milagros317
Wielder of 500 Feathers
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2002
- Messages
- 626,730
- Points
- 113
Or turn him over to the Kurds. 
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
Good for Iraq: Saddam caught!
- Thread starter Haltickling
- Start date
asutickler
1st Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2001
- Messages
- 4,111
- Points
- 38
If they want to punish Saddam in the worst way possible, they have but to lead him to the front door of whatever facility they are keeping him in, and shove him out into the street. Depending on the time of day and how busy things were, he MIGHT make it 50 feet...
Personally, I would like to see Hussein given a lengthy public trial by the new governing body of Iraq. This would serve to both reveal the full scope of Hussein's crimes against the Iraqi people, by calling witness after witness to testify against him for the public record, AND demonstrate empirically to the people of Iraq that they no longer need live in fear of their government, by giving the most hated man in the country a scrupulously fair trial. Further, if Hussein stands trial in Iraq, he is subject to capital punishment. Should he be sentenced to death, I would advocate, as barbaric as it may sound, a public, televised execution. Many in Iraq are still fearful of Hussein, and with good reason: he brutalized them in unimaginable fashion for decades. Many still fear his return, even though he is currently in custody, and televising his execution would put an end to those fears, PERMANANTLY.
Personally, I would like to see Hussein given a lengthy public trial by the new governing body of Iraq. This would serve to both reveal the full scope of Hussein's crimes against the Iraqi people, by calling witness after witness to testify against him for the public record, AND demonstrate empirically to the people of Iraq that they no longer need live in fear of their government, by giving the most hated man in the country a scrupulously fair trial. Further, if Hussein stands trial in Iraq, he is subject to capital punishment. Should he be sentenced to death, I would advocate, as barbaric as it may sound, a public, televised execution. Many in Iraq are still fearful of Hussein, and with good reason: he brutalized them in unimaginable fashion for decades. Many still fear his return, even though he is currently in custody, and televising his execution would put an end to those fears, PERMANANTLY.
intense tickler
TMF Poster
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 78
- Points
- 0
saddam
I like everyone else I know that Saddam was a most evil man. And Im happy for the people of Iraq that hmm maybe things will turn out right in that country. But that is a big maybe. I just need to question the wisdom of why we went in there, for I truly dont understand it. There are dozens of dictators all over the globe, why there? why now? Why is Halibuton a company once run by the Vice President there with no sort of corporate bidding? Iraq is the second largest oil producer in the world. I kiss the ground that the young kids walk on for risking there lifes, but these are the kids of the poor and working class and if they are in the reserves there is a chance they will be called again. Not the kids of the wealthy or powerful. I live in New York we are under a code orange threat alert and what does a man we found in a rathole have to do with that shit?
We will be hit again one day some how and americans need to wake up and read between the lines. There is no proof that Saddam had anything to do with those planes flying into the trade center that killed thousands, I saw those flames licking at those buildings that day and all the hyjackers were for the most part Saudi's (our friends). I for one am sick to my stomach when I see the President trying to look like some hero landing on an air craft carrier in a flight suite when this man has not spent a day in the military but spend his college years as a sort of slacker. And im sad that most americans are falsly lulled into a false sense of security by this Saddam farce.
I like everyone else I know that Saddam was a most evil man. And Im happy for the people of Iraq that hmm maybe things will turn out right in that country. But that is a big maybe. I just need to question the wisdom of why we went in there, for I truly dont understand it. There are dozens of dictators all over the globe, why there? why now? Why is Halibuton a company once run by the Vice President there with no sort of corporate bidding? Iraq is the second largest oil producer in the world. I kiss the ground that the young kids walk on for risking there lifes, but these are the kids of the poor and working class and if they are in the reserves there is a chance they will be called again. Not the kids of the wealthy or powerful. I live in New York we are under a code orange threat alert and what does a man we found in a rathole have to do with that shit?
We will be hit again one day some how and americans need to wake up and read between the lines. There is no proof that Saddam had anything to do with those planes flying into the trade center that killed thousands, I saw those flames licking at those buildings that day and all the hyjackers were for the most part Saudi's (our friends). I for one am sick to my stomach when I see the President trying to look like some hero landing on an air craft carrier in a flight suite when this man has not spent a day in the military but spend his college years as a sort of slacker. And im sad that most americans are falsly lulled into a false sense of security by this Saddam farce.
