how much value would you put on the opinion of someone who...

[vetteman9368]

was an Athiest, but considered himself an expert on religion
was a pacifist, but yet a war profiteer

a communist, yet owns a business and profits very well from it

????

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by vetteman9368

was an Athiest, but considered himself an expert on religion
was a pacifist, but yet a war profiteer

a communist, yet owns a business and profits very well from it

????

Regardless of what you think of him, there is unfortunately thousands if not millions who think just like him and whos votes cancel yours out...perhaps it's best we try to understand where they're coming from.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by vetteman9368

was an Athiest, but considered himself an expert on religion
was a pacifist, but yet a war profiteer

a communist, yet owns a business and profits very well from it

????

I think I might be compelled to ask why that person holds some of these beliefs.

Perhaps his opinion on religion was formed after eight years of Catholic school and about a decade as an alter boy. He might just have picked up a thing or two about religion during that time.

As to being a pacifist, you do realize you are talking about someone who has fully supported the war in Afghanistan since day one. There is a difference between being a pacifist and and being one of those flag waving baffons that support anything a republican president does in the name of god and country. (Many of whom also sport a rebel flag on their daily driver. Oh the irony!) Some of us veterans value the lives of our service men and women and never want to see them risked for anything less than our national security. There is a huge difference between being a pacifist and believing we went into Iraq on trumped up bogus charges while spending a trillion dollars we had to borrow from China. Would you still support that war knowing there was no WMD's, that it would cost a trillion dollars we don't have, that it would kill thousands of our troops, maim tens of thousands more and leave hundreds of thousands of others suffering from PTSD?

As to his business, it came about selling equipments to his brothers in arms after he got out of the military. The equipment sold doesn't kill anyone, it makes the jobs of soldiers, sailors, and airmen much easier.

I always get a chuckle when I see some of you talk about supporting veterans and two posts later tell me to stuff my opinion up my ass because you disagree with it. I guess the only vets worth supporting are the ones you agree with.

And as for the communist comment, Leave that to TxAg. I would hope you were above that and could debate ideas instead of just resorting to name calling. Kind of shows a lower IQ to go that direction.

But to answer your original question, I think the best thing to do is to have a rational discussion with those you disagree with. Don't just take the easy route and do a pile on the only self professed Liberal that post on the site.

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

I think I might be compelled to ask why that person holds some of these beliefs.

Perhaps his opinion on religion was formed after eight years of Catholic school and about a decade as an alter boy. He might just have picked up a thing or two about religion during that time.

As to being a pacifist, you do realize you are talking about someone who has fully supported the war in Afghanistan since day one. There is a difference between being a pacifist and and being one of those flag waving baffons that support anything a republican president does in the name of god and country. (Many of whom also sport a rebel flag on their daily driver. Oh the irony!) Some of us veterans value the lives of our service men and women and never want to see them risked for anything less than our national security. There is a huge difference between being a pacifist and believing we went into Iraq on trumped up bogus charges while spending a trillion dollars we had to borrow from China. Would you still support that war knowing there was no WMD's, that it would cost a trillion dollars we don't have, that it would kill thousands of our troops, maim tens of thousands more and leave hundreds of thousands of others suffering from PTSD?

With that I agree, but we part ways on the strategy to deal with the islamics....I think most here know how I would do it.....and no boots on the ground, ANYWHERE.......


As to his business, it came about selling equipments to his brothers in arms after he got out of the military. The equipment sold doesn't kill anyone, it makes the jobs of soldiers, sailors, and airmen much easier.

That much is true

I always get a chuckle when I see some of you talk about supporting veterans and two posts later tell me to stuff my opinion up my ass because you disagree with it. I guess the only vets worth supporting are the ones you agree with.

And as for the communist comment, Leave that to TxAg. I would hope you were above that and could debate ideas instead of just resorting to name calling. Kind of shows a lower IQ to go that direction.

You come off as a commie in the economics discussions....
which is convenient for the Bilderbergers.....you know, the multi trillionaire families controlling one hell of a lot via interlocking directorates, and various holding companies....I would bet anyone on this forum is NOT a member of any such economic group, let alone political....

