The fact that the Baathists had problems with Qasim and his group has nothing to do at all with U.S support for the Baathists, you’ve mixed those two points, furthermore I never cared and wrote about internal conflicts.

Indeed there were non-Baathists leaders in power after the overthrow of the previous government, so what? By 1974 anyone within the Baath party who had relations with other political parties would be executed according to RCCR No .865 (funny btw how many of these resolutions contradict with what the Baathists themselves DID to come to power)

Great, I never said Baathists never made anything good for the country, like all political parties they did both bad and good, nationalization of Iraq’s oil was good, too bad that the country didn’t benefit of it in the end as they took most of the money to themselves.

The U.S is still the biggest enemy to Iraq in my eyes. Between the U.S and the Iraqi Baathists the Iraqi Baathists are angels. Still doensn’t stop me from viewing the Baathists government as trash, not that the current one we have now is any better. The Baathists were a tool to U.S plans, they were backstabbed which they realized after what would have been a succesful occupation of Kuwait turned into a failure (in fact they already got backstabbed earlier through U.S support for Iran during the Iran-Iraq war). The Baathists had their own interest, it doesn’t stop the fact that the U.S benefitted from Iraqis overthrowing Qasim’s government, Iraq having war with Iran, the Baath party crushing any resistance against them, and finally Iraq trying to occupate Kuwait (which was a good thing to try and do as Kuwait belongs to Iraq). However, this and further U.S interest is irrelevant in this discussion.

Maybe the CIA provided lists, maybe it didn’t. So what? Iraqis know infinitely more about Iraq than the CIA. They always have.
The 1963 massacre of the communists was a bad thing but you treat it as a CIA plot in which the Baath was only a tool. You are wrong. It was an internal conflict of Iraqi society. Your analysis is national-chauvinist. Non-Baathist military officers ended up in power in 1963, by the way.
In 1972 the Baath carried through what Kassem could only begin — the actual nationalization of Iraq’s oil. That’s another thing you fail to mention. The way you argue is fragmentary and distortive. It only serves as a ‘left’ cover to make the Baathists as bad, or worse, than the imperialist aggressors.
Your recourse to personal insult shows only that you well know how false your ‘analysis’ really is.

All are cuneiform or syllabic scripts, so that in addition to the ideograms, pictures for entire words (e.g. LUGAL “king”), they are given in syllabic script, with a vowel supporting (a) consonat(s), like “mu”, “ug”, and so on (the syllabes separated with “-” from each other).

Thus, for example, a Hittite text with some Sumerian could begin as follows:

nu-mu DUMU LUGAL.GAL (.…)

which would mean

“now-(to/for) me SON (of) KING.GREAT (…)”

or more freely

“Now, for/to me, the son of the great king (…)”

By reading the Hittite text, you come also a little familiar with the most common words, such as DUMU “son”, ID “river”, HURSAG “mountain”, including names, in this case LAGASH which I readily recognized as a Sumerian place name.

Sometimes you can also understand the contents of some Sumerian words as, say, in the example above, the LUGAL word seems to contain two other Sumerian words, namelu LU “man” and GAL “great, mighty, etc.” (also added to the LUGAL.GAL), “king” being more accurately “man of might”.

I hope we get this war over soon so that I can concentrate more on Sumerian rather than those wiping off the Sumerian culture off the earth…

Let’s see what we can deliver for that

Jouna Pyysalo
NDHF Net
http://newsdeskhelsinkifinland.net

Indeed it is sad that thugs are destroying the remains of one of the first civilizations in the world, the failed Iraqi government should put more work into protecting those important sites. It will never happen though considering the fact that they never cared about U.S base(s) destroying remains of Babylonia until people actually started to notice it.

It’s very bad the occupation mobs and their minions are destroying and/or looting the cuneiform tablets and all the stuff there.

NDHF Net
http://newsdeskhelsinkifinland.net

The Baathist party had full support from the U.S government, not due to the fact that the U.S government were in love with Baathists but due to the fact that Qasim and his group tried to nationalise the Iraqi oil industry and created what the U.S considered as provoking economic policies. To put it simply, the U.S wanted to get rid of Qasim due to his “love” for his country thus the Baathists, who also were enemies of Qasim, served as the perfect tools for getting rid of him. The enemy of my enemy is my friend!

While you’re in your state of denial do the world a favor and jump off from a cliff.

Or what about some guys in Anbar today, aka Baathists who not that long ago said they prefer John McCain (a guy who wants U.S troops to stay in Iraq as long as he feels like) as U.S president but that (if I recall correct) they preferred an U.S presence in the country?

Like ladybird said, kick out americans and every other foreigner (including ones from neighbhouring countries) and then solve out problems about who commited most crimes. The Baathists have no moral highgrounds whatsoever, every group is responsible for crimes.