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
mr intense tickler, a couple thoughts come to mind...
first, we in america have an all volunteer military. from your post i guess you ascribe to the theory of bring back the draft.
where did you, and others, get the idea that we went into iraq because they were involved in 9/11 attack? it was said that saddam supported the terrorists of the world, but it was never claimed that he was involved. i fear you've been listening to the left wingers a wee bit too much.
president bush was in the military! he was a pilot. so no, your remarks are off target.
frankly i don't give a good god damn about iraq, but i do see his capture as a much needed giant step along the road for our boys comming home!
steve
first, we in america have an all volunteer military. from your post i guess you ascribe to the theory of bring back the draft.
where did you, and others, get the idea that we went into iraq because they were involved in 9/11 attack? it was said that saddam supported the terrorists of the world, but it was never claimed that he was involved. i fear you've been listening to the left wingers a wee bit too much.
president bush was in the military! he was a pilot. so no, your remarks are off target.
frankly i don't give a good god damn about iraq, but i do see his capture as a much needed giant step along the road for our boys comming home!
steve
Re: mr intense tickler, a couple thoughts come to mind...
I'm going to be annoying and interject here.
Saddam wouldn't have pissed on any member of al-Qaeda if they were on fire, unless he'd just had a drink of gasoline. Saddam and Osama's boys are Sunni and Shi'ite muslims repectively and they hate each others guts. Think of catholic and protestant christians in Northern Ireland and you'll have some idea.
Bush in the military....
His involvement with military service was being fiddled into the National Guard by a friend of his dad's to avoid the draft, fighting a coke-snorting habit whilst refusing to take a medical with a military doctor in case it was discovered (he tried to insist on his personal physician doing it, which was in direct contravention of military proceedure), and flying a clapped-out F-104 around the deadly skies of Houston because he checked the "I do not want to volunteer for overseas service" box on his enlistment papers. Hardly the actions of a brave guy from the upper classes volunteering to serve his country. Good actions for a future career in politics though, especially if he wanted to boast about having been in the military, because most people simply don't know the extent of his paper-shuffling career in uniform.
Hell yes! The sooner all the guys and gals are back with their families and friends, the better! When that happens Steve, I'll agree a time with you and we'll pop a couple of beers at the same time to commemorate it.
areenactor said:
I'm going to be annoying and interject here.
Saddam wouldn't have pissed on any member of al-Qaeda if they were on fire, unless he'd just had a drink of gasoline. Saddam and Osama's boys are Sunni and Shi'ite muslims repectively and they hate each others guts. Think of catholic and protestant christians in Northern Ireland and you'll have some idea.
Bush in the military....
His involvement with military service was being fiddled into the National Guard by a friend of his dad's to avoid the draft, fighting a coke-snorting habit whilst refusing to take a medical with a military doctor in case it was discovered (he tried to insist on his personal physician doing it, which was in direct contravention of military proceedure), and flying a clapped-out F-104 around the deadly skies of Houston because he checked the "I do not want to volunteer for overseas service" box on his enlistment papers. Hardly the actions of a brave guy from the upper classes volunteering to serve his country. Good actions for a future career in politics though, especially if he wanted to boast about having been in the military, because most people simply don't know the extent of his paper-shuffling career in uniform.
areenactor said:
Hell yes! The sooner all the guys and gals are back with their families and friends, the better! When that happens Steve, I'll agree a time with you and we'll pop a couple of beers at the same time to commemorate it.
intense tickler
TMF Poster
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 78
- Points
- 0
Iraq
Areenactor in response to your post Id like to go over it point by point ok?
First off it is true that we do have an all volunteer army and though the idea of bringing back the draft has been bantered about in congress, I for one would not like to see that come back. My point was that for the most part the people serving in the military are the children of the poor and working classes not the rich and powerful of this country. Does that seem a little unfair to you as it does to me? As for where I and others got the idea that there is a correlation between Sept 11 and the Iraq invastion? Well lets ask Mr Dick Cheney who was quoted verbatim in the Boston Globe on Sept 16, 2003 in an article by Annie Kornblast and Bryan Beder and I quote "The adminstration is learning more and more about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before sept 11" unquote. True the Bush adminstration never really claimed that Saddam was directly involved in the Sept 11 Attacts here but they have twisted the truth around to make it seem that way to bolster their own agenda.
Now as far was Bushes military record well I stand by what said, he did not serve lol. Oh yeah he was in the Texas Air National Guard 1n 1972 but my understanding is that our brave commander and chief potrayed himself as some sort of fighter pilot when running for governor of Texas when in fact he was suspended from flight for 2 years and was awol (did not show up) for a whole year. See the advantages the rich have? So no as far as im concerned he did not truly serve his country the way these young heros are now in Iraq.
So again I want to come to the question. Why are we there? Is the capture of Suddam that big a feather in our caps (excuse the pun lol)?
is this mere feel good musle flexing on our part at the cost of all those lifes? Is it oil? Is it really that Saddam is that much of a tyrrant? Hes not the only one nor the first or the last why him why there and why now?
Areenactor in response to your post Id like to go over it point by point ok?