But to answer your original question, I think the best thing to do is to have a rational discussion with those you disagree with. Don't just take the easy route and do a pile on the only self professed Liberal that post on the site.

Phil, I know more than you do.....you are a easy target....

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by mrvette

With that I agree, but we part ways on the strategy to deal with the islamics....I think most here know how I would do it.....and no boots on the ground, ANYWHERE.......:

Wasn't pulling out part of the reason the extremists were able to conjure up so much hate against the United States in the first place?

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Stangkiller

Wasn't pulling out part of the reason the extremists were able to conjure up so much hate against the United States in the first place?

Like Viet Nam, we should have never been there on the ground in the first place....

each are had simple solutions, but that did not fit the billing of the PROGRESSIVES to destroy this country by sapping the morale of the public and by extension, the troops....

[Broken Wind]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

There is a huge difference between being a pacifist and believing we went into Iraq on trumped up bogus charges while spending a trillion dollars we had to borrow from China. Would you still support that war knowing there was no WMD's, that it would cost a trillion dollars we don't have, that it would kill thousands of our troops, maim tens of thousands more and leave hundreds of thousands of others suffering from PTSD?

What intel were you privy to that led you to believe Iraq did not have WMD's?

As to his business, it came about selling equipments to his brothers in arms after he got out of the military. The equipment sold doesn't kill anyone, it makes the jobs of soldiers, sailors, and airmen much easier.

So you facilitated the killing of others by making it easier for US warfighters to perform their mission.

[LATB]

KITK

[AC54ME]

Joe:

As to Cheney's supposed "lie" over WMD's, a closer inspection of the truth would find that Saddam's own scientists were lying to him that they indeed did have a nuclear program. Our diminished CIA resources, another gift of "well-meaning" liberals, was gathering it's information from high ranking officers within Saddam's own military... Saddam believed he had a viable nuclear program as evidenced by his refusal for UN inspections and internal CIA intel confirmed as much... it's a bit of a stretch then to conclude we should have known MORE than the ruler of the country but is typical of the left and their "America is evil" bias. All of those involved have acknowledged getting it "wrong" on WMD's and in most cases apologized.


Try this on for size... YOU are President... your country has just been struck in an unprecedented attack the likes of Pearl Harbor and costing us 3,000 civilians and Billions in economic damage.. it's also clear that "IF" any of these crazy people had their hands on a nuke, they wouldn't hesitate to use it... so imagine losing an entire US City... say... NYC... Muslims the World over would rejoice in 12 million deaths as a part of their "peaceful religion" but the effects on the West would be devastating... and lead to a full out nuclear response from the US that would dwarf WWII... this would be because public outcry would demand swift and terrible retribution as well as being a preventative measure to ensure that never could happen again...so, now you're Bush on Sept 12th, being handed what you believe to be credible information that Saddam is either in possession of nuclear devices or about to be... with a clear history of mischief along with supplying terrorists support and materials, it wasn't a far fetched conclusion to imagine Saddam supplying a nuclear device to suicidal jihadists... what would YOU have done differently??

In the end.. 30 million people now have the taste of freedom for the first time in their lives and are free of tyranny.. something you take for granted. I find your lack of gratitude and in fact all liberals lack of respect for these freedoms, paid for in blood, nothing less than appalling. I wonder why the entire Middle East is now breaking out in cries for personal freedom?? I'm sure you could never admit it might be due to policies the evil George Bush put into place or the work that free American soldiers performed to supply freedom to a Nation bereft of it. This would just not fit with your larger narrative of the US and Bush as agent s of evil... party line of liberals sold to well meaning but hopelessly naive and ignorant American citizens as "fact"... you wanna talk about lies... liberals have been spouting nothing but lies for generations.

[vetteman9368]

Phil,

On the issue of religion, i feel that your are free to not believe in God, the same way that people are free to believe in a ham sandwich as a supreme being if they want. Its ironic that the left is all for religious tolerance, except for Christians. I understand you went to parochial schools and that fostered a lot of conflict and disbelief. I don't agree with a lot of tenants of the Catholic Church and to an extent organized religion in general. But religion and faith are two different things, and your classification of all Christians (see tebow thread) as "loons" completely discredits you in the department.

