Saddam Hussein Is Officially dead!!!.....

[Merkaba]

Saddam Got the hat, ate it, bit the bullet , gave up the ghost,is outie 5000, said peace, etc...

Give a slang way of saying died and discuss. :smoke:


(first Saddam is Dead thread!!) :lol:

[Light__Fantastic]

There is already another thread on this, but you seem happy and like a nice person.

[-1up!-]

Saddam now plays poker with God.

[JohnXDoe]

tippin' one for my homey

[Schyma]

Only the Arab stations are saying this; it's not 100% sure just yet.

I've been watching CNN all day, I've been very bored all day but this is very interesting.

[Africa]

They've been saying that it's been documented, that it will show up on the net.

[Light__Fantastic]

I hope there's a video of your mother dying. :)

[Hababi]

I hope there's a video of your mother dying. :)

Why do you love Saddam?

Saddam can now enjoy Hell...

[Light__Fantastic]

I don't love Saddam, I was just saying something I found equally as distasteful.

Zero would you still worship god if he sentenced your mother to serve eternally in hell?

[Hababi]

I don't love Saddam, I was just saying something I found equally as distasteful.

You equated Saddam with his mother. I imagine he loves his mother, thus you must love Saddam...



Zero would you still worship god if he sentenced your mother to serve eternally in hell?

God doesn't sentence anyone; people choose.

[Light__Fantastic]

Saddam also has a family...it's called empathy.

God doesn't sentence anyone; people choose.
Well what if she had an abortion you don't know about, would you worship him when he allows your mother to suffer eternally in hell?

[Schyma]

Yea, they're saying it was taped.

It sounds good now but his death isn't going to effect the progression of the war at all. :-/

[Hababi]

Saddam also has a family...it's called empathy.

Yup some of them are getting executed too, because they're despicable human rights abusers.

If my dad was Saddam, I'd want him executed.

[Light__Fantastic]

You didn't answer me about your mother. =o

[Hababi]

Well what if she had an abortion you don't know about, would you worship him when he allows your mother to suffer eternally in hell?

:confused: Where does it say that if someone has an abortion, they go to Hell? Is that according to the Light Fantastic version of the Bible?

[dei]

I hope there's a video. :)

You deserve a good hanging too.

[dei]

:confused: Where does it say that if someone has an abortion, they go to Hell? Is that according to the Light Fantastic version of the Bible?

Isn't it murder?

[Light__Fantastic]

:confused: Where does it say that if someone has an abortion, they go to Hell? Is that according to the Light Fantastic version of the Bible?
Just because I don't bother researching the exact principles of a fantasy world doesn't mean you have to try so hard to dodge the real question.

If your mother did whatever is required to go to hell would you still be worshipping God while she suffers perpetually?

[Hababi]

You deserve a good hanging too.

Because that's as bad as murdering hundreds of thousands of people...


Isn't it murder?


Murderers can go to Heaven.

And Chad, my mothers' decisions are of no relevance to my faith in Christianity.

[Light__Fantastic]

Because that's as bad as murdering hundreds of thousands of people...

:lol:

They were state sanctioned executions! Saddam was the state.

[Hababi]

:lol:

They were state sanctioned executions! Saddam was the state.

He was not a democratically elected leader, not running a system of orderly, proper laws.

[Light__Fantastic]

He was officially recognised as a legitimate leader by America, the UK and France among other countries. So he was legitimate enough to give weapons to, but not for anything else?

And Chad, my mothers' decisions are of no relevance to my faith in Christianity.I didn't say you would stop believing in anything, just if you would keep worshipping a God that could allow such a thing to happen to someone you loved.

[Schyma]

Because that's as bad as murdering hundreds of thousands of people...Seriously, I know my statement wasn't very tasteful but you guys sound like you're defending the man. (this forum is always set to attack someone :lol:)

[Light__Fantastic]

Everyone deserves defence. It's called a fair trial. Maybe they don't have this in Texas.

[Schyma]

Did Saddam give a fair trial with the people he killed?

[Hababi]

He was officially recognised as a legitimate leader by America, the UK and France among other countries. So he was legitimate enough to give weapons to, but not for anything else?

Basically :p

It's called pragmatism. We sometimes work with bad rulers, against worse rulers. We did it in WW2, with Stalin. Was that wrong? Should we have let the Holocaust go on? After all, that's regime change, and siding with a tyrant, my my.


I didn't say you would stop believing in anything, just if you would keep worshipping a God that could allow such a thing to happen to someone you loved.

Absolutely.

[Light__Fantastic]

Did Saddam give a fair trial with the people he killed?

Why is that relevant? Everyone gets a fair trial no matter what.


Was that wrong?
Yes.

Absolutely.

Sucks to be Christian then.

[Schyma]

Why is that relevant? Everyone gets a fair trial no matter what.You're absoultly right and he got just that which was way more than he deserved.

[The Digital Pimp]

Pretty ninja way to kill him. We would have had a big TV special.

[Light__Fantastic]

You're absoultly right and he got just that

He didn't get a fair trial. Members of his defence team getting killed is not indicative of a fair trial.

[ShadowMan]

I don't think he cared much for a fair trial...refusing to recognize the judge, rejecting the idea of a pardon...

[Schyma]

He didn't get a fair trial. Members of his defence team getting killed is not indicative of a fair trial.Do you not agree he got what he deserved?

[Light__Fantastic]

Of course I don't. If you want Saddam to hang you are pretty despicable as a person.

[The Digital Pimp]

Do you not agree he got what he deserved?

Agreed. People think he's just another figurehead of American dominance, capital punishment being the wrong answer, and all that stuff they've been whining about. Nevermind that he killed all those Kurds, and tens of thousands more. How quickly we forget.

[PsychoTronn]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061230/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam

[Schyma]

Of course I don't. If you want Saddam to hang you are pretty despicable as a person.:lol: Cute.

Edit: I think I'll stop here.

[Light__Fantastic]

If you support state sanctioned capital punishment but not what Saddam did you are a hypocrite, put simply.

[Hababi]

Yes.


So we should've let Hitler finish the Holocaust? I know you hate Jews, but I didn't know it was this bad.:smash:


If you support state sanctioned capital punishment but not what Saddam did you are a hypocrite, put simply.


No.

[Light__Fantastic]

Hitler was a direct threat to this country, I don't know about yours.

[Hababi]

Hitler was a direct threat to this country, I don't know about yours.

Not mine. So why should America have committed itself to, by your definition, an illegal action?

[Light__Fantastic]

When did I say they should have. =o

[dei]

I don't know if I agree with him being hanged, but I can see where the people that wanted it are coming from. He was a bad person, a really bad person, so whatever.

But I don't think it would be right to release the footage of his hanging.

[The Digital Pimp]

Hitler was a direct threat to this country, I don't know about yours.

So was Saddam. Even if he wasn't, are you saying we should only care about bad things when they're happening to us? Next.

[Light__Fantastic]

So was Saddam.Haha

Source? Please, there can't be anyone still saying the WMDs here in 45 minutes nonsense.


Even if he wasn't, are you saying we should only care about bad things when they're happening to us?Yeah that's why you helped him attack Iran. o.0

[Hababi]

When did I say they should have. =o

That's what I'm attempting to establish. Should America have sat by and watched Hitler exterminate Jews?

[Surtr]

Gj people.

He's going to really feel the pain for his crimes now. Now that he's dead and can't think or do anything at all anymore.

Seriously, It'd make more sense to torture him but keep him alive and **** with the man's head for his crimes, rather than hang him, as it'd have been immediate death.

Not that I at all support killing him, tbh I think it's kinda' stupid but whatever, he's kicked the can now, and I've got no say in it at all, so whatever.

[Light__Fantastic]

That's what I'm attempting to establish. Should America have sat by and watched Hitler exterminate Jews?You are the one who thinks the state should have absolute power over the life of any individual. Hitler had that power according to your apparent beliefs.

[Hababi]

You are the one who thinks the state should have absolute power over the life of any individual. Hitler had that power.

You're not answering my question.