First off it is true that we do have an all volunteer army and though the idea of bringing back the draft has been bantered about in congress, I for one would not like to see that come back. My point was that for the most part the people serving in the military are the children of the poor and working classes not the rich and powerful of this country. Does that seem a little unfair to you as it does to me? As for where I and others got the idea that there is a correlation between Sept 11 and the Iraq invastion? Well lets ask Mr Dick Cheney who was quoted verbatim in the Boston Globe on Sept 16, 2003 in an article by Annie Kornblast and Bryan Beder and I quote "The adminstration is learning more and more about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before sept 11" unquote. True the Bush adminstration never really claimed that Saddam was directly involved in the Sept 11 Attacts here but they have twisted the truth around to make it seem that way to bolster their own agenda.
Now as far was Bushes military record well I stand by what said, he did not serve lol. Oh yeah he was in the Texas Air National Guard 1n 1972 but my understanding is that our brave commander and chief potrayed himself as some sort of fighter pilot when running for governor of Texas when in fact he was suspended from flight for 2 years and was awol (did not show up) for a whole year. See the advantages the rich have? So no as far as im concerned he did not truly serve his country the way these young heros are now in Iraq.
So again I want to come to the question. Why are we there? Is the capture of Suddam that big a feather in our caps (excuse the pun lol)?
is this mere feel good musle flexing on our part at the cost of all those lifes? Is it oil? Is it really that Saddam is that much of a tyrrant? Hes not the only one nor the first or the last why him why there and why now?
Duty...honor...responsibility
Many of those who could answer your question completely are in mass graves in the Iraqi desert. I agree that we can debate the wisdom of unilaterally removing another government, but given the massive evidence of wholesale slaughter that's been running rampant and unchecked in Iraq the last few decades, I'd say the answer is:
Because we can
Because we should
Because SOMEONE needs to hold madmen accountable for their actions
Once again, not to beat the proverbial deceased equine, this SHOULD have been a U.N. operation, but they're toothless and timid at all the wrong times. Until there IS an effective world organization I guess the strongest nation the world has ever seen will have to continue to endanger its children and treasure when the circumstances call upon it do so...
As for only the poor serving in the armed forces, I can only say that this was NOT the case in the 70's and early 80's, when a majority of our service branches were comprised of middle class citizenry. I'm not up on current statistics, but even if true, the experience is a privelege in many ways, and strengthens those who endure and embrace it....*my 2 cents*.
Q
Many of those who could answer your question completely are in mass graves in the Iraqi desert. I agree that we can debate the wisdom of unilaterally removing another government, but given the massive evidence of wholesale slaughter that's been running rampant and unchecked in Iraq the last few decades, I'd say the answer is:
Because we can
Because we should
Because SOMEONE needs to hold madmen accountable for their actions
Once again, not to beat the proverbial deceased equine, this SHOULD have been a U.N. operation, but they're toothless and timid at all the wrong times. Until there IS an effective world organization I guess the strongest nation the world has ever seen will have to continue to endanger its children and treasure when the circumstances call upon it do so...
As for only the poor serving in the armed forces, I can only say that this was NOT the case in the 70's and early 80's, when a majority of our service branches were comprised of middle class citizenry. I'm not up on current statistics, but even if true, the experience is a privelege in many ways, and strengthens those who endure and embrace it....*my 2 cents*.
Q
Last edited:
MrMacphisto
Level of Lime Feather
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2002
- Messages
- 13,906
- Points
- 0
though it seems hackneyed at this point... why not?
Going to War with Iraq was stupid the second time around, period. Bush, Sr. should have finished the job when we went in the first time, but that's another discussion altogether. Anyway, back to the second time, fighting Iraq this time around was for oil, and more specifically, for Halliburton. Don't you think it's a bit more than just a coincidence that Cheney is the former CEO of that company and the same company gets a bunch of new contracts afterward?
As far as Saddam is concerned, he's just another patsy who we've played quite well. Killing him would simultaneously be an act of mercy to rid him of his shameful existence and also would be a great relief to those who suffered under him. Osama is a bit more slimy than Saddam, but we used him to our benefit against the Soviets. We also trumped his 9/11 plot by turning the tragedy into a reason to kick the shit out of his supporters and any other group we found "inconvenient" in the Middle East. Don't get me wrong; I hate Islamic extremists just as much as anyone else, but Israel is far from innocent. It's a shame we couldn't just go back in time and let the Jewish refugees of WWII develop a prosperous community in some random place like Wyoming where their neighbors wouldn't try to kill them, and they wouldn't get the urge to "occupy" the land of their neighbors.