AS for the pacifist war profiteer statement, i think that has already been covered. You are profiting off of a war you denounce, that comes across as very hypocritical, regardless of if your product is a weapon or not.

You, admittedly, identify yourself as a leftist (which is synonymous with communist), yet you are an avid capitalist. once again it reeks of hypocrisy. You want to increase others taxes and regulations, but i don't hear about you volunteering any extra cash to the feds. I'm sure they would be happy to redistribute your wealth for you if thats what you truly believe in.

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by vetteman9368

Phil,

On the issue of religion, i feel that your are free to not believe in God, the same way that people are free to believe in a ham sandwich as a supreme being if they want. Its ironic that the left is all for religious tolerance, except for Christians. I understand you went to parochial schools and that fostered a lot of conflict and disbelief. I don't agree with a lot of tenants of the Catholic Church and to an extent organized religion in general. But religion and faith are two different things, and your classification of all Christians (see tebow thread) as "loons" completely discredits you in the department.

AS for the pacifist war profiteer statement, i think that has already been covered. You are profiting off of a war you denounce, that comes across as very hypocritical, regardless of if your product is a weapon or not.

You, admittedly, identify yourself as a leftist (which is synonymous with communist), yet you are an avid capitalist. once again it reeks of hypocrisy. You want to increase others taxes and regulations, but i don't hear about you volunteering any extra cash to the feds. I'm sure they would be happy to redistribute your wealth for you if thats what you truly believe in.

He doesn't want to redistribute his own wealth.

He just wants to redistribute your wealth.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by vetteman9368

Phil,

On the issue of religion, i feel that your are free to not believe in God, the same way that people are free to believe in a ham sandwich as a supreme being if they want. Its ironic that the left is all for religious tolerance, except for Christians. I understand you went to parochial schools and that fostered a lot of conflict and disbelief. I don't agree with a lot of tenants of the Catholic Church and to an extent organized religion in general. But religion and faith are two different things, and your classification of all Christians (see tebow thread) as "loons" completely discredits you in the department.

Chad, Christianity IS a religion. You can't pick and chose what parts of it you chose to believe in and call yourself a Christian. You either buy into the bullshit or you do not.

The overwhelming vast majority of people on this planet are what ever religion they are because that is the religion they were born into. These religions conflict in their beliefs and historically has been the cause of most of the death and destruction humans have imposed on each other.

If there was a god, what kind of being would allow this to happen? And if you still believe there is a god that allows this to happen, is this truly a being worthy of worship?

My problem with ALL religion isn't that people practice it, its that they then try to use it to impose their will onto others. The "personhood" bullshit movement is a perfect example. Teaching intelligent design is another. These beliefs are based on nonsense that people only believe because they were brought up to believe. You can not rationalize any of it.

Religion has never been anything but mind control for the masses.

And the only difference between religion and faith is that you are too embarrassed to admit you believe in the bible.

AS for the pacifist war profiteer statement, i think that has already been covered. You are profiting off of a war you denounce, that comes across as very hypocritical, regardless of if your product is a weapon or not.

This is just dumb. Are you actually suggesting that the only people who do business with the government are those that wholeheartedly agree with every war we fight, every bill we pass, or foreign policy decision our leaders make?

Seriously?

Well then by your logic every republican doctor should quit accepting medicare and medicaid payments because congress passed the health care bill.

And how the hell can you call a veteran who supports the war in Afghanistan a pacifist? Do you even know what that word means?

You, admittedly, identify yourself as a leftist (which is synonymous with communist),

I identify myself as a social liberal. Which sure as shit isn't a communist. Do you even know what the difference is? Many of the views of liberalism are diametrically opposed to communism. Calling people communist simply because you don't agree with them is McCarthyism. Its what people who lack the ability to debate do when they can no longer have a rational discussion. I challenge you to try to rise above that.

yet you are an avid capitalist. once again it reeks of hypocrisy. You want to increase others taxes and regulations, but i don't hear about you volunteering any extra cash to the feds. I'm sure they would be happy to redistribute your wealth for you if that's what you truly believe in.

Really?

People (for the most part) pay the government the taxes they owe. To suggest that those of us that support higher taxes are hypocrites simply because we don't send in more money isn't even worth a discussion. Its the kind of stupid shit Rush says to his mindless dolts to justify his position.