Seriously, It'd make more sense to torture him but keep him alive and **** with the man's head for his crimes, rather than hang him, as it'd have been immediate death.


Wouldn't that be less humane? :p

[Light__Fantastic]

What? Do I think they should intervene in mass genocide? Of course.

I'm just telling you your support for a state to have that power is related. Hitler had every right to kill the Jews if we go by that.

[Hababi]

What? Do I think they should intervene in mass genocide? Of course.

So what does it take to be "mass" genocide? What about non "mass" genocide? Medium genocide? 'Minor' genocide?

Saddam Hussein's son was a serial rapist and murderer. Saddam Hussein was still guilty of grievous human rights abuses, up until the day he was drive out of power.



I'm just telling you your support for a state to have that power is related. Hitler had every right to kill the Jews if we go by that.


No, because they weren't guilty of capital crimes.

[Light__Fantastic]

You didn't invade because he abused human rights.

No, because they weren't guilty of capital crimes.Which are defined by the state. Hitler can make being a Jew a capital crime.

[Surtr]

You're not answering my question.



Wouldn't that be less humane? :p

I think being humane isn't that high on the list lol.

Who the **** would care? The man would be dead to the world anyways, whether he was stuck in a concrete room, with almost no food at all, and constantly getting the **** kicked outa' him. He'd learn his goddamn lesson that way at least. :lol:

[Light__Fantastic]

Who the **** would care? Human rights advocates? durrr

See also: Every sane person on the planet.

[Schyma]

Seriously, It'd make more sense to torture him but keep him alive and **** with the man's head for his crimes, rather than hang him, as it'd have been immediate death.Now that I'm against; maybe he deserved it but torture for the sake of torture is just wrong. When you've committed as many wrongs as he has, you lose the very right to keep breathing.

[Hababi]

You didn't invade because he abused human rights.

That doesn't change the fact that he did, and that taking him out stopped this. What if we chose to take out Hitler because we thought he had the atomic bomb? Would that have made it wrong, even though it would've stopped the Holocaust?


Which are defined by the state.

No, which are defined by the moral code.

[The Digital Pimp]

Hitler can make being a Jew a capital crime.

Well then he'd be cool, wouldn't he? Too bad that in the real world, killing innocent people is illegal.

Next!

[Light__Fantastic]

That doesn't change the fact that he did, and that taking him out stopped this.We are talking about valid reasons for another country to intervene. If this was not the reason you intervened you had no right to do so.

No, which are defined by the moral code.Which moral code? Any state can have whatever moral code it pleases.

[Light__Fantastic]

Well then he'd be cool, wouldn't he? Too bad that in the real world, killing innocent people is illegal.

Are you stupid? There are no laws for the world to follow. If a country wants to make something legal they will, there is no concept of it being illegal to them.

Another country can intervene and stop, but there is no authority for the world to make anything illegal.

What is this real world you speak of anyway?

[Hababi]

We are talking about valid reasons for another country to intervene. If this was not the reason you intervened you had no right to do so.


See my edit.


Which moral code? Any state can have whatever moral code it pleases.

We're talking about the JudeoChristian moral code.

[The Digital Pimp]

Which moral code? Any state can have whatever moral code it pleases.

Your mum's moral code. It's a pretty damn loose one, I must say.

[Alf™]

Sad to see that Hussein was hung. Doubly sad to see that it was video taped and could be leaked to the media, and people are happy about this.

[The Digital Pimp]

Sad to see that Hussein was hung. Doubly sad to see that it was video taped and could be leaked to the media, and people are happy about this.

Oh come on, where's the fun in keeping it private? I would've had a big TV special if I had anything to say about it. Lots of people are happy Saddam is gone and proof would be pretty sweet to have. As well as champagne and dancing around said corpse.

Oh, and correct grammar is "hanged".

[Light__Fantastic]

What if we chose to take out Hitler because we thought he had the atomic bomb? Would that have made it wrong, even though it would've stopped the Holocaust?Yeah it would have been wrong, because you had the same destructive technology. You used them against Japan too, remember?

We're talking about the JudeoChristian moral code.Why are we talking about that? I'm just using Nazi Germany as an example here. Any state can make up any moral code they please. They could make having six fingers a capital offence and start hanging people for it. If you give them the power over life as a state they can do whatever they wish with that power.

Your mum's moral code. It's a pretty damn loose one, I must say.Oh, so you just lost credibility in this argument just then. Ok cool.

[TojesDolan]

Oh come on, where's the fun in keeping it private? I would've had a big TV special if I had anything to say about it. Lots of people are happy Saddam is gone and proof would be pretty sweet to have. As well as champagne and dancing around said corpse.

Oh, and correct grammar is "hanged".
Well, considering America's fascination for death and extremely obnoxious lack of empathy for human life (unless it's some ****ing slut who is brain-dead, or even so, an ex-president who deserved death as well), I think that's a good reasoning.

[The Digital Pimp]

Why are we talking about that? I'm just using Nazi Germany as an example here. Any state can make up any moral code they please. They could make having six fingers a capital offence and start hanging people for it. If you give them the power over life as a state they can do whatever they wish with that power.

Luckily there's other states then, eh?

Oh, so you just lost credibility in this argument just then. Ok cool.

Oh, supporting dictators did that for you pretty quick.

Next!

[Light__Fantastic]

To do what? You are going to invade everyone who has different values to you? Good luck on that one.

Oh, supporting dictators did that for you pretty quick.Except I haven't. Nice reading comprehension you have there.

[The Digital Pimp]

Which country has the laws where killing innocent people is legal? Find me one, and then you might have a point.

[Alf™]

Oh come on, where's the fun in keeping it private? I would've had a big TV special if I had anything to say about it. Lots of people are happy Saddam is gone and proof would be pretty sweet to have. As well as champagne and dancing around said corpse.

Oh, and correct grammar is "hanged".

That is a sick, sick opinion you have there, even if you are partly joking. Killing someone, for killing other people? That's just stupid.

[TojesDolan]

Luckily there's other states then, eh?



Oh, supporting dictators did that for you pretty quick.

Next!
It's still not U.S.A.'s business what other countries want to do with their government system. Like they know everything the world needs.

That is a sick, sick opinion you have there, even if you are partly joking. Killing someone, for killing other people? That's just stupid.

You know, teenagers. :/

[The Digital Pimp]

Fine, pictures of the body will suffice. As they say on the internet:

"Pics or it didn't happen."

For all we know, he could be chilling out in a jacuzzi with all of our favourite bands playing.

[Mr. Ron]

Whats pissing you off so much light fantastic?

[Light__Fantastic]

I think there are enough reputable people that know for sure he is dead that you wouldn't need pictures other than for your unatural desires to see Saddam dead.

[The Digital Pimp]

Whats pissing you off so much light fantastic?

That he's wrong and can't admit it. It's a real bitch, huh?

I think there are enough reputable people that know for sure he is dead that you wouldn't need pictures other than for your unatural desires to see Saddam dead.

Well, I'll need them only to quell your unnatural desire to see him alive.

[Wow]

So how long 'til a video is uploaded onto Youtube?

[Merkaba]

There is already another thread on this, but you seem happy and like a nice person.

No, I checked first, and there was only a thread about him being SCHEDULED to die, but not being dead. Now hes dead, completely NEW subject matter!!! hehe, just kidding. And yea I am a pretty nice guy....most of the time. :chug:

[TojesDolan]

That he's wrong and can't admit it. It's a real bitch, huh?



Well, I'll need them only to quell your unnatural desire to see him alive.
Actually you need to grow up, to be quite honest.

[Light__Fantastic]

Whats pissing you off so much light fantastic?

Willingness for anyone to die is a horrible trait in anyone. The hypocrisy in people who are so righteous when it comes to how many people Saddam has killed, what a terrible guy he is, but then saying they are glad he will be hanged.

That he's wrong and can't admit it. It's a real bitch, huh?
Says the guy who made this post

http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13914519&postcount=62

[Schyma]

Killing someone, for killing other people? That's just stupid.What is sad about a horrible dictator (who's killed hundreds) getting caught in the gallows? Again, when you've committed as many wrongs as he has, I honestly believe you lose the right to keep breathing. He's abused life.

