3 ms·
Classified Cable Proves US Ok’d Saddam’s Kuwait Invasion
- Pinckney 16y agoThe relevant section seems to be NOTE: ON THE BORDER QUESTION, SADDAM REFERRED TO THE 1961 AGREEMENT AND A "LINE OF PATROL" IT HAD ESTABLISHED. THE KUWAITIS, HE SAID, HAD TOLD MUBARAK IRAQ WAS 20 KILOMETERS "IN FRONT" OF THIS LINE. THE AMBASSADOR SAID THAT SHE HAD SERVED IN KUWAIT 20 YEARS BEFORE; THEN, AS NOW, WE TOOK NO POSITION ON THESE ARAB AFFAIRS. Which I suppose can be read as the US taking no position on Iraq-Kuwait affairs at all, but given the context it seems to me to refer only to the statement by the Kuwaitis to Mubarak that Iraqi troops were too close to the border. If Saddam is asserting this is a lie, then the US response may only refer to the US not taking a position on these statements. Or, to conclude, I would really like to hear confirmation or refutation by someone more familiar with the history or with experience in diplomatic matters.
- gojomo 16y agoI read the whole cable. It doesn't support Ron Paul's interpretation or the submission headline. The "NO POSITION" comment is about the particulars of a specific border dispute; it doesn't mean no position on war/invasion. (The U.S. probably has no position on the Canada/Denmark dispute over Hans Island. It doesn't mean the U.S. would greenlight either country resolving the dispute by force.) Also, the summary at the top of the cable states: "AMBASSADOR MADE CLEAR THAT WE CAN NEVER EXCUSE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES BY OTHER THAN PEACEFUL MEANS." Also, this "TOOK NO POSITION ON THESE ARAB AFFAIRS" section has been leaked, and discussed, years ago, and the whole memo was declassified more than 2 years ago. See for example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/glaspie1-13.pdf http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/glas... And finally: not hacker news. Flagged.