Printable View
No, he's not dead yet. But the farce trial is over, the appeal has been rejected, it's only a matter of time... but it is of some comfort that he did not go the way of Milosevic by dying before he was to be executed. Ironic, pointless, redundant, but we're all emotional, aren't we?
Thoughts.
This sucks!Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
It is the will of the American people. Let this serve as a message to terrorists everywhere that nations holding WMDs will not be spared. The American people have spoken as one voice.
Oh well, where one falls, another hundred shall rise
Saddam Hussein remains the true president of Iraq. The zionist devils will be defeated.
Saddam is so used to dying.
He will reincarnate after 100 years to wage war against Bush's grandson.
And the vicious cycle goes on.
:eek2: :eek2: :eek2:
He should have been killed the day he was caught.
Too bad he looks like a kindly old uncle makes me feel sorry for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
Iraq now has possesion of him and he will be hung within 24 hours are the current reports.
I didn't believe you at first...Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
http://www.24dash.com/centralgovernment/14759.htm
Will Dick Clark host this Event?
Hmmm, perhaps he'll make it to next year after all:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchas...s-atlantic.php
Hmm, I herd it on the news that he was in Iraqui custody and that his lawyers filed that appeal, but quoting the article in your link...
I highly doubt that anyone will declare that he got an unfair trial. If its true that he is in Irauqi custody then it may be too late for the appeal?Quote:
"prevent the transfer of the Applicant into the hands of an authority that has indicated it will execute him after what has been deemed by a number of third party organizations an unfair trial."
Commandment #8:Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by 10 Commandments
http://milton.yourguide.com.au/detai...tegory=generalQuote:
Saddam Hussein could be hanged within hours, a senior Iraqi source told Reuters after Saddam's lawyer said US forces had handed over the former president to Iraqi authorities for execution.
US officials, however, insisted that the 69-year-old ousted dictator was still in American hands.
I've seen similar statements over the past half hour, so Its debate-able as to where he really is ATM.
Well they also said they were afraid of the backlash that probably will occur when they hang him so it could be a ploy to keep everyone guessing until they are finished.
True. There's also a law there that is supposed to bar executions from happening on a religious festival (which it will be when he is executed (depends on who you are in Iraq too, har har)).
Reports now say that he will be executed by 6AM BST/10 PM EST. Just a few hours remaining.
What do you think is going through his head right now? Is he thinking about the people he killed or the families of those people he killed who will be celebrating? Does he still deem himself to be a victim? Is he cursing his enemies one last time? Is he going to face it with dignity, or go down yelling?
That's what I'm pondering...
Ha ha... talk about a mismanaged judicial system
He'll be back, folks... FROM THE GRAVE!!! :eek2:Quote:
A trial in a second case, alleging genocide against Kurds, continues against him.
And... he's dead. The 'dam has broken. Hussein has left the building. Kicked the proverbial milk bucket.
:cry:
War does not determine that who is best, War determines that who is left :cry:
*rubs hands*
Eeeexcellent.
[/Burns]
See it was True! They were just trying to confuse everyone as to keep any uprising or attacks to a minimum.
Dont let the door hit you on your way out Sadam!
I don't think he was a nice person, but he was killed for a stupid reason. George have been sending troops to rid Saddam of the Weapons of Mass Destruction, capture him, and kill him for torturing his Iraqi people etc...
What about the weapons of mass destruction? What happens if a little boy picks them up :O
:confused: he was executed for his part in the killing of 148 Shia Muslims (plus there were two or three other trials due to start for the likely outcome would have been execution) - would you care to qualify 'stupid'?Quote:
Originally Posted by kregg
and it was his own fault. All he had to do was comply with the UN on the stupid WMD issue and none of this would have happend.Quote:
Originally Posted by kregg
I'm wondering the same.Quote:
he was executed for his part in the killing of 148 Shia Muslims (plus there were two or three other trials due to start for the likely outcome would have been execution) - would you care to qualify 'stupid'?
Something called 'pretext'.Quote:
Originally Posted by bushmobile
do the crime, do the time ... :cry:
the pretext for the invasion of Iraq was dubious at best (if that's what you were referring to), but Saddam Hussain was not on trial for being invaded.Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
Despite the debacle of the last few years, Saddam was tried in the an Iraqi court, found guilty, and sentence in accordance with Iraqi law - he wasn't killed for a stupid reason, however 'stupid' the war might have been in the first place.
He was dead either way. If he had complied, I'm more than fairly certain that Iran would have seen an oppurtunity to march in and give him a swift kick in the ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by System_Error
LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by bushmobile
We may have mixed things up, but yeah, I was referring to the reason for the invasion, which in turn, someone else was referring to when he said stupid.Quote:
- he wasn't killed for a stupid reason, however 'stupid' the war might have been in the first place.
just finishing off what should have been done back in 92 .. :eek2:Quote:
Originally Posted by bushmobile
I was in Syria at the time. We had black snow that winter. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
should have put out some big containers ... :bigyello:Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
We tried making a snowman in school, but our teacher stopped us. Something about 'racism' which I was too young to understand at the time.
What a shame. That would have been far more entertaining. Plus Bush could be looking stupid on other issues more entertaining than Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by crptcblade
:lol: :lol:Quote:
We tried making a snowman in school, but our teacher stopped us. Something about 'racism' which I was too young to understand at the time.