[Mr. Ron]

I think there are enough reputable people that know for sure he is dead that you wouldn't need pictures other than for your unatural desires to see Saddam dead.

Wanting to see a person that killed thousands of people (odds are if you're an Iraqi, maybe some of your family members) dead isn't unnatural. Thats a common emotion...Nothing a human feels or want sis unnatural, since wanting something IS human nature in itself.


I think there is something else that is bothering you.

[Light__Fantastic]

Like what?

[Schyma]

Period possibly? :p

[Light__Fantastic]

Schyma hasn't lynched enough black people this week. He's such a silly Texan.

[Alf™]

The immaturity in this thread really does astound me.

[TojesDolan]

I think some of you guys are misinformed about this Saddam Hussein.

[Schyma]

If you're implying I'm racist just because I come from Texas, you're much dumber than previously thought.I think some of you guys are misinformed about this Saddam Hussein."Misinformed?" You shitting me! Are you aware of how many he's killed of his own people!?!

[Light__Fantastic]

No I was saying something stupid because that seems to be the trend in this thread.

After you said
Period possibly? :p
just because I think it's dumb to desire the death of anyone.

his own peoplePeople are people, why you guys think the fact they were Iraqis he killed makes it any different is bemusing.

How many Iraqis have American munitions killed? Let's hang your president then.

[Africa]

Idk how soon do you guys think the photos will arrive,

[TojesDolan]

"Misinformed?" You sh¡tting me! Are you aware of how many he's killed of his own people!?!

Yeah, and americans are all fat ****s who drink coca cola and live in big houses with new cars.

At least go to wikipedia and see what he's done in his life. Not a place to be trusted, but o well.

[Schyma]

Oh.....I get it. It's an anti-American thing, is it not?

[Mr. Ron]

No I was saying something stupid because that seems to be the trend in this thread.

After you said

just because I think it's dumb to desire the death of anyone.

People are people, why you guys think the fact they were Iraqis he killed makes it any different is bemusing.

How many Iraqis have American munitions killed? Let's hang your president then.

Well, you'd think a nation's own leader wouldn't gas them, kidnap them, torture them, kill them for disagreeing and the like. A leader is meant to serve the people, not the other way around.

[The Digital Pimp]

The immaturity in this thread really does astound me.

Yeah, you really gotta watch out for these trolls, especially in controversial topics eh.

[Alf™]

Yeah, you really gotta watch out for these trolls, especially in controversial topics eh.

What.

[Schyma]

I get it: The people in this thread that are defending Saddam are all (by my knowledge) non-American. It has nothing to do with morals, they just hate America.

[Africa]

Lolz I don't think that's the case.

[Schyma]

Yeah, and americans are all fat ****s who drink coca cola and live in big houses with new cars.
Let's hang your president then.No?

[Alf™]

That's not even close to the reason Schyma. You are an idiot if you think I am defending Saddam for every one of his actions.

No?

Wow and good work taking things out of context.

[Schyma]

It is kind of odd though that all the people that are opposed to killing Saddam, are non-American.....perhaps I'm wrong but it is a strange coincidence.

[Alf™]

:lol:

If I hated America I would hate quite a few countries, including my own, as there are so many similarities between America and Australia and England etc. etc. and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't live in a country I hate.

[TojesDolan]

Oh.....I get it. It's an anti-American thing, is it not?
No, I was picturing when you think you know about certain things but actually what you know is what you are told is reality. Go read about him. It won't take you long.

I get it: The people in this thread that are defending Saddam are all (by my knowledge) non-American. It has nothing to do with morals, they just hate America.

I like american eagle clothing.

[Rrrrrrr]

This is absolutely disgusting. They kill him on the first day of Eid, not ninety minutes before morning prayers. Saddam's death would've been a major step forward for the country and they had to go at it like savages with absolutely no restraint. Imbeciles.

[silicon71]

Us Iraquis will find a new ruler to conquer you filthy infadels. You americans think you can stop us just by hanging hussein? ha!

[Mr. Ron]

This is absolutely disgusting. They kill him on the first day of Eid, not ninety minutes before morning prayers. Saddam's death would've been a major step forward for the country and they had to go at it like savages with absolutely no restraint. Imbeciles.

Weird, the thousands of Muslims around the world celebrating his death didn't seem to mind that.

[AA-12]

I can say nothing bad of the man, but fate has arrived at his doorstep. May the future of the Middle East become brighter.

[Danger Bird]

That trial really didn't sound fair. Jus' sayin'.

[AA-12]

To be fair, a trial of this proportion will never be "fair". Similiar to a group of cops searching and finding a criminal who killed one of their men. Do you think they'd say "sir, put your hands up, and remain calm", or beat the hell out of him and shoot him dead.

[spitfirejunky]

Well, any hope we had of reinstalling him so we can leave Iraq is now lost.

[Mr. Ron]

I can say nothing bad of the man, but fate has arrived at his doorstep. May the future of the Middle East become brighter.

...Huh?

[AA-12]

He himself never threatened me or my loved ones ever. He wanted to sustain his country just like anyone else.

@spitfirejunky: Captain obvious :p

It is a sad thought though :-\

[Danger Bird]

He himself never threatened me or my loved ones ever. He wanted to sustain his country just like anyone else.
You know, he did kill innocent people.

[AA-12]

You know, he did kill innocent people.

We all know that, but compare him to a huge war with our guys dying, or an even worse leader, or the extremists in Iraq taking over. He'd be considered the best of all possible evils.

[spitfirejunky]

@spitfirejunky: Captain obvious :p

/salutes you

[Danger Bird]

We all know that, but compare him to a huge war with our guys dying, or an even worse leader, or the extremists in Iraq taking over. He'd be considered the best of all possible evils.

That doesn't mean there's nothing bad to be said about him.

[AA-12]

Well let me say it again then, sure he's done bad things. So has my father, but that doesn't mean I don't believe he's a good man overall.

[Mr. Ron]

He himself never threatened me or my loved ones ever. He wanted to sustain his country just like anyone else.

@spitfirejunky: Captain obvious :p

It is a sad thought though :-\

By......killing them....

Come on Josh.

[Mr. Ron]

Well let me say it again then, sure he's done bad things. So has my father, but that doesn't mean I don't believe he's a good man overall.

I can safely say your father never attempted to gas hundreds of people or torture them.

[AA-12]

I don't know why I bother starting these things, hah. It's pointless anyway, he's dead. Carry on.

[Mr. Ron]

I don't know why I bother starting these things, hah. It's pointless anyway, he's dead. Carry on.

I don't know either.


You defend a genocidal dictator and just brush aside the fact that whatever "good" he ever did will always be outweighed by the atrocious things he committed.


Do you think a leader is right in killing people that do not agree with his ideals to keep his nation under control?

[spitfirejunky]

Judging by the current, endless chaos, maybe.

[Chu]

You know, Iraq was better off with Saddam in power if it's innocent people dieing that you're going by...

I don't understand how you can hate Saddam, and not hate the guy who gave the order to drop the Nuke on Japan (I don't know the correct statistics, but would I be wrong in saying more people died because of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings then Saddam's ruling?), I suppose it's because the latter was on the 'good' side, and you're all ****en hypcrits?

If America was trying to help a nation, they could have helped a nation that actually needed help, like Myanmar/Burma, or even Cambodia.

[Danger Bird]

I don't understand how you can hate Saddam, and not hate the guy who gave the order to drop the Nuke on Japan
Oh, well that's simple. I DO.

You didn't even ask anybody their opinion about that, you just jumped to the conclusion of how we felt about it and then called us hypocrites for the position you assumed we held. But none of that matters because Japan is completely ****ing irrelevant.

Yes, we screwed up their country and they may well have been better off but that's beside the point. Just because we may be doing worse than him doesn't make him a good man. He was a genocidal maniac.

[sexymuffin]

yeah but he knew how to party you have to give him that

[Danger Bird]

Well, obviously, but that's neither here nor there.