Sadly, the U.S. will probably continue to create its own worst enemies, and the current nation-building going on in Afghanistan and Iraq are prime breeding grounds for new despots. It's going to take a lot of money and manpower we don't have to do this correctly, so the most likely outcome of all of this is that the current administration will do what it has to for a quick fix in time for the next election. I'm sure the hundreds of millions being raised for Junior's second campaign will be well spent broadcasting smiling faces of Iraqi youth, only to see many of the same children get blown up a few months later by some desperate a**hole with a bus bomb.
On a lighter note, Merry Christmas to all and here's Tom with the weather....
Going to War with Iraq was stupid the second time around, period. Bush, Sr. should have finished the job when we went in the first time, but that's another discussion altogether. Anyway, back to the second time, fighting Iraq this time around was for oil, and more specifically, for Halliburton. Don't you think it's a bit more than just a coincidence that Cheney is the former CEO of that company and the same company gets a bunch of new contracts afterward?
As far as Saddam is concerned, he's just another patsy who we've played quite well. Killing him would simultaneously be an act of mercy to rid him of his shameful existence and also would be a great relief to those who suffered under him. Osama is a bit more slimy than Saddam, but we used him to our benefit against the Soviets. We also trumped his 9/11 plot by turning the tragedy into a reason to kick the shit out of his supporters and any other group we found "inconvenient" in the Middle East. Don't get me wrong; I hate Islamic extremists just as much as anyone else, but Israel is far from innocent. It's a shame we couldn't just go back in time and let the Jewish refugees of WWII develop a prosperous community in some random place like Wyoming where their neighbors wouldn't try to kill them, and they wouldn't get the urge to "occupy" the land of their neighbors.
Sadly, the U.S. will probably continue to create its own worst enemies, and the current nation-building going on in Afghanistan and Iraq are prime breeding grounds for new despots. It's going to take a lot of money and manpower we don't have to do this correctly, so the most likely outcome of all of this is that the current administration will do what it has to for a quick fix in time for the next election. I'm sure the hundreds of millions being raised for Junior's second campaign will be well spent broadcasting smiling faces of Iraqi youth, only to see many of the same children get blown up a few months later by some desperate a**hole with a bus bomb.
On a lighter note, Merry Christmas to all and here's Tom with the weather....
intense tickler
TMF Poster
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 78
- Points
- 0
Saddams capture
MrMacphisto hit the nail right on the head and I agree with him.
Has every one overlooked the fact that Vice President Dick Cheney was the former CEO of Haliburton the company awarded a multimillion dollar contract with no kind of bidding war and paid for with our tax dollars?
As for the graves of those Iraqs slaughered by Saddam well there is not way to defend that kind of atrocity, but what about Uganda or Chile or Yogoslavia? Some of these dictators were allowed to live out there lives in peace in exile. Should we have invaded them too? And though Milosovec of Yugoslvia is on trail in front of a UN War Trails Tribunal others live in exile unscathed.
It really boils down to the political landscape and anyone who thinks it all simple altruism on the part of the current adminstration is naive.
As for the UN being "toothless well did you know that the UN is trying to establish a new International Criminal Court to provide a world forum to deal with such matters, but guess what? This court faces strong U.S. opposition and with U.S. money being 20 percent of the international monetary fund well its possible this may not even get off the ground.
The US simply does not have the resources to put out every fire in the world and when we do its for a reason and not always the one we are led to believe, it really boils down to simple economics and politics and possibly some true concern for the suffering.
MrMacphisto hit the nail right on the head and I agree with him.
Has every one overlooked the fact that Vice President Dick Cheney was the former CEO of Haliburton the company awarded a multimillion dollar contract with no kind of bidding war and paid for with our tax dollars?
As for the graves of those Iraqs slaughered by Saddam well there is not way to defend that kind of atrocity, but what about Uganda or Chile or Yogoslavia? Some of these dictators were allowed to live out there lives in peace in exile. Should we have invaded them too? And though Milosovec of Yugoslvia is on trail in front of a UN War Trails Tribunal others live in exile unscathed.
It really boils down to the political landscape and anyone who thinks it all simple altruism on the part of the current adminstration is naive.
As for the UN being "toothless well did you know that the UN is trying to establish a new International Criminal Court to provide a world forum to deal with such matters, but guess what? This court faces strong U.S. opposition and with U.S. money being 20 percent of the international monetary fund well its possible this may not even get off the ground.
The US simply does not have the resources to put out every fire in the world and when we do its for a reason and not always the one we are led to believe, it really boils down to simple economics and politics and possibly some true concern for the suffering.
MrMacphisto
Level of Lime Feather
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2002
- Messages
- 13,906
- Points
- 0
thanks
Thanks for the response, BigJim...
I'm taking a look at your link right now....
Thanks for the response, BigJim...
I'm taking a look at your link right now....
