Saddam is on death row, the heads of Iranian and Iraqi states embrace amicably over talks to stabilize Iraq, America is still considering Iran to be the axis of evil, Israel insists that Iran is dangerous, and many do not recall (or mention) that the US supported Saddam in the war against Iran, nor that Israel sold weapons to both. Kamin Mohammadi reminds us of the forgotten victims of Saddam's chemical attacks on Iran
Iranians are the first civilians in the world to experience chemical bombs!
The mustard-gas bombs dropped on Sardasht on that afternoon were the first time a chemical weapon was used on a civilian town. In the following months, Saddam Hussein’s troops would drop these deadly bombs on several other villages in Iran as well as on Kurdish settlements in Iraq itself, including the infamous bombing of Halabja.Source of pictures
...
Mustard gas’s chief assault on the body is grave chemical burns. It affects the respiratory organs, eyes and skin within hours.
...
The bombing of Sardasht was at the start of a devastating campaign during the Iraq-Iran war. Saddam’s bombs claimed more than 100,000 Iranian civilian casualties. The gas agents had been developed to wipe out more people over a wider range than their predecessors. A by-product of this approach was that the noxious, insidious nature of the chemicals used ensured many of his victims died a very slow, very painful death.
Thus, those who have survived still live under the cloud of the bombs. The gas effected their DNA, caused long-term respiratory problems, eye and skin problems as well as immune system disorders, psychological disorders, genetic disorders, and probably cancers. There is also anecdotal evidence that some of the problems can be passed on to children.
...
Since Saddam Hussein was in direct violation of The Geneva Protocol of 1925, Iran complained bitterly to the international community, and though several UN missions were dispatched to Iran, only two UN resolutions addressed the chemical attacks, both weakly worded and failing to make explicit Iraq’s violation of the protocol. One of the resolutions didn’t even name Iraq as the originator of the attacks on Iran and another was not issued until after the ceasefire in the autumn of 1988.
It is this failure by the international community to support Iran against these illegal attacks that is in part responsible for Iran’s current defiance on the nuclear issue.
...
Although, in the standoff between Iran and the US that is currently taking place over the nuclear issue, Iran is seen as the potential aggressor, in reality, Iran’s experiences in the war have hardened its position.
But far away from these high-octane political wranglings, the people of Iran continue to try to live their lives within the uncertainty and psychological warfare employed by both sides, including those still physically devastated by the effects of the war and the unprovoked chemical attacks on innocent Iranian civilians. And what strikes them as ironic is that they are the only people in recent history to have directly suffered the effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and now they are painted as part of a country that is the West’s greatest enemy ...
Also see AllBlog video post of Rumsfeld and Saddam in action
11 comments:
So true, you say what the mainstream media doesn't dare.
That was the time when the US thought to crush Iran by way of Saddam. Now that they have reinforced iran by crushing Saddam, they still need to wage war on Iran ! Many mice, little time !
they certainly are trying, aren't they?
But I don't think they "intended" to reinforce Iran. Iran became reinforced thanks to almost 30 years of sanctions and the hard work of its people.
Americans can listen all they want to a bunch of bitter traitor Iraninas who live in a time warp outside of Iran, but they should hopefully take a look at a history book and realize a people who has not succumbed to the British and the Russians, will not tolerate American colonization either.
I am no apologist for the government of Iran, but it is Iranians like me and my family who have suffered their perils most. And we do not need Americans to rescue us. In fact we resent America for forcing us to line behind Ahmadinejad! But in the face of evil, one sticks to the lesser one.
A culture that has been around for a few thousand years can determine for itself what kind of democracy it desires. If America wants to be respected, it better learns to respect.
I am defiants Sophia, I am defiant.
Naj,
The Iran Air Flight 655, along with the Israeli bombing of the USS Liberty incident will forever reside in the Orwellian memory hole...
True enough, what we call any conflict doesn't matter for the people on the ground there - death is death, complete failure is complete failure...
but, as the neo-cons have correctly estimated, the right marketing on the homefront is important for mobilizing the moribund morality of Americans, who still (ostensibly) have a partial say in their own country's foreign policy direction.