[Chu]

You guys are just all talking like Saddam's the worst guy in history, I was simply using Japan as an example that there have been worse things done, I'm not defending Saddam by any means, but I feel that killing him was a bit extreme, maybe he deserved it in your eyes, but to me, simply keeping him in a prison (Maybe just a house arrest type thing) would have been the most humane thing.

Yes, we screwed up their country and they may well have been better off but that's beside the point. Just because we may be doing worse than him doesn't make him a good man. He was a genocidal maniac.
I wasn't saying he was a good man, or that Iraq was 'better off', but if your criteria for what is better off is based on the death's of innocent people, you can by no means say America has made Iraq a better country, and that's NOT beside the point, Saddam was put to death for doing in 30 years what Americans have done in 4, where is the 'humanity' in that? To me, this is a case of double standards "Oh, we've removed this horrible man who killed many people, but in the act of doing so, we have done exactly what we were fighting against!"

Why don't Americans waste their money on something that actually needs help? Like Myanmar, which is, imo the perfect example of what American propoganda made Iraq out to be, except of course, there's nothing to be gained out of helping an extremely poor country (Yes the military dictatorship is quite well off, with pretty much 90% of profits made from the Myanmar/Laos/Thailand 'Golden Circle' drug market going to the Burmese government, which in turn, spends it on guns and ammunition, so they can kill their own people (Isn't that what Saddam has been killed for?), but as for the rest of the people of Myanmar, who make up the majority, it is an extremely poor country).

[MegaPhony]

Something about the whole rushing of his execution seems very fishy to me, like they confused when he should be executed, I heard it was AFTER thirty days, and they changed it to BEFORE thirty days. People began to rise against and protest against his execution, and within 2 or 3 days, they had him executed. I feel uncomfortable about the whole trial and no matter how bad of a man, dictator or leader he was. I feel he did not have a fair trial and sentence, something went awry and he was killed before someone could find error or reason to go against the verdict.

[MegaPhony]

Yes, we screwed up their country and they may well have been better off but that's beside the point. Just because we may be doing worse than him doesn't make him a good man. He was a genocidal maniac.

Do you realize the irony in this statement?
A ****ing genocidal maniac handled Iraq better than the US is, then WHAT does that say about the whole war and the US itself..just back the **** off, especially if you're making a situation worse.

[Dannyboy15]

You guys are just all talking like Saddam's the worst guy in history, I was simply using Japan as an example that there have been worse things done, I'm not defending Saddam by any means, but I feel that killing him was a bit extreme, maybe he deserved it in your eyes, but to me, simply keeping him in a prison (Maybe just a house arrest type thing) would have been the most humane thing.

Wow you're a pus*y!

House arrest? Give me a ****ing break. Why don't we give him a fancy hotel room with free room serivice? After all it would be the most humane thing. You're the type of person that would probably give convicted child molesters community service working at pre-schools.

[Chu]

I'm a pussy, because violence, or death in this case, isn't the answer to everything? Meh, I'll wear that hat :)

Edit: You obviously have no idea what house arrest is.

[Rrrrrrr]

House arrest is going too easy on him. Solitary for life would've been fitting I think.

[Dannyboy15]

I'm a slightly confuzzled sea lion, because violence, or death in this case, isn't the answer to everything? Meh, I'll wear that hat :)

Edit: You obviously have no idea what house arrest is.

Yes I do. You get an ankle bracelet and get to live at home most of the time, and you can only leave if it is arranged.

For me the death penalty is the second option. IMO he should be locked up in a 4ft x 4ft jail cell, and be beaten every day for the rest of his life.

[Chu]

Yet he's being charged for crimes against humanity, so you do the most inhumane thing possible. What are you, like 12?

[Dannyboy15]

Yet he's being charged for crimes against humanity, so you do the most inhumane thing possible. What are you, like 12?

He deserves it. Probably even more.

I'm glad you're not in any position of authority.

[Chu]

And I am glad I don't live in America :)

[Alf™]

He deserves it. Probably even more.

I'm glad you're not in any position of authority.

You are an idiot. How can you condone legally sentencing people to death? In Saddam's case, it's almost letting him off lightly. Instant death, no conditions. He deserves a jail cell for the rest of his life imho, or even better, a fair trial.

[Dannyboy15]

You are an idiot. How can you condone legally sentencing people to death? In Saddam's case, it's almost letting him off lightly. Instant death, no conditions. He deserves a jail cell for the rest of his life imho, or even better, a fair trial.

I already explained my first option. :)

[Alf™]

I already explained my first option. :)

What time period are we living in? It's the 21st century and that option just won't happen. That would be a sick and cruel punishment and I like to think yourself, and everyone, have a higher class than that.

[Surgicalgod]

1. The US had no right to capture and execute Saddam.
2. He didn't get a fair trial
3. There are far worse leaders out there who are "friends" of America.

Weird, the thousands of Muslims around the world celebrating his death didn't seem to mind that.

Islam has about 1.2-1.4 billion followers.

[Dannyboy15]

1. The US had no right to capture and execute Saddam.
The Iraqi's executed Saddam.


2. He didn't get a fair trial
It is impossible for Saddam to get a completely fair trial. Everyone already knows what he did.

[Light__Fantastic]

Well, you'd think a nation's own leader wouldn't gas them, kidnap them, torture them, kill them for disagreeing and the like. A leader is meant to serve the people, not the other way around.

Saddam executed those who he thought were a threat to his regime. If you support a states right to carry out capital punishment you recognise his right to do that.

Your president has similar powers for torture, but I guess that's ok because he can only do it to people who aren't officially citizens right? You know what's really funny about that? Saddam is an honorary American citizen. He was given the key to Detroit in 1980.

I get it: The people in this thread that are defending Saddam are all (by my knowledge) non-American. It has nothing to do with morals, they just hate America.Sure I dislike America, the country sucks and the foreign policy seems to be to mess everything up as much as possible. Doesn't invalidate any of my reasoning. =]

Similiar to a group of cops searching and finding a criminal who killed one of their men. Do you think they'd say "sir, put your hands up, and remain calm", or beat the hell out of him and shoot him dead.

What? Those people shouldn't be police officers then.

You're the type of person that would probably give convicted child molesters community service working at pre-schools.

Nice sweeping generalisation, you are the type of person who thinks criminals somehow don't have any rights?


It is impossible for Saddam to get a completely fair trial.

I would think it's entirely possible to improve on the completely worthless one that he got.

Oh, well that's simple. I DO.Your hatred is entirely irrational.

But none of that matters because Japan is completely ****ing irrelevant.So events where hundreds of thousands of were killed people isn't relevant when we are talking about other events where hundreds of thousands of people were killed? o.0

Presumably you don't think the people behind those killings needed hanging, or wished their death, or even had the strange hatred you do for Saddam.

What about the US sanctions that had direct the direct effect of killing hundreds of thousands? Those weren't war casualties, those are deaths you knew would happen. Let's hang all the people responsible, huh?
He was a genocidal maniac.

So is God, but zero still loves him. =x

[veggie 3.14]

On the one hand, he's dead, which is great, 'cause he was a bastard.

But... I think it would've been better to chuck him in solitary for the rest of his life, which'd be far, far worse in my opinion.

But then, I have no say in the matter.

[r8guitarist]

well that was 5 years of nothing well spent.

[r8guitarist]

However killing him was the best option. If Iraq kept him in prision there would always have been a group of people willing to free him and kill anyone they had to in order to do it.

[Jim]

Was watching the film Stripes last night and stumbled upon a particuarly humourous line.

"We're soldiers; but we're American soldiers. We've been kickin' *** for 200 years. We're 10 and 1."

Make that 10 and 2.

On this particular note of Saddam's apparent death, I don't wish to delve particularly deep. Capital punishment has always been and will always be (human existence permitting) a grey area. If someone has committed a crime, are their rights as humans relinquished? I personally think so. But to take someone's life - especially in an advanced race as we claim to be - just seems so simply primative.

I'm a supporter of zero tolerence against any crime, but what's wrong with rotting in a jail cell? Death just seems the easy option, considering the crimes committed. Let him bounce a tennis ball against a cell wall for the rest of his life, rather than grant him quicker transcendence to a higher (or lower) form.

