"
No, I'm claiming you're on drugs for calling me a murderer. Remember? "Killing unarmed people isn't a problem for you, as you already pointed out." Wow. Talk about damning the evidence."

That's not calling you a murderer. That's saying you have no problem with murder as a matter of principle.

The fact that you can't even tell the difference speaks volumes.

Oh, oh, I wanna play the link game too...

http://uk.krg.org/genocide/pages/page.aspx?lngnr=12&pnr=37

" THE KURDISH GENOCIDE: THE FACTS

An estimated 1million people in Iraq have ‘disappeared’ since the 1960s, all presumed murdered or missing.
Human Rights Watch reported in its 1993 comprehensive report on Anfal in Iraq that at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds are estimated to have been killed at the hands of the Ba’ath regime.1 However, since then, several sources have stated that as many as 182,000 or even more people were killed in that operation
Gendercide: Throughout the Kurdish Anfal, men and boys of ‘battle age’ were rounded up and ‘disappeared’ en masse. Most of these men and boys were captured, transported to mass graves and shot in mass executions. Of the total victims of Anfal, an estimated 70% were men, approximately aged 15 to 50.2
Thousands of women and children also vanished. Unlike the men, however, they were taken from specific areas as opposed to throughout the region. Evidence also shows that many were taken to internment camps where they were executed or died from deprivation.3
During the 1980s, the Kurdish population was attacked with chemical weapons, killing thousands of men, women and children indiscriminately.
During the Anfal, 90% of Kurdish villages and more than 20 small towns and cities were completely destroyed."

But, hey...let's be fair, guys--

Putin's other big heroes have killed WAY more people than that...

THAT'S why he doesn't consider it a genocide--I mean, he just has high standards, clearly Saddam and the Ba'ath Party should have upped their game if they're going to contend with the Kim Dynasty or Stalin in Putin's book!

In terms of, you know, like, the actual game:

9/10 spots are filled and already joined:

Yankees:
1. obiwanobiwan
2. VashtaNeurotic
3. WardenDresden
4. bo_sox
5. ERAUfan97

Red Coats:
1. Putin
2. dr. octagonapus
3. Wutsti
4. Scoggle
5.

mapleleaf (yay...) and mendax have both been sent invites for the #5 slot already...

So whoever joins, we should be ready to go.

Did we want to take PE up on that offer to go American territory vs. Non-American territories, or let it be random?

http://uk.krg.org/genocide/pages/page.aspx?lngnr=12&pnr=37

You do know what KRG stands for, don't you?

And the HRW report was based on nothing but testimony from peshmergas who were at the time, fighting alongside Iran against Iraq. Look at the methodology in their actual report.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/robinmiller10.html

Iraq didn't have blood agent. That's a big problem for you, and for HRW. They had mustard gas.

The ICJ ruled the Anfal Campaign a genocide in 2005 while trying van Anraat, preceding the Iraqi court ruling in the trial of Hussein in 2006. If you're going to argue with their ruling, be my guest, but argue with the ICJ, not me. The ruling said that "the (Hague, the Dutch court) court has no other conclusion than that these attacks were committed with the intent to destroy the Kurdish population of Iraq" and that the Kurdish population "legally and convincingly ... meets requirement under Genocide Conventions as an ethnic group." I'm not here to question their ruling. If you think that means I'm trying to avoid a response to you, frankly, I don't give a shit, because it's 1:42 in the morning and I'm way too tired to read court transcripts just to humor you, so get a grip on reality and then try me again.

Somebody explain to me where and how Iraq got blood agent in 1988.

Until you do, you have nothing. No amount of reciting reports from occupational governments or separatists will wish away that problem for you. No amount of shouting that anybody who disagrees with you loves genocide will wish away that problem for you. No amount of macho posturing will wish away that problem for you.

If you want someone else that agrees with me, talk to Canada - http://karygiannismp.com/spip/article.php3?id_article=1345.

Also see -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/16/newsid_4304000/4304853.stm.

According to this, Iranian hospitals treated a number of Halabja "tragedies of war," as your NYT article calls all the dead people, for poison by mustard gas and nerve agents, components for both of which Anraat was convicted of selling to the Iraqi government. Most of the survivors showed symptoms of poison by mustard gas.

