Graph of Iraqi Weapon Imports

[Nie Trink Wasser]

http://www.solport.com/resources/Iraqi%20Weapons.JPG


data taken from : http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/atirq_data.html




"American troops found that the fleeing Baath Party and paramilitary
forces had set up minefields on roads and bridges leading out of the
city. Late today an American engineering team was clearing the third
of such fields, this one with 30 mines, by detonating them with C4
explosives.

Lt. Col. Duke Deluca, noting that the mines had been made in Italy,
said, "Europeans are antiwar, but they are pro-commerce." "

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


"American troops found that the fleeing Baath Party and paramilitary forces had set up minefields on roads and bridges leading out of the city"

How can this be? I thought the U.S. was the only country in the world who didn't sign the anti-Landmine treaty.

(Side note: does anyone know if Iraq actually signed that treaty?)

[Nie Trink Wasser]

you're missing the point

the point isnt about mines being banned weapons, its about cultures that preach peace to keep their secret market share in war growing.

[c0rbin]

And people think it was Uday who ruined the glorious Iraqi Olympic Cross-Country Team.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by Segnosaur


How can this be? I thought the U.S. was the only country in the world who didn't sign the anti-Landmine treaty.

(Side note: does anyone know if Iraq actually signed that treaty?)

Right, and of course the reason they didn't sign it, was because they love the carnage these weapons produce..:rolleyes:

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
you're missing the point

the point isnt about mines being banned weapons, its about cultures that preach peace to keep their secret market share in war growing.

Hey, it was a joke. I was making fun of Iraq, and its habit of doing "bad things".

Of course, I did look it up: Italy did sign the anti-landmine treaty. I guess you can build them as long as you don't use them. (Any idea how long these land mines have been around?) On the other hand, Italy is a member of the coaltion.

Oh, and I did look it up... Iraq did not sign the treaty. So of course they are free to use as many mines as they want.

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
http://www.solport.com/resources/Iraqi%20Weapons.JPG


data taken from : http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/atirq_data.html






This graph represents total arms imports, no?

Canada is shown with 0%, yet a Canadian company sold Iraq a "super gun" which could have been used for lobbing ordinance at its enemies in the region, namely Kurds, and the nations of Iran, and Isreal. Of course the Iraqis claimed they were attempting to shoot satelites into orbit.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/021106-gun.htm

During the Iraq Iran conflict the Brits and Americans supplied Saddam's regime with many weopons. Yet, imports for Britain are 0% and

the USA is conspicuously missing from the graph, even though it is a permanant Security Council member.

Oops, after looking at the graph more carefully the 5th time :eek:

I see the USA , I think the UNSC in brackets threw me off. My bad. Where is the sheepish smilie?

So there fore my saying:
The accuracy of this graph is suspect.

has to be reviewed in light of my error.

I was perusing the Research site when I realized my mistake. Odd that I did not see it till my 5th reading.... temporary blindness?

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe

Canada is shown with 0%, yet it sold Iraq a "super gun" which could have been used for lobbing ordinance at its enemies in the region, namely Kurds, and the nations of Iran, and Isreal. Of course the Iraqis claimed they were attempting to shoot satelites into orbit.


If you look at the source of the underlying information, Canada is listed as selling a few million dollars of weapons to Iraq in the 1980s. (This could have been for the super-gun). However, while Canada was selling millions, Russia, France, etc. were selling billions. (It may also be possible that the 'super-gun' might not be classified as a weapon, because it would be at least partly experimental.)

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe

During the Iraq Iran conflict the Brits and Americans supplied Saddam's regime with many weopons. Yet, imports for Britain are 0% and the USA is conspicuously missing from the graph, even though it is a permanant Security Council member.


What do you mean the U.S. is missing? I see it right there on the graph. (11th down, right under Libya and that war-like country Denmark). As for Britian, like Canada they sold several million, but compared to the totals supplied by Russia, France, etc. it was minor.

Oh, and by the way, even in the years that the U.S. supplied Iraq weapons, they still sold less than the Russians did.

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe


The accuracy of this graph is suspect.

The data from the graph comes from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. I had never heard of that organization until a few weeks ago, but from what I understand, it is a fairly well respected (slightly left-biased) organization. If you want to complain about anyone, complain about them.

Your main concern seems to be a few zeros.... But that is roundoff error (i.e. figures were rounded to 0 decimal places). In both the case of Canada and Britian, the percentage of the total works out to less than 0.1%.

[Mike B.]

This graph highlights what I find to be one of the weakest arguments I heard from the anti-war crowd.

We always heard how the US backed Saddam in the 80s while he was fighting Iran, so therefore it was hypocritical to be against Saddam now.

If this was so I always found it odd that the Iraqi armed forces were made up of Soviet tanks and Migs as well as French Mirage Jets. How much did the US support Saddam. It appears the Soviets backed him as a Baathist far more than the US. I think the argument just sounded so good, people never really looked at it.

(Don't get me wrong there were cogent reasons why there should not have been a war.)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mike B.
This graph highlights what I find to be one of the weakest arguments I heard from the anti-war crowd.

We always heard how the US backed Saddam in the 80s while he was fighting Iran, so therefore it was hypocritical to be against Saddam now.

If this was so I always found it odd that the Iraqi armed forces were made up of Soviet tanks and Migs as well as French Mirage Jets. How much did the US support Saddam. It appears the Soviets backed him as a Baathist far more than the US. I think the argument just sounded so good, people never really looked at it.

(Don't get me wrong there were cogent reasons why there should not have been a war.)

I don't think it is so much that the US is guilty of hypocrisy and no one else is. It is more, the US has never acknowedged it's hypocrisy, or the conseqences of it. It is also the largest arms exporter in the world.

As for the rest of the world, they can hardly complain about US hypocrisy either, as you point out, the arms industry is a disgrace to the 'civilised' world, with much of it being used to continue bloody wars in the third world.

Even if European countries are being hypocrtical in opposing the war, does not make it right, as you point out. As for many of the countries that are lining up to support it, I would say the cheque is in the mail.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Mike B.

We always heard how the US backed Saddam in the 80s while he was fighting Iran, so therefore it was hypocritical to be against Saddam now.

There are other good reasons to remember how we helped arm Saddam. Like history not repeating itself.

[Walter Wayne]

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe
Canada is shown with 0%, yet a Canadian company sold Iraq a "super gun" which could have been used for lobbing ordinance at its enemies in the region, namely Kurds, and the nations of Iran, and Isreal. Of course the Iraqis claimed they were attempting to shoot satelites into orbit.

...While it was a Canadian who designed the gun, he did so under contract with Iraq, and had I believe Austria and South Africa build the guns. So the graph would be correct.
Here (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/other/supergun.htm)