[Aaron]

Murder most foul.

[Light__Fantastic]

If someone has committed a crime, are their rights as humans relinquished? I personally think so.As said already, a state can make anything a crime, do they then get to revoke human rights because they can classify whoever they want as a criminal?

Do you support the torture of so-defined enemy combatants of the United States?

Seeing as this thread is semi-about Iraq in general, some interesting polls:

http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55

85% [Of US troops surveyed] said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks

[Jim]

I never said I supported torture at all, or even specify any sentence that would be preferable for any crime. Merely that if you commit an unlawful act in any state, you should not be merely slapped on the wrist.

And yes, their are many prisoners kept by America that haven't even received a trial (let alone a fair one), and I don't support that at all. What I do support is that you are not innocent until proven so.

Yeah I support torture :rolleyes:

[Light__Fantastic]

You do support torture if you support the removal of all rights just because a state chooses to classify you as a criminal. That is exactly how America justifies the torture they do.

[Aaron]

There are many people kidnapped by the US government who haven't even been charged with a crime.

[Jim]

Not being tortured isn't just a human right. It's a basic right. Would you torture a harmless kitten? It's not a human, so it can be subject to abuse surely??

By human rights I mean basic freedom and nothing more. I do support America capturing what they believe to be "enemy combatants". It's their business, especially if these prisoners were caught training and plotting with terrorist organisations. I don't support them hoilding them without trial. I don't support the torture of them. This is why I don't support America overall, because they play the world with their own rules.

[Light__Fantastic]

Ok so you support the ability of a single person to declare any non-citizen an enemy combatant, regardless of any other criteria. Yeah that's not just as stupid at all.

[Jim]

Any "non-citizen"? I was talking about people who knowingly commit crimes reaping what they sew. Your telling me I support the capture of innocent civilians. Stop putting words in my mouth to create an argument.

[Light__Fantastic]

Define enemy combatant, because it's all about designation according to the US and not actual offences.

[Knifeboy]

Wanting to see a person that killed thousands of people (odds are if you're an Iraqi, maybe some of your family members) dead isn't unnatural. Thats a common emotion...Nothing a human feels or want sis unnatural, since wanting something IS human nature in itself.


I think there is something else that is bothering you.


As an american, with no connections to iraq at all, wanting to see Saddam hanged is sick, and disgusting

Edit: oops, didn't mean to lash out at americans only. Bad habbit

[Jim]

Define enemy combatant, because it's all about designation according to the US and not actual offenses.
Which is indeed unfair. Why are you arguing with me?

[Light__Fantastic]

You said being classified as a criminal is enough to remove certain rights, how can you argue that when you can be considered a criminal for nothing.

[Chu]

I don't think he's arguing with you, I think he's just trying to understand where you're coming from, it could come off as a bit provocative depending on how you interepret it I suppose.

[wartree]

It horrific, the guy next to saddam , giving him instructions , how to die...
:upset:

[Jim]

If someone has committed a crime, are their rights as humans relinquished? I personally think soMerely that if you commit an unlawful act in any state, you should not be merely slapped on the wrist.I was talking about people who knowingly commit crimes reaping what they sewI never said being "classified as a criminal" at all because every state has different and often skewed views of what's "right and wrong". I've only ever said (and I'll say it again) that if you commit an indecent act against somebody or something knowingly, you should not expect complete freedom to greet you on the other side.

Don't tell me for a second that I support the American army capturing innocent civilians because I never said that.

[wartree]

Yup some of them are getting executed too, because they're despicable human rights abusers.

If my dad was Saddam, I'd want him executed.

b.u.l.l.s.h.i.t

[Light__Fantastic]

What is an indecent act? What is a crime? The state can make anything you do a crime or an indecent act, so they can in effect take away your rights at will. That is if we give them that power to revoke any rights of criminals apart from holding them in custody.

[Aaron]

The US military committed a crime when they kidnapped Saddam.

[Hababi]

Yeah it would have been wrong, because you had the same destructive technology.

So had we invaded because of incorrect assaumptions, you would've objected and criticized it as illegal and wrong? You would've told the Jews, "We shouldn't have stopped him!"

Regardless of the rationale, we stopped an evil man and his evil children from perpetrating more massive crimes on his people. The ends are the same, no matter what rhetoric was used to get there.


Why are we talking about that?


Because you said that it was against the Bible.

[Jim]

Well I wasn't aware I was drawing myself into an argument about a hypothetical state's judicial system, but rather making a point that if you wrongly impede on another's freedom (note that I've previously used the word "crime" generically and not in a particularly lawful sense), you deserve no lenience. If you need further knowledge about my stance on anything at all, I've probably already covered it and do not fancy covering it again.

Now it's 12:30 in the ****ing morning and I'm going to sleep.

[Light__Fantastic]

So had we invaded because of incorrect assaumptions, you would've objected and criticized it as illegal and wrong?Yeah. The end doesn't always justify the means, especially when the end is different from what you thought it would be when you employed the means.

You would've told the Jews, "We shouldn't have stopped him!"But I said you should intervene for genocide, it is you who advocates state sponsored murder, not me.


we stopped an evil man and his evil children from perpetrating more massive crimes on his people.
Evil is religious rhetoric and unquantifiable. Evil means nothing to me, sorry.

Well I wasn't aware I was drawing myself into an argument about a hypothetical state's judicial system,Well Saddam shouldn't lose his rights just because the American administration says he's a criminal. The ICJ would consider some Americans war criminals. In fact, that's probably the only reason why they don't recognise it - too afraid of being tried themselves.

Edit: Wrong qoute =[

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

They should have locked him up in a zoo for public redicule. This will only make a martyr out of him

Besides, the death penalty is far too lenient

[Light__Fantastic]

Ridicule, and I don't know when you will learn of human rights.

[Rearviewmirror]

Saddam was a sadistic murderer of thousands of his own people and others. It's known, documented information that his repression of the Iraqi people didn't stop until he was finally apprehended.

Here's a mere few of his devilish deeds:

He drained the southern marshes, causing grave environmental damage and forcible relocation of civilians in an attempt to eliminate opposition to the regime.

He ordered the murders of many Shi'a clerics.

He destroyed villages and forcibly relocated people in both the north and the south, and destroyed villages in south Iraq.

He used chemical weapons against his own people.

In the 1970s and 80s, the Iraqi regime, under Saddam Hussein, destroyed over 3,000 Kurdish villages.

In northern Iraq, the government campaigned forcibly to deport Kurdish and Turkomen families to southern governorates. As a result of these forced deportations, approximately 900,000 citizens were internally displaced throughout Iraq. Local officials in the south ordered the arrest of any official or citizen providing employment, food or shelter to the Kurds.

Iraq's 1988-89 Anfal campaign subjected the Kurdish people in northern Iraq to the most widespread attack of chemical weapons ever used against a civilian population. The Iraqi military attacked a number of towns and villages in northern Iraq with chemical weapons. In the town of Halabja alone, an estimated 5,000 civilians were killed and more than 10,000 were injured.

In the southern marshes, government forces burned houses and fields, demolished houses with bulldozers, and undertook a deliberate campaign to drain and poison the marshes. Villages belonging to the al Juwaibiri, al Shumaish, al Musa and al Rahma tribes were entirely destroyed and the inhabitants forcibly expelled. Government troops expelled the population of other areas at gunpoint, forcing them to relocate by cutting off their water supply.

__________

This mass destruction and death was ordered by the leadership of Saddam Hussein, and has been well documented and visualized throughout it's occurrence, by both the suppressed people, human rights groups, and international governments and agencies.
__________

International human rights groups and others gathered evidence to establish an international criminal court to try Saddam and his senior aides for war crimes and crimes against humanity. This was, no doubt, successful.

It is, undoubtedly, a great thing that this tyrant is finally dead and gone. He died by the means he often employed himself, upon innocent others: Death by hanging. He lived by the sword and died by it. Good riddance to him.

[Light__Fantastic]

Not that it's easy to read yellow on white but..

If you support capital punishment by the state you have to recognise Saddam's power as the state to execute whoever he likes!

