Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays
the US and Britain propped up the first monarchy there early in the century... Saddam came long after. he wasn't president until 79. its easy to claim everything is a conspiracy, but i don't think its easy to defend a statement like "the US put him in power"... particularly when you look at his history, the coup attempts, he role in security there for the Bathe party etc etc etc... it all led up to him becoming president. he was already more powerful and had more influence than the president he worked for before he became president. his actions were clearly his own. whether or not others agreed to embrace him should he become president is a different question entirely... that i dont doubt at all.
|
Sure.. hard to see how the US put him in power, but there sure as hell was more interference going on by the US and most prob the UK.
Was just trying to find references to the London meeting time - there were admissions by people involved that they chose Saddam (to assassinate Iranian ministers) because of his background, - basically a street thug from Tikrit. There were changes of plan and that was the reason for the delay and half year stay in London - he did eventually kill the Iranian Finance Minister and failed attempts on others.
Who knows.. the Iranian assassinations (and attempted ones) are not in dispute - that leaves the question as to why Saddam would be interested in cooperating with the US/UK in these killings. Seems there is some kinda benefit to Saddam due from these countries. Killers usually don't work for nothing :-)