
as tanks, thermal imaging night sights and state-of-the-art air
defence missiles at the exhibition in Amman, Jordan. Machine
tools that could be used to produce weapons will also be on
show. The government-run Defence Export Services
Organisation will also have a stall.
Promotional material for the Sofex military fair boasts that
Saddam Hussein is sending an official delegation. Sultan
Hashim Ahmad, the Iraqi Defence Minister, attended the last
Sofex. Sudan, Syria, Libya and Iran - all listed as sponsors of
terrorism by the US State Department - are also expected to
attend.
'It's an appalling example of double standards. Where there is a
buck to be made, we're there,' said Andrew Bergen, spokesman
for the Stop the War Coalition, which campaigns against military
action against Iraq.
In the Eighties the UK and US supplied Iraq with millions of
pounds' worth of military equipment. Baghdad used British
companies to procure 'dual-use' machine tools to make
ammunition. Even though the UK had imposed an embargo on
'lethal equipment', the Conservative Government let the sales
proceed.
The Ministry of Defence confirmed last week that Lord Bach, the
Defence Procurement Minister, would be attending the fair.
'Sofex allows the UK defence industry to demonstrate its
product range to a number of potential overseas customers very
effectively,' said an MoD spokesman.
There is no suggestion that the British firms are doing anything
wrong. 'We exhibit there. The Government decides what we can
sell to whom,' said a spokesman for the American military
aviation giant Lockheed Martin, whose British arm is attending
the fair. Lockheed Martin makes the Longbow 'fire-and-forget'
and the Hellfire 2 anti-tank missiles. Both would be expected to
play a key role in any attack on Iraq.
Some senior industry figures, however, have expressed surprise
at the British presence. 'Are we there to show the Iraqis what we
are about to drop on them?' one asked. Exhibition organisers list
Raytheon, the American company which makes the long-range
Cruise missiles that experts predict would spearhead any US
bombardment of Iraq, among companies at the fair. Vickers, the
UK arms company which makes the Challenger, the Army's
main battle tank, will also be exhibiting.
Sales by British firms are carefully vetted, but other nations are
less rigorous. The Russian state arms export corporation,
Rosoboronexport, which will be at Sofex, provided Robert
Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe with 21,000 AK-47s and eight
attack helicopters.
A Romanian firm which offered banned anti-personnel mines for
sale at an arms fair in the UK three years ago, will exhibit, as
well as Vazovski, a Bulgarian company, which makes grenade
launchers, missile and anti-aircraft systems. Vazovski small
arms were shipped to Unita rebels with false 'end-user'
certificates in the late Nineties.
Britain has always had a tradition of military co-operation with
Jordan and the strong representation of UK companies at the fair
is being seen as an expression of support for the government of
King Abdullah. The Jordanian economy benefits hugely from
trade with Iraq. Any military operations will have a massive
impact in the kingdom.
The Middle East has long been a good market for British
weapons firms. According to recent Foreign Office figures, the
UK licensed arms exports worth £1.4 billion to the Middle East
and North Africa between January 1999 and December 2001.
You really believe that? Unreal.
When Reagan bombed Libya, he went so far as to burn his own intelligence in order to show to the American people that the attack was justified. He showed the cards. The reason Bush and the State department aren't showing their cards is because they have no cards.
It's not a matter of belief. Belief requires no evidence. The FACT is that the US has new bases in Afghanistan, Turkmenestan, Pakistan and Uzbekistan.
The action in Afghanistan was leaked 4 months before 9/11 even occurred. These are actual facts. You don't have to believe them and I don't care if you do because I know them to be true.
And you accuse me of acting on blind belief? LOL...Wow!
Yes. You can't substantiate a single claim. Do you dispute that the US has new bases along the pipeline route?
Both Bush and Cheney have major interests in energy companies. Enron and other major companies loaned the Bush campaign the use of their aircraft during the Florida fight. They donated alot of money to the Bush campaign otherwise.
You've heard of political payback haven't you? The reward occurs after the administration leaves office. Always does. Look at how many ex-Senators and Congressman are lobbyists for industries that courted them while they held office. Furthermore, in this case, the Caspian pipeline was a pipe-dream for all intents and purposes due to the instability in the region, namely Afghanistan. While I would never claim that 9/11 was staged in order to facilitate the Afghanistan nation-building occurring now, it is quite obvious that the results are favorable to those who thought the pipeline all but impossible.
In fact, I don't think the administration would stage such an event given their obvious belief that the American public will fall for outright lies as justification for going to war with Iraq.
In fact, the action in Afghanistan was already planned prior to the events of 9/11. The press in India had reported that Afghanistan was to be invaded as early as July of 2001.
9/11 simply saved the administration some lame excuses to draw from. As it was, there still wasn't any justification for invading Afghanistan (Al Quaeda is NOT Afghanistan nor is Afghanistan Al Quaeda).
So then you concede that there are bases all along the pipeline route even in nations where there have been no terrorist camps which target the US.
Good.
Read this.
http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatures/nat2.asp?recno=10∓ctg=policy
This article was published June 26th 2001.
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.shtml
This one in March of 2001.
Janes is pretty reliable I'd say. You can knock them if you'd like but you probably wouldn't have any takers.
I will explain to you how those bases you describe were obtained AFTER 9-11, to support the war in Afghanistan.
Some built by the bin Laden construction company. At any rate, we were performing joint excercises in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan in 1997 and 1998. Interestingly enough this coincided with the acquisition of oil and gas contracts by US companies.
I don't think I've laid this all at Bush's feet. He's merely continuing plans that were started back in his father's administration (if not before then) continued during the Clinton administration and perhaps now completed under his administration. This isn't some evil plan hatched by Bush. It's the continuation of an interventionist policy that doesn't serve the interests of the American people but does serve the interests of some big oil companies who've managed to negotiate contracts with countries in a very unstable region.
You apparently haven't watched the news. Cheney sold his shares before declaring I believe. And the FEC keeps the details of campaign donations. It's documented fact that Lay and Enron were big contributers.
So then you concede that there are bases all along the pipeline route even in nations where there have been no terrorist camps which target the US.
Well, of course they exist...but your timeline, and the motives you ascribe for their establishment are highly suspect.
We have bases in dozens of countries that 'have no terrorist camps which target the US'. Why? Because they are strategically placed NEAR countries which bear us ill-will. Duh.
Just because a duck is near the hen's nest, that doesn't prove that it laid a chicken egg.
It's not my timeline. What's suspect is why the US had targetted Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks. That they had is established fact.
Oh, really? And where do think they got the anthrax? Do you think they brewed it up in a cave? Get real. No bunch of loonies living in a cave dreamed up 9/11. This one has Saddam's fingerprints all over it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.