Anyway, Saddam did equally as many good things for Iraq, what's your point?

[Rearviewmirror]

Not that it's easy to read yellow on white but..

If you support capital punishment by the state you have to recognise Saddam's power as the state to execute whoever he likes!

Anyway, Saddam did equally as many good things for Iraq, what's your point?


The point is easily seen that you can't decipher the difference between right and wrong. By your evaluation, murder by a tyrant is alright just as long as he did a few good things, too. I suppose it would have been okay if Hussein killed you and your family, just as long as he did a good deed on the same day. No great loss anyway, right? Like it or not, and I guess, judging by your posts that you don't, sometimes the evil tyrants are, justifiably, taken down and laid to rest by their own means. An eye for an eye. That's justice. The difference is, they executed a murder who killed innocent people.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

yway, Saddam did equally as many good things for Iraq,
what?

[The End]

Yup some of them are getting executed too, because they're despicable human rights abusers.

If my dad was Saddam, I'd want him executed.

hahahahahaha bullshit

[lunchforthesky]

I agree with Zero, i'd want that too.

[Knifeboy]

By your evaluation, murder by a tyrant is alright just as long as he did a few good things, too.

You're completely ignoring his point.. If you condone capital punishment by the state, then you can't say Saddam Hussein did anything bad, because he WAS THE STATE.

[italic zero]

I don't think there was any other way this could go.

[We_Love_Lime]

what?

Had the best health care in all out of the Middle East countries. The best engineers and architects came out of Iraq.

I can't stand to read this bullshit on Anti-Saddamitism.
I mean what he did was wrong.
But killing him?
Way to go ****tards, we officially are the biggest dumbasses in the world.

What do we achieve by killing him? We achieve the hate from a bunch of pissed of Sunnis, who will eventually cut off all of our balls. We had him, he was ours. He could never get away. But we had to make it official? We have gained nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Our pride is going to cause our fall, and when we fall, we're going to ****ing fall hard.

And isn't Killing Saddam and "giving him what he deserves" sort of like an eye for an eye mindset which we've condemned over so many years?
Bunch of hypocrits we are.
Give yourself a good long look in the mirror. Than shoot yourself for being such an asshole.

[TojesDolan]

And isn't Killing Saddam and "giving him what he deserves" sort of like an eye for an eye mindset which we've condemned over so many years?

If you are romantic enough you can say his death was better than just holding him in, I guess.

Ironically, I don't support him being murdered for his "crimes". There is a large group of presidents who should be dead by now under that logic.

[We_Love_Lime]

If you are romantic enough you can say his death was better than just holding him in, I guess.



I don't get it?

[WhoDidTheElf]

Ridicule, and I don't know when you will learn of human rights.

Why should we extend human rights to some one who so blatantly ignored them?

[lfantwister]

You're completely ignoring his point.. If you condone capital punishment by the state, then you can't say Saddam Hussein did anything bad, because he WAS THE STATE.

That's crazy talk! You can condone capital punishment by THE state (America) but believe no one else should be able to kill!

Regardless of my insanity, it's still possible. Saddam has not been the state for four years. He is in many ways completely separate from the current state of Iraq, and putting him through a court system like we did is based not on his leadership qualities but the atrocities he carried out. If he hadn't been the Glorious Leader of Iraq but still masterminded the murders of all those people, he would still be killed for his crimes. His death is rather irrelevant to his old post--it's the crimes he's being punished for, not his position.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

Had the best health care in all out of the Middle East countries. The best engineers and architects came out of Iraq.


Income per head in Iraq 1979: 6756
Income per head in 1998: 1131

[Hababi]

Yeah. The end doesn't always justify the means, especially when the end is different from what you thought it would be when you employed the means.

The end is a democratic Iraq with the potential for stability. It's up to them to make it work.

The problem is that you don't realize that taking out a murderous tyrant, which we agree Saddam was, is never morally wrong. No matter the cause, taking out a bloodthirsty dictator is a good action.



But I said you should intervene for genocide

For major genocide. I'd love a clarification on exactly constitutes "major" and what doesn't quite meet that standard. How many people are you willing to let die before you'll morally approve intervention?


Evil is religious rhetoric and unquantifiable. Evil means nothing to me, sorry.


What would you call brutally murdering a man's entire family because he made a joke about you?

[lfantwister]

What would you call brutally murdering a man's entire family because he made a joke about you?
justified. Humor is overrated.

[Rimbaudian]

At least when Saddam was in power, when civilians died it benefited the country.

[drewhet]

here it is guys.

http://pandachute.com/videos/leaked_saddam_being_hung_video

[Mr. Ron]

Well that was quick.

[White Riot!]

barbaric

EDIT: I THINK THE VIDEO WAS CUT

[Mr. Ron]

Ok, that doesn't change anything.

[White Riot!]

The end is a democratic Iraq with the potential for stability. It's up to them to make it work.


Pure propaganda nonsense crap. If the military might of "supposedly the worlds strongest nation" (hahaha yeah right) :p cannot stabilise the nation of iraq , let alone secure airport road in baghdad , how the hell is a culturally backward and divided people going to even contemplate about achieving this.

Its more like how american can wipe its hands clean of the mess it created, twice or even a third time

[Iskandar]

The end is a democratic Iraq with the potential for stability. It's up to them to make it work.

The problem is that you don't realize that taking out a murderous tyrant, which we agree Saddam was, is never morally wrong. No matter the cause, taking out a bloodthirsty dictator is a good action.
Whether you agree with capital punishment or not, it's never strictly necessary.

[Light__Fantastic]

what?
He improved the economy of Iraq hugely for a start,

Within just a few years, Iraq was providing social services that were unprecedented among Middle Eastern countries. Saddam established and controlled the "National Campaign for the Eradication of Illiteracy" and the campaign for "Compulsory Free Education in Iraq," and largely under his auspices, the government established universal free schooling up to the highest education levels; hundreds of thousands learned to read in the years following the initiation of the program. The government also supported families of soldiers, granted free hospitalization to everyone, and gave subsidies to farmers. Iraq created one of the most modernized public-health systems in the Middle East, earning Saddam an award from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

I'm sure you can read more for yourself instead of me quoting wikipedia at you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam#Modernization

That's crazy talk! You can condone capital punishment by THE state (America) but believe no one else should be able to kill!What? Since when is America the state and Saddam not. They have no more right to execute people than Saddam did. Especially since they actually recognised him as the legitimate ruler of Iraq when it was convenient for them.

Regardless of my insanity, it's still possible. Saddam has not been the state for four years.Neither has he killed anyone in four years. As an advocate of corporal punishment by the state (a supporter of Saddam's execution), you support Saddams ability to execute anyone he pleases. Saddam was the state, he had the power to execute people. America has no more right over life than he did.

If he hadn't been the Glorious Leader of Iraq but still masterminded the murders of all those people, he would still be killed for his crimes. His death is rather irrelevant to his old post--it's the crimes he's being punished for, not his position.
I don't think you understand... They weren't crimes if you think the state has power over life because he was within his rights to kill those people. You don't get to say well America can have the right to execute, but nobody that disagrees with us on the criteria can! because you don't own the world.

Why should we extend human rights to some one who so blatantly ignored them?So then are you better than the Saddam you seem hate so much. I know Americans like to be richeous about this stuff, you do know that goes out of the window when you start doing the stuff you are actually accusing Saddam of.

[Light__Fantastic]

The end is a democratic Iraq with the potential for stability. It's up to them to make it work.Less than 50% of Iraqis want democracy.


The problem is that you don't realize that taking out a murderous tyrant, which we agree Saddam was, is never morally wrong. No matter the cause, taking out a bloodthirsty dictator is a good action.
Even if we agree it is not our place nor our countries to do that..

If an extremist religious state had the power America does and the roles were reversed, they could think they needed to remove all secular society and free the people from their life of sin. They would invade your country and convert it from democracy to theocracy because that is what they absolutely believe is best and right just as you believe removing Saddam could never be wrong.

For major genocide. I'd love a clarification on exactly constitutes "major" and what doesn't quite meet that standard. How many people are you willing to let die before you'll morally approve intervention?

