Re: [MERCS] Weapons available [FH]

> Under international law, they are.  If you hold Iraqi
> citizenship, you're an Iraqi.  Your personal
> preference in favor of independant Kurdistan is
> irrelevant.  Personally, I'm all in favor of
> Kurdistan, mostly because it would honk off Turkey.
> Any divisiveness in the Dar al'Islam makes me happy.

I listed no preference for Kurdistan.  I simpily stated a fact.

> > room talk about Iraq's use
> > of WMD's against a rebelious minor nationality.
>
> Even if the cases occoured as you suggested, that
> doesn't not translate to the above statement.  The
> fact that 7 generations back, I'm descended from a
> slave overseer does not prevent me from being offended
> by, for instance, the Sudanese continuing to practice
> chattel slavery (and the Saudis effectively doing so
> as well).

The whole point is that the U.S. is not clean from use of WMD.

> > There are two documented
> > instances where the U.S. Army intentionally used
>
> Cite source.	Reliable, off-net source preferably.

I don't remember the source; I came a accross them about 10 years ago
while
doing some research.  If the sources weren't credible, I would not have
bothered to remember them.

> I've only seen 2 cases where this was substantiated.
> One case was a _British_ officer ordered the
> distribution of smallpox-infected blankets.
>
> The other was a New York Indian fighter
> (pre-Revolutionary, IIRC) who died of smallpox and
> ordered himself buried in his infected blankets.  The
> Indians predictably desecrtated his grave and started
> a plague.  Frankly, I find that to be self-inflicted.
>
> > with biological weapons, while march them off to
> > concentration camps
> > (resorvations), to end a minor nationality's ability
>
> I can tell you've never actually seen a concentration
> camp.  Hop a flight to Europe sometime.  It's
> mind-expanding.

Actually, I have seen two Nazi concentration camps.  One of which,
Buchenwald (sic), had a recently discovered mass grave behind it (in the
summer of 1992).  The dates were from 1946 on (I forgot the upper
bound).
Stalin didn't like to waste resources, only people...

> If the US wanted to engage in Nazi-style extermination
> practices, there would be no Indians left at all.
> We're more effective than Germans when we set our mind
> to something.  More flexibility.

If you knew your history, you would know that Adolf Hitler had the
highest
regard for what the U.S. Army did to the American Indians.  He liked it
so
much in fact, it was his plan for the USSR.  Only the in-ablity of the
Nazi's to defeat the Allies (especailly the Soviets) prevented them from
implementing this.  The Hollocost was a result of the Nazi's in-ability
to
inflict far worse and far broder genocide.  Remember, the Jews and
Gypsies
were only the two at the top of the Nazi extermination list.  All of the
Slav's were also on there.  If you doubt this, why don't you check what
percentage of captured Russian soldiers survived the war...

The reason there are some American Indians left is because the goal was
to
exterminate enough of them to break there will...  Nazi's weren't after
just
breaking there will...