The second article in that post basically fucks up the NYT thesis all on its own ("we cannot say with any certainty that Iraqi chemical weapons killed the Kurds).

"The ICJ ruled the Anfal Campaign a genocide in 2005 while trying van Anraat, preceding the Iraqi court ruling in the trial of Hussein in 2006. If you're going to argue with their ruling, be my guest, but argue with the ICJ, not me."

That wasn't the ICJ. That was a regular Dutch court charging a Dutch national. Nice poaching from wikipedia though.

My god this is pathetic.

Oh and incidentally, did the Dutch state commit troops to the overthrow of Saddam Hussein?

The answer would be yes.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/new-invasion-report-dutch-government-misrepresented-case-for-iraq-war-a-671660.html

Wait, you mean there was a war in the Persian Gulf and Europe got involved? Damn, you're full of insight tonight!

Nice dodge of the fact that you claimed the ICJ concluded genocide took place.

And naturally the fact that a state court from a participant in the war on spurious pretenses ruled that 'genocide' took place isn't a conflict of interest to you. But as you amply documents, conflicts of interest mean nothing to you.

Nice dodge of the fact that your NYT article was making bullshit claims about what gases were used on the Halabja residents.

I can play your game too buddy. You wanna go?

Your "this day in history" summation claimed mustard gas *may* have been used, and the "testimony" that it was used comes from people in Tehran, who supposedly spoke to unspecified "reporters". No citations given. No nothing.

And Tehran has no interest in claiming mustard gas was used.

And you people mock the Iraqi information minister or the KCNA? You're worse.

bo_sox bumaye! bo_sox bumaye! bo_sox bumaye! :D

Alright, well if you need a backup you know where to find me.

You think the world is a giant conspiracy, don't you?

Let's just clear this up -

EVERYONE that was involved in the Iraq War has a stake in the Iraq War. Everyone you cite will have a stake in it. Everyone I cite will have a stake in it. That's why they are reporting on it. It means *nothing.*

Seriously, the Iraqi Information Minister? Al-Sahhaf, right? You're going to talk to us about interest in the war? HE WORKED FOR SADDAM HUSSEIN! Hell, the office was

Fuck, man... you know how many shitty nicknames he has for the crap claims he's made, right? They're really funny, read them.

Oh wait, sorry, I got the nicknames thing off Wikipedia, I guess it must be false.

Lol, I left a sentence out. The office was dissolved in May 2003. Strange timing..

"You think the world is a giant conspiracy, don't you?"

Because people never lie about countries they are about to bomb or just recently bombed. Especially about atrocities which are the easiest thing in the world to lie about. Nope, it's never happened. Especially from the very same people who made up the story about babies being torn out of incubators in Kuwait. They have the best reputation in the world.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p25s02-cogn.html

What, like, I bet you're a conspiracy theorist, man. Those stories from Tehran about mustard gas, they're like, totally true man. Tehran would never lie, man. Especially about Iraq, the country they're at war with, man. Get that tinfoil hat off, man. Those WMDs were totally there, man. And like Hussein, he was totally responsible for 9-11 man. Oh and did I mention he was Hitler, man?

"Seriously, the Iraqi Information Minister? Al-Sahhaf, right? You're going to talk to us about interest in the war? HE WORKED FOR SADDAM HUSSEIN! Hell, the office was "

Yes and I'm saying the crap you're providing here is more ridiculous than his work. Hence why I said you're worse. Good grief.

Ok. Game on. Are the Great Powers being rearranged, or do we play with what we have?

Unfortunately, mapleleaf got there before I logged in today.

I reiterate maple's question.

What would you guys prefer? Its not a big deal for either me or PE to reorganize the countries.

I was under the impression we were doing USA vs Canada. But I don't care.

I have maple blocked, so anything worth reading from him will have to be reposted by someone.

I don't mind too much, with the one comment that since I'm actually British it would make sense thematically.

Forum blocks don't carry into the game.

I think you've misunderstood me Mendax, we are talking about reallocating countries in game so that the yanks, have american powers. Rather than switching players