No, I only said major because we were specifically talking about the holocaust and you posed an extremely stupid question as to whether I thought intervention was needed. Genocide isn't based on the number of people as far as I know.

What would you call brutally murdering a man's entire family because he made a joke about you?
An extreme over-reaction. Too bad Saddam never did anything like this.

[RNR]

Less than 50% of Iraqis want democracy.



Less than 50% of them know what democracy is thanks to Saddam.

[Light__Fantastic]

Are you saying Iraqis are stupid, or was that a rather unfunny joke?

[Krabsworth]

They're not stupid just a bit ignorant.

[RNR]

Not stupid. Ignorant.

edit: yeah.

[Light__Fantastic]

You mean like that entire continent just above South America is?

[Krabsworth]

Are you saying North and Central Americans are ignorant, or was that a rather unfunny joke?

[Light__Fantastic]

Looks like I am saying it because both of you guys just made blanket statements about a place you've never been. Who knows what it's like to live under Saddam here? Either of you two? Didn't think so.

The Iraqis are the best judges of what each was like and which they preferred. You act like you know best without actual experience of it, that is true ignorance. :')


Then you ignore democracy in practice because them Iraqis don't know what they want!

[Krabsworth]

They obviously don't.

[Light__Fantastic]

They know what they don't want, and that's democracy.

[Krabsworth]

Like America is going to let another Iran spring up.

and just because most of the country supports the radicals, doesn't mean its the best thing for the country, or the region

you may remember this thing called slavery that most of America supported

[We_Love_Lime]

STFU Krabsworth.
Light knows what he's talking about.

[We_Love_Lime]

Income per head in Iraq 1979: 6756
Income per head in 1998: 1131

?
Thanks.

[Krabsworth]

STFU Krabsworth.
Light knows what he's talking about.

k thx moka

nowhesingsnowhesobs was just illustrating how under saddam iraq kind of economically spiraled downwards

[Light__Fantastic]

Like America is going to let another Iran spring up.What is another Iran exactly? I'd like to see you justifying keeping such countries in submission just because you don't like their policies.

and just because most of the country supports the radicals, doesn't mean its the best thing for the country, or the regionIt wasn't me who wanted this lovely idea of democracy in Iraq, it was you, remember! So now you don't want democracy? You want what America thinks is best for the Iraqis.

under saddam iraq kind of economically spiraled downwardsI think you'll find it was the complete opposite.

=x

[Africa]

another Iran is a country that will throw off the U.S. imperialistic influence in the Middle East, source of natural resources.

[Krabsworth]

oh yeah i guess urrite

[We_Love_Lime]

k thx moka

nowhesingsnowhesobs was just illustrating how under saddam iraq kind of economically spiraled downwards

I'm just playing man.
I have no idea what's going.
Just felt like being an arsehole

I'm a bit biased because I'm arab myself.
But whatever.

[IERA]

Not that it's easy to read yellow on white but..

If you support capital punishment by the state you have to recognise Saddam's power as the state to execute whoever he likes!



If you condone capital punishment by the state, then you can't say Saddam Hussein did anything bad, because he WAS THE STATE.

The keyword here is punishment: A penalty imposed for immoral behavior. The execution of Saddam was contingent on his wrongdoings, whereas the executions ordered by Saddam (the ones he was sentenced for) were deliberate killings of innocent Shiite non-combatants. The two forms of execution are not identical.

You are commiting the logical fallacy of equivocation.

Thus it is logically sound to condone capital punishment, yet not condone the executions ordered by Saddam (though by no means is it necessary to do so)

By your line of thought we could reason, that if you support state-sanctioned incarceration of a random killer, you also condone the imprisonments of jews, gypsies and homosexuals during WW2 (not to mention a plethora of political prisoners. Remember Solzhenitsyn and the gulags, the filmmaker Paradjanov?).

[Erratic]

I don't feel like looking through 11 pages of political debates, so can someone answer my question?

Did they use the method where they drop him and his neck breaks or did he hang there for 5 minutes and get strangulated?

[Chu]

I'm assuming his neck broke (The news report I watched said it was over 'in the blink of an eye').

[BassVirtuoso]

Rest In Peace

[Africa]

I don't feel like looking through 11 pages of political debates, so can someone answer my question?

Did they use the method where they drop him and his neck breaks or did he hang there for 5 minutes and get strangulated?

His neck snapped like a twig, I saw the vid, it was bent sideways and he was completely gone in an instant. Another picture shows his head abnormally sideways, suggesting it was broken.

[Apollyon]

That doesn't change the fact that he did, and that taking him out stopped this. What if we chose to take out Hitler because we thought he had the atomic bomb? Would that have made it wrong, even though it would've stopped the Holocaust?

Isn't that an example of pre-emptive politics? Something I support in certain situations that you've told me is facist? :p

[Give me Beer]

I'm against it because I am against capital punishment. It would be hypocritical of me to support this one. :) I would like to say I won't miss him. He was an aweful human being and I've got no sympathy for him. I would just have prefered seeing him in prison for the rest of his life.

[The Digital Pimp]

I don't feel like looking through 11 pages of political debates, so can someone answer my question?

Did they use the method where they drop him and his neck breaks or did he hang there for 5 minutes and get strangulated?

It was quick; that's what hangings are. Gravity and a big knot in the rope breaks the neck instantly.

[RCVA]

America has a hell of a lot of Oil in Alaska. They don't really need the middle east as much some seem to think.


They have always talked about liberty and freedoms since its birth as a country which came as a result of fighting for their freedom from the British Empire.


I think Americans genuinely want people to gain self determination, like they did after world war 2 in all those broken up European empires. I think the Iraqis should be allowed to choose how they want to be ruled and i think anyone who is not Iraqi or involved in Iraq's politics should leave the Iraqis to make their own choices on how they should be ruled.


Not the Americans saying it should be democracy and not other groups who want Islamic Shariah law or however they think Iraq should be ruled.

I don't think anyone wants to be ruled by an oppressive authoritarian leader though. That's just my two cents. I don't think the killing of Saddam is consequential really, Iraq's still a huge problem.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

I think you'll find it was the complete opposite.

no.

[de rien]

The keyword here is punishment: A penalty imposed for immoral behavior. The execution of Saddam was contingent on his wrongdoings, whereas the executions ordered by Saddam (the ones he was sentenced for) were deliberate killings of innocent Shiite non-combatants. The two forms of execution are not identical.

You are commiting the logical fallacy of equivocation.

Thus it is logically sound to condone capital punishment, yet not condone the executions ordered by Saddam (though by no means is it necessary to do so)

Saddam has complete power over Iraq. As the recognised ruler, he has the power to define what is punishable. He can define what is immoral just like America can. That's why he can define uprising as immoral and punish people for it.

He gets to chose what is moral and immoral, not you.

[badtaste]

Saddam has complete power over Iraq. As the recognised ruler, he has the power to define what is punishable. He can define what is immoral just like America can. That's why he can define uprising as immoral and punish people for it.

He gets to chose what is moral and immoral, not you.

So that's a justification of Saddam's actions?

[de rien]

No it's why you shouldn't support capital punishment no matter who it is. I don't support capital punishment, I don't believe the state should have power over life. Those that do must agree Saddam was within his right to kill all those people because he was the state, with the power to take life of those he deemed guilty of whatever crimes he thought were punishable by death.

[Hababi]

Less than 50% of Iraqis want democracy.


According to what?




If an extremist religious state had the power America does and the roles were reversed, they could think they needed to remove all secular society and free the people from their life of sin. They would invade your country and convert it from democracy to theocracy because that is what they absolutely believe is best and right just as you believe removing Saddam could never be wrong.

We're talking about removing a brutal dictator, who murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people, not someone who we merely had a difference of philosophies with.



No, I only said major because we were specifically talking about the holocaust and you posed an extremely stupid question as to whether I thought intervention was needed. Genocide isn't based on the number of people as far as I know.


Ok so how many people does a dictator have to murder before you'll deem it morally ok to take him out?


An extreme over-reaction. Too bad Saddam never did anything like this.