I took an enormous amount of shit years ago when I posted about spending $5,000 upgrading one of my old cars. As a result I don't generally post anymore about what toys I buy. But having said that, I assure you that I am in the income bracket Obama wants to raise the taxes on. And I fully support him doing so.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by AC54ME

Joe:

As to Cheney's supposed "lie" over WMD's, a closer inspection of the truth would find that Saddam's own scientists were lying to him that they indeed did have a nuclear program.

Sorry but that is bullshit. They were lying to him before the first Gulf War in 1991 but not in the 12 years after that.

Our diminished CIA resources, another gift of "well-meaning" liberals,

More bullshit spin. Bush 1 started to decreased the size of the CIA because the cold war had ended. Up until that point about 60% of the CIA's budget had been spent on the Soviet Union. With them no longer a threat, that was no longer necessary. When Clinton became president, he continued to reduce the size of the CIA but only by about 20%. However, this reduction is irrelevant to the discussion because during Clinton's term he actually substantially increased the CIA's role in anti terrorism.

increased the was gathering it's information from high ranking officers within Saddam's own military[/U]... Saddam believed he had a viable nuclear program as evidenced by his refusal for UN inspections and internal CIA intel confirmed as much...

This is simply a lie. He was well aware of his situation.

it's a bit of a stretch then to conclude we should have known MORE than the ruler of the country but is typical of the left and their "America is evil" bias. All of those involved have acknowledged getting it "wrong" on WMD's and in most cases apologized.

There is a pretty big difference between "getting it wrong" and intentionally deceiving. Iraq's connection with Al-Qaeda – a lie. Iraq's purchase of uranium from Niger – a lie. mobile biological weapons programme – a lie. Etc.

Try this on for size... YOU are President... your country has just been struck in an unprecedented attack the likes of Pearl Harbor and costing us 3,000 civilians and Billions in economic damage.. it's also clear that "IF" any of these crazy people had their hands on a nuke, they wouldn't hesitate to use it... so imagine losing an entire US City... say... NYC... Muslims the World over would rejoice in 12 million deaths as a part of their "peaceful religion" but the effects on the West would be devastating... and lead to a full out nuclear response from the US that would dwarf WWII... this would be because public outcry would demand swift and terrible retribution as well as being a preventative measure to ensure that never could happen again...so, now you're Bush on Sept 12th, being handed what you believe to be credible information that Saddam is either in possession of nuclear devices or about to be... with a clear history of mischief along with supplying terrorists support and materials, it wasn't a far fetched conclusion to imagine Saddam supplying a nuclear device to suicidal jihadists... what would YOU have done differently??

So now Iraq is Al Qaeda. Do you really believe this stupid shit? Saddam didn't have anything to do with Al Qaeda, in fact Bin Laden hated him. He use to call him an "infidel". Saddam never had a nuke nor did he have a program to create one. Even if he did, he had no delivery method to get one over here. And even if he had the ability to get one over here he would have had to have been suicidal to even contemplate nuking one of our cities. Judging from the fact that he was found whimpering in a hole, its safe to say he wasn't suicidal at all.

This was all just bullshit excuses to go in and finish the job Bush's daddy never did.

In the end.. 30 million people now have the taste of freedom for the first time in their lives and are free of tyranny.. something you take for granted. I find your lack of gratitude and in fact all liberals lack of respect for these freedoms, paid for in blood, nothing less than appalling.

So the whole reason for going in turned out to be bullshit so lets justify it with saying we freed a bunch of people.

Well, I can do math. So lets take a closer look at this shit you are now trying to sell.

At the very conservative war cost estimate of a trillion dollars. Each one of the Iraqi's that we freed cost American tax payers $33,000. If you then factor in the interest on the money we had to borrow to pay for this war combined with the long term cost of caring for the combat veterans that came back, the total cost of the war may be closer to two trillion or more. That means it may be close to about $66,000 per Iraqi that we freed.

With 300 million of us, that means our "Boy Scout" Iraq merit badge - as you now like to present the war - cost ever many woman and child in this country about $6500.

So having spent so much on freeing these people its reassuring to know how much they love us and support us for what we did.