BTW,
BTW, CHECK OUT HOW WE REWARD OUR TROOPS FOR SLAUGHTERING UNARMED/NON-THREATENING CIVILIAN WOMEN AND CHILDREN - it's like what they say, if you can't fire 'em, promote 'em!
"Premier-warlord George Walker Bush" would be pleased if his memory went back further than this morning's breakfast!
I remember when the Americans attacked Iraq, the joke in Teheran was "a pity, they should have come here". In Kristof - an opponent to the invasion- blog in NYT, you had reports of welcoming of the Americans in many places. After the looting of the museum and other places, and later with all the stories about Abou-Ghraib...
This was not the image that Iranian had of Americans, why such a mis-management?
mismanagement on American behalf?
mismanagement on Iranian media behalf?
mismanagement on American media behalf?
I remember the day Americans attacked Iraq (for the second time) It was on the eve of our Persian new year. I was inconsolable, crying in the arms of a friend, knowing the blood bath that would begin ... I didn't want the neighbor who had fought us once to suffer in the hands of aliens from the other side of the ocean. No nation has to suffer what Iraq has, is, for so long.
we protested in -25 degrees temperature
we prevented our government to take part in this historic shame
we sent journalists to make sure Canada will not be part of it
and it worked
...
Living in Quebec, we have the privilege of thinking before swallowing any potion that's force fed to us.
...
But I also remember hearing from my friends in Iran, that certain Iranians were hoping America would liberate them too ...
Frankly, I am finding it ironic that when we are in Iran, we never believe what our state media is telling us. we think it is propaganda. But when we come abroad, we see the state-produced news in Iran is very close to what is happening in the world, the looting, and the abu Gharib are not fabrications of Iranian media ...
I also remember I was in Iran during the so called student-revolt (was it 18 of june?) I was watching CNN from the sattelite and I was completely amazed by the lies they were telling. I was in the heart of Tehran, in one of Tehran University's dorms at 3:00 am, looking for a camera cable my brother had lent a friend; and the CNN was portraying Tehran and the campus in a state of fascist take over! LIES LIES AND MORE LIES.
But I honestly doubt Iranians will welcome Americans. Perhaps the Westernized zombies, but from what I see, the country is filled with youth who at the same time that is well educated in the pros and cons of "the West", is also well rooted in his own culture, creativity and determination for change!
Thus I remain optimistic.
I hope I am right.
I am probably naive, but once the Americans got to Iraq, why this "laisser-aller"? For instance, couldn't they put guards in front of the museum? As a symbol of order? As much as I followed through NYT, the Americans were welcomed at least by a certain number of civilians. I cannot believe that - at some point at least - these atrocities were not "avoidable"
No you are not naive at all. In fact this is the question that teh intelligent americans asked as well.
I will try to track down the sources, there was a documentary, maybe by the fifth State or by the 60 Minutes, I don't remember exactly the title, but they basically concluded that although the Iraqis had pleaded to Americans for the safe-guarding of the museusm, the American soldiers were too busy guarding the oil!
Also, there were reports of professional looting taking place. I.e. the orders having been made ahead of time, and the professionat "collectors" taking advantage of the mayhem to "obtain" the ordered items!
Haven't you seen the images of the directors of the museum crying as if on the grave of a murdered child as they walked through the shatters of what was once an invaluable collection of the mesopotamia ...
( which reminds me of seeing a few ancient archeological pieces of Persian art, obtained by the MET in New York, in the year 1994. I thought there was an indefinite moratorium on exportation of Iranian art, and an embargo on acquisition of things Iranian by the Americans.)
Oh well, maybe we are all wrong and oil is not what they are really after, they want our ancient relics too! ;)
Obviously I take that Museum story as a symbolic value for the following events... where were the Americans who were "The Americans" that people looked up at them?
Hopefully one day Rumsfeld will answer that question in an international court!
Post a Comment