Yes, he did.

[de rien]

According to what?

http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55

We're talking about removing a brutal dictatorOr a nice president who did a lot for his country. I don't know why you don't understand the subjectivity in this. To continue my example, an extreme religious regime could think living in secular society to be just as bad or worse than you think living under a dictator is. Just because they absolutely think they are helping us by changing our regime doesn't give them the right to do so.

Ok so how many people does a dictator have to murder before you'll deem it morally ok to take him out?
The same number of people that it's morally ok to kill using sanctions.

But really, it's entirely situational.


Yes, he did.Source? All I know of is him removing political opponents and possible uprising against his regime.

[Hababi]

http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55


Which poll are you specifically referencing?


Or a nice president who did a lot for his country. I don't know why you don't understand the subjectivity in this.

There is no subjectivity to the fact that he murdered hundreds of thousands of people.


The same number of people that it's morally ok to kill using sanctions.



Sanctions kill nobody. Brutal dictators do.

Do you think it was right to put sanctions on South Africa during the Apartheid?


Source? All I know of is him removing political opponents and possible uprising against his regime.
http://espn.go.com/oly/s/2002/1220/1480103.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam%27s_Iraq

[We_Love_Lime]

I'm pretty sure that when the Iraqis fight back against the democracy that we've "set up", which mind you, isn't working, and will never work until Sunnis and Shi'ites can agree on anything, which is never. Than that's when you get the hint that Iraqis don't want a democracy.
It's the way they've been ruled since the beginning of time man.
The tribes have a leader, who rule over that clan, and that's it. You can't just take away their way of life that they've lived for hundreds of years can you?
No.
Iraq doesn't need a democracy. They need someone who won't stand for bullshit ( Saddam ) and who will keep Sunnis and Shi'ites in check ( Saddam ).

Watch, the number of deaths in Iraq is going to exceed the number of people Saddam kills.
Than we'll know we're ****ing useless as a country

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

ok, I get our point. Arabs are filthy barbarians who need psychopathic dictators, who will keep them in line, not stand for any ****, start aggressive wars and ruin their economies!

[We_Love_Lime]

?
Shut up.
You completely mistook my post, altered its meaning, than attempted to say some smartass rant that made yourself look good, funny, and smart.

Way to Go.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

perhaps I exaggerated:

"Iraqis are tribal people who need dictators who will keep them in line"

is maybe more correct

[RCVA]

Saddam has complete power over Iraq. As the recognised ruler, he has the power to define what is punishable. He can define what is immoral just like America can. That's why he can define uprising as immoral and punish people for it.

He gets to chose what is moral and immoral, not you.

And how the **** does he know what's best for his ****ing people? killing kurds in the north? slaughtering any political enemies?


That's no way any country should be ruled in the 21st century.

[Efrim]

And how the **** does he know what's best for his ****ing people?

But we do?

[Sammy_L_D]

I don't agree with the execution of Saddam.

A better punishment would've been making him into a human water turbine.

He'll drown eventually anyways.

That or charge admission to see him fight gladiators.

Or robots.

[We_Love_Lime]

perhaps I exaggerated:

"Iraqis are tribal people who need dictators who will keep them in line"

is maybe more correct

To an extent yes.
It's worded a bit harsh with the "tribal people", but that's how many Middle Eastern civilizations lived for hundreds of years.
Democracy isn't going to help or stop the conflict betwean sunnis and shi'ites.
Its going to be a strong and powerful leader.
Saddam did that. Regardless of what he did to the Kurds, to his own people, he kept order.

[Iskandar]

Sanctions kill nobody. Brutal dictators do.

Do you think it was right to put sanctions on South Africa during the Apartheid?
They certainly starve people. Sanctions are generally ineffective at anything but ruining a nation's economy. They certainly don't touch the great leader in his opulent palace with six swimming pools.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

he kept order.
Stalin kept order over a state that encompassed many disparate ethnic groups

so gg stalin

[BassVirtuoso]

Whoever cheers for Saddam's death is just as bad as him IMO.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

i am just as bad as Saddam

how is this so?

[lfantwister]

Whoever cheers for Saddam's death is just as bad as him IMO.
except killing one brutal tyrant isn't exactly the same as killing hundreds of thousands of innocents...

[RCVA]

But we do?

No. The Iraqi people do.


Let them choose how to run their own country. Saddam didn't let them do that and we aren't letting them either.

[lfantwister]

Let them choose how to run their own country. Saddam didn't let them do that and we aren't letting them either.
Isn't letting people choose their government at the heart of democracy?

So are you saying that we should instill a democratic government?

As a sidenote, do you think that if the Iraqi people decide to support an extremist regime (ie terrorist or radical Muslim or murderous) we should support that?

[We_Love_Lime]

Stalin kept order over a state that encompassed many disparate ethnic groups

so gg stalin

You're not understanding what I'm getting at.

[BassVirtuoso]

except killing one brutal tyrant isn't exactly the same as killing hundreds of thousands of innocents...

I never said it was.

[HaVIC5]

I never said it was.
Whoever cheers for Saddam's death is just as bad as him IMO.

Actually, you did.

[BassVirtuoso]

Actually, you did.

No, I didn't say "Killing a tyrant is the same as killing 1000s of innocent people"

I said/meant "celebrating death makes you as bad as the tyrant who celebrated death"

[RNR]

Celebrating the death of a bad man. I can see how come people, especially ones who lived under his regime could do such a thing.

[RCVA]

Isn't letting people choose their government at the heart of democracy?

So are you saying that we should instill a democratic government?

As a sidenote, do you think that if the Iraqi people decide to support an extremist regime (ie terrorist or radical Muslim or murderous) we should support that?

Good point.


I'm not sure what should be done.

Whatever solution is taken won't be perfect as there is 20% population Sunni muslims who are used to being in control as a result of Saddam's regime a lot more Shi'ites who will want increased influence in a new country to fairly represent the views of the people and the Sunni's will want to resist this as they are used to being the ruling class of Iraq.


Btw i'm getting most of my information from my memory of BBC programs and reading newspapers so this could be a load of bullshit. sorry if that's so.

[BassVirtuoso]

Celebrating the death of a bad man. I can see how come people, especially ones who lived under his regime could do such a thing.

I'm not going to try to argue my opinion, it's not based on anything but my own opinion on the value of life.

[lfantwister]

Whatever solution is taken won't be perfect as there is 20% population Sunni muslims who are used to being in control as a result of Saddam's regime a lot more Shi'ites who will want increased influence in a new country to fairly represent the views of the people and the Sunni's will want to resist this as they are used to being the ruling class of Iraq.
You could always pull for 3 states although it would rip apart Baghdad and it would suck for US interests (ie aint gonna happen). But it seems like one of the more peaceful ways to resolve the conflict.

edit: Celebrating the death of a bad man. I can see how come people, especially ones who lived under his regime could do such a thing. Just to contradict what I said, Talabani is aligned to some degree with United Socialists, who oppose the death penalty. So in encouraging capital punishment he's alienating his party's principles. But he is also a Kurd and Saddam's death can be seen as retribution from an ethnic standpoint of his Kurdish genocide.

[VomitStainedCretin]

edit: Just to contradict what I said, Talabani is aligned to some degree with United Socialists, who oppose the death penalty. So in encouraging capital punishment he's alienating his party's principles. But he is also a Kurd and Saddam's death can be seen as retribution from an ethnic standpoint of his Kurdish genocide.

Aren't the Kurds kinda annoyed about Saddam dying now, since they wanted him executed after the Kurd genocide trial which is currently occurring?

[lfantwister]

Yeah, but I think they are also annoyed that he died at all. Or at least Kurdish president is.

[Avalanche.]

Our pride is going to cause our fall, and when we fall, we're going to ****ing fall hard.

CORRECTION: Pride makes us strong, pride makes unites us- PRIDE MAKES AMERICA. You're with the other 90% of the world that hates us because the confuse ARROGANCE with PRIDE. A lot of people don't understand the difference between the two... and that is the problem.

[We_Love_Lime]

Pride makes America?
Look where America got us ;).