Oh wait a minute, I forgot. They hate us as much as they ever did.

I wonder why the entire Middle East is now breaking out in cries for personal freedom?? I'm sure you could never admit it might be due to policies the evil George Bush put into place or the work that free American soldiers performed to supply freedom to a Nation bereft of it. This would just not fit with your larger narrative of the US and Bush as agent s of evil... party line of liberals sold to well meaning but hopelessly naive and ignorant American citizens as "fact"... you wanna talk about lies... liberals have been spouting nothing but lies for generations.

Holy shit!!! Most of these assholes getting toppled wouldn't have been in power IF WE HADN"T BEEN SUPPORTING THEM. That's the thing that sucks about us. We preach freedom and then give money to brutal dictators simply because they have oil or because we don't want them to **** with Israel. We are the worlds biggest hypocrites. And you believe the bullshit!

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Each one of the Iraqi's that we freed cost American tax payers $33,000.

So just to clarify.... you will bitch about how much it costs to free a population of people from a dictator who killed an estimated 500,000+ OF HIS OWN PEOPLE yet you have no problem spending a hell of a lot more than that to be given as handouts to lazy ass lifetime welfare recipients.

Do you deny that Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons (which by definition are WMDs) to kill hundreds of thousands of his own people?

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by TxAg

Please show this assertion to to be true.

Well you can start with Egypt, Jordan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Saudi Arabia. Go back farther and you will see Iran, Cuba and many more.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by RedLS1GTO

So just to clarify.... you will bitch about how much it costs to free a population of people from a dictator who killed an estimated 500,000+ OF HIS OWN PEOPLE yet you have no problem spending a hell of a lot more than that to be given as handouts to lazy ass lifetime welfare recipients.

Do you deny that Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons (which by definition are WMDs) to kill hundreds of thousands of his own people?

Its not our responsibility to free populations under dictatorships. It is our obligation to look after our own.

Just to clarify YOUR position... you will bitch about how much it cost to feed and house our own poor, yet you have no problem spending a hell of a lot more to foreign Muslims who as a whole, despise us.

Also, If you want to use Saddam's brutality as justification for the Iraq cluster **** then why are we not now "liberating" all those who suffer in North Korea, Iran and the rest of the shit holes ruled by despots?

You want to claim the moral high ground, but it is out of your reach.

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Its not our responsibility to free populations under dictatorships. It is our obligation to look after our own.

So we should have also left Hitler to go about his business... right?

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Just to clarify YOUR position... you will bitch about how much it cost to feed and house our own poor, yet you have no problem spending a hell of a lot more to foreign Muslims who as a whole, despise us.

Feeding and housing?? You really think that 47% of Americans would starve and be homeless without welfare? The truth is that you support a ridiculous leftist wealth distribution agenda while at the same time gaining votes for the libtard in charge, and this is how you do it. It isn't about the poor starving kids...

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Also, If you want to use Saddam's brutality as justification for the Iraq cluster **** then why are we not now "liberating" all those who suffer in North Korea, Iran and the rest of the shit holes ruled by despots?

When either of those countries killes HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of people with chemical weapons, please let me know.

Originally Posted by Joecooool

You want to claim the moral high ground, but it is out of your reach.

What you also failed to notice is that unlike you... I make no bullsh*t hypocritical claim of the moral high ground.

I'll gladly admit that my views are formed in the best interest of myself and my country.

[PortDawg]

Duelfer Report

Key Findings

Iraq Survey Group (ISG) discovered further evidence of the maturity and significance of the pre-1991 Iraqi Nuclear Program but found that Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after that date.

Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.
Although Saddam clearly assigned a high value to the nuclear progress and talent that had been developed up to the 1991 war, the program ended and the intellectual capital decayed in the succeeding years.

Nevertheless, after 1991, Saddam did express his intent to retain the intellectual capital developed during the Iraqi Nuclear Program. Senior Iraqis—several of them from the Regime’s inner circle—told ISG they assumed Saddam would restart a nuclear program once UN sanctions ended.

Saddam indicated that he would develop the weapons necessary to counter any Iranian threat.

