Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Did Fed finance Saddam's weapons?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bacasper



Joined: 26 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:43 pm    Post subject: Did Fed finance Saddam's weapons? Reply with quote

Did the US Federal Reserve finance Saddam Hussein�s weapon purchases?

Published 27 February, 2010, 18:51


As Congress debates legislation to make the US Federal Reserve less secretive, Republican Ron Paul said the Bank loaned Iraq billions of dollars to buy US weapons in the 1980s.

...

On the rocky road to that elusive goal, Paul appeared this week alongside fellow lawmakers on Capitol Hill where they had the pleasure of putting Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke in the hot seat for a painful Q&A session. Bernanke, incidentally, is the guy who ran the money-printing machines at full speed to bail out the American economy, if not the entire globalization project itself, following the Collapse of 2007.

Paul, who regularly provides the fireworks to otherwise drab Congressional hearings due to his profound knowledge of the issues, slammed the �cozy relationship� that now exists between lawmakers and the Federal Reserve Bank, which creates what the congressman from Texas has labeled the �inflationary tax.�

�There has been a political cozy relationship between Congress and the Federal Reserve,� said Paul, addressing his comments at Bernanke. �The Congress has been derelict in its duties to provide oversight�Congress can keep spending and getting reelected. They don�t have to raise taxes, so the Fed can act as a taxing authority: you print the money, [which] dilutes the value of the money, prices go up, and price inflation is a tax and when people pay a lot more for their medical care than they used to they ought to think about the inflationary tax.�

Paul then discussed the lack of transparency in the Federal Reserve, and how this may have contributed to more than one under-the-table transaction that worked to disrupt US foreign policy.

�I would like to get to more specifics on the �transparency bill� because it has been reported in the past that during the 1980s the Fed actually facilitated a $5.5 billion dollar loan to Saddam Hussein, and then he bought weapons from our military industrial complex,� Paul said, adding that was also the time when the Iraqi dictator invested in a nuclear reactor.

full story at link
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
caniff



Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The military-industrial complex has to make money same as the next guy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
T-J



Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But Saddam didn't have any weapons....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catman



Joined: 18 Jul 2004

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

T-J wrote:
But Saddam didn't have any weapons....


Not in 2003.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bacasper



Joined: 26 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

T-J wrote:
But Saddam didn't have any weapons....

Oh, he had weapons. From where do you think he got the poison gas he used on the Kurds?

He just didn't have WMDs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jaykimf



Joined: 24 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bacasper wrote:
T-J wrote:
But Saddam didn't have any weapons....

Oh, he had weapons. From where do you think he got the poison gas he used on the Kurds?

He just didn't have WMDs.


Isn't poison gas a WMD?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
T-J



Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jaykimf wrote:
bacasper wrote:
T-J wrote:
But Saddam didn't have any weapons....

Oh, he had weapons. From where do you think he got the poison gas he used on the Kurds?

He just didn't have WMDs.


Isn't poison gas a WMD?


Apparently in the opinion of some it is not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bacasper wrote:
T-J wrote:
But Saddam didn't have any weapons....

Oh, he had weapons. From where do you think he got the poison gas he used on the Kurds?

He just didn't have WMDs.



In Halabja, between 3,200-5000 people were killed, and between 7000-10,000 injured by a poison gas attack.

I'd say that qualifies as a WMD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RufusW



Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"WMDs" inferred nuclear weapons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RufusW wrote:
"WMDs" inferred nuclear weapons.


Actually the most widely used definition of WMDs (in U.S official documents) includes chemical and biological weapons as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RufusW wrote:
"WMDs" inferred nuclear weapons.


Not to anyone who knows what a WMD is. I'm far more scared of biological and chemical weapons than nuclear ones, honestly. Especially biologicals; a well crafted biological weapon could decimate an entire nation's population.

That said, it's still not why Iraq was invaded.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RufusW



Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was referring to the inferring that had been done during the lead up to the Iraq war. Nobody was scared of Saddam launching poisonous gas towards Europe.

Anyway, wasn't America's sponsoring of Iraq well known before this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International