Initially, Saddam chose to conceal his nuclear program in its entirety, as he did with Iraq’s BW program. Aggressive UN inspections after Desert Storm forced Saddam to admit the existence of the program and destroy or surrender components of the program.

In the wake of Desert Storm, Iraq took steps to conceal key elements of its program and to preserve what it could of the professional capabilities of its nuclear scientific community.

Baghdad undertook a variety of measures to conceal key elements of its nuclear program from successive UN inspectors, including specific direction by Saddam Husayn to hide and preserve documentation associated with Iraq’s nuclear program.
ISG, for example, uncovered two specific instances in which scientists involved in uranium enrichment kept documents and technology. Although apparently acting on their own, they did so with the belief and anticipation of resuming uranium enrichment efforts in the future.
Starting around 1992, in a bid to retain the intellectual core of the former weapons program, Baghdad transferred many nuclear scientists to related jobs in the Military Industrial Commission (MIC). The work undertaken by these scientists at the MIC helped them maintain their weapons knowledge base.

As with other WMD areas, Saddam’s ambitions in the nuclear area were secondary to his prime objective of ending UN sanctions.

Iraq, especially after the defection of Husayn Kamil in 1995, sought to persuade the IAEA that Iraq had met the UN’s disarmament requirements so sanctions would be lifted.

ISG found a limited number of post-1995 activities that would have aided the reconstitution of the nuclear weapons program once sanctions were lifted.

The activities of the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission sustained some talent and limited research with potential relevance to a reconstituted nuclear program.
Specific projects, with significant development, such as the efforts to build a rail gun and a copper vapor laser could have been useful in a future effort to restart a nuclear weapons program, but ISG found no indications of such purpose. As funding for the MIC and the IAEC increased after the introduction of the Oil-for-Food program, there was some growth in programs that involved former nuclear weapons scientists and engineers.
The Regime prevented scientists from the former nuclear weapons program from leaving either their jobs or Iraq. Moreover, in the late 1990s, personnel from both MIC and the IAEC received significant pay raises in a bid to retain them, and the Regime undertook new investments in university research in a bid to ensure that Iraq retained technical knowledge.

[PortDawg]

Chemical Weapons Usage

Examples of Known Iraqi Use of CW

The war with Iran ended in August 1988. By this time, seven UN specialist missions had documented repeated use of chemicals in the war. According to Iraq, it consumed almost 19,500 chemical bombs, over 54,000 chemical artillery shells and 27,000 short-range chemical rockets between 1983 and 1988. Iraq declared it consumed about 1,800 tons of mustard gas, 140 tons of Tabun, and over 600 tons of Sarin. Almost two-thirds of the CW weapons were used in the last 18 months of the war. Examples of CW use by Iraq:
Use in Iran-Iraq war, 1983-1988


August 1983 Haij Umran

Mustard , fewer than 100 Iranian/Kurdish casualties

October-November 1983 Panjwin

Mustard, 3,000 Iranian/Kurdish casualties

February-March 1984 Majnoon Island

Mustard, 2,500 Iranian casualties

March 1984 al-Basrah

Tabun, 50-100 Iranian casualties

March 1985 Hawizah Marsh

Mustard & Tabun, 3,000 Iranian casualties

February 1986 al-Faw

Mustard & Tabun, 8,000 to 10,000 Iranian casualties

December 1986 Um ar-Rasas

Mustard, 1,000s Iranian casualties

April 1987 al-Basrah

Mustard & Tabun, 5,000 Iranian casualties

October 1987 Sumar/Mehran

Mustard & nerve agent, 3,000 Iranian casualties

March 1988 Halabjah& Kurdish area

Mustard & nerve agent, 1,000s Kurdish/Iranian casualties

April 1988 al-Faw

Mustard & nerve agent, 1,000s Iranian casualties

May 1988 Fish Lake

Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties

June 1988 Majnoon Islands

Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties

July 1988 South-central border

Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties

Use in Southern Iraq against the Popular Uprising, 1991


March 1991, an-Najaf - Karbala area

Nerve agent & CS, Shi’a casualties not known.


These are selected uses only. Numerous other smaller scale CW attacks occurred.

[PortDawg]

Oh and here is a link to the Chemical weapons Key findings:

Duelfer Report

I'm not gonna post that entire thing.