All I saw on the TV at that time was one minute George and Tony saying something like Saddam having weapons of mass destruction and how we were all going to die. Afterwards then American and British troops went in and messed up Iraq. They both got what they wanted (oil), and found saddam hussein, and then it's like "You've tortured many of your own people..."Quote:
Originally Posted by bushmobile
He did before but nobody did anything. Why now?
And say hello to my purple elephant folks
Saddam's final moments
http://www.cnn.com/video/player/play...execution.affl
Cellphone video of Saddam's body
http://www.cnn.com/video/player/play...dead.body.reut
Oh, we're better off now?Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
Ok, I'll bite, how are we better off? How was this execution of the war superior to what happened in 92?
Which brings me back to the question I've been asking all along: What is an attainable outcome to the current situation that could be considered a victory for the US? What will it look like? How will we know that it has been achieved?
Frankly, I have read a few attempts to come up with an answer to that question, and they all rely on "then suddenly a miracle happens." I am beginning to believe that no plausible, attainable, outcome to the current situation will be better than the situation pre-invasion. If that is the case, then the US has lost, and it's just a question of how long we drag it out before admitting it.
That sounds like "cut and run", and it is. Despite being a slogan, the "cut" part is short for "cut your losses", and is the only rational answer when the ONLY alternative is to take bigger losses with no possible gain.
I never thought we should have gotten into Iraq, but now that we are there, I think we should not leave until we have attained the best result that is attainable. Right now, I'm leaning towards leaving now, because, though it will be a disaster, there is no alternative that is likely to produce a better result.
As for Saddam, I find it odd that as of this morning, the media couldn't and wouldn't say that his death was confirmed. All I heard was that "a body was shown which was reported to be that of Saddam..." That's an awful lot of hedging. Are we not sure?
Sometimes I look at the long term possibilities and think 'it can be done', but then I remember where Iraq is located. The middle east is fighting and will always be fighting. Not to mention half the people we are trying to 'help' are against us :lol: (some for good reason, as Saddam provided more security) Nothing we can do. There's more troops guarding the borders of Iraq and South Korea than our own. I'm sick of the US fighting other peoples fights. We have more than enough problems on native soil. One of them is getting rid of this lame duck we call president :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
So what will joerge butch be remembered for?
He'll be remembered for this war more than Kennedy will be remembered for Vietnam (or Truman, who really kicked that one off).
who's we .. you livin it up in the US anyway ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
now you can watch the video ..
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,240257,00.html
Great, let us all get a taste of his blood.
I hope you realise I'm vegetarian...Quote:
Originally Posted by grilkip
You should be ashamed of yourself. :afrog:Quote:
Originally Posted by kregg
:afrog: :afrog:
Non vegetarians don't drink blood . :eek: .They relish the meat. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kregg
Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
Quit feelin' so sorry for yourself. Life's too short for that. There are plenty of homeless folks in the US. There are plenty of people living sordid, unhappy, squalid lives here. You don't get handed anything. Anybody who thinks welfare, or other assistance living is a great deal is welcome to try it, as far as I'm concerned. They'll leave the roles as quick as they can, or else they probably would end up there anyways.
You aren't the only one who has ever had it tough, and those of us who are "livin' it up in the US" are doing so only with effort.
im not feeling sorry :wave:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
you still in the US .. unless you dont like it there or something?
I wish I was living in a 3rd world country, it would award me with so much more perspective.
I have no complaints. :thumb:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Allow me to bite too. I may agree with you, but I am going to play devil's advocate here (or according to Chavez, Bush's advocate :afrog: ), and attempt to say why invading Iraq did have its benefits too.
The reason I think so is, this war was costly. Nobody is stupid enough to make an investment that large if there isn't going to be a return on the investment. They had to evaluate options and they must have known that there would be some benefit to this move.
Regional stability. Iraq is no longer a regional power. Look at all the other countries around it. Iran is the only remaining 'power' there. And Israel. All the other countries are nothing but petty entities that play with oil. Saddam gone, Iraq embroiled in civil war, the playing field has gone down.
Oil. You have to keep in mind, that in about 100 years from now, when the world's oil supplies have run out and nobody has done anything about it but will instead spend time bickering and laying the blame on previous administrations, the US's hold over the Middle East will ensure that their oil reserves last longer, so that they can spend time in developing a solution that would enable their transition from fossil fuels to another source to keep the country running. Remember, oil is everything. When it runs out, there will be wars between nations just for oil. By gaining a stronghold in the region, they ensure the future of a few generations down the line.
OK, that's what I can come up with for now.
History is filled with examples of governments undertaking massive, definitive action, which was directly in opposition to their own best interests. Saying, in effect, "nobody could be stupid enough to have...." Well, that may be true for an individual, but it is certainly not true for a group. Groups have no problem being stupid.Quote:
The reason I think so is, this war was costly. Nobody is stupid enough to make an investment that large if there isn't going to be a return on the investment. They had to evaluate options and they must have known that there would be some benefit to this move.
We have permenant US military bases on the east and west of Iran. That is how were bettter off. After 92 we did not. Think Germany after WWII. The US still has permenant military installations there. They came in quite handy during the cold war. The US Military will be in Iraq and Askrackastan for the next 30+ years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I would consider that a victory.
Nice country name there, MB. Took me a moment to pronounce it correctly. I doubt we'll remain in those bases, though. Perhaps Iraq, but not the other. We're already pulling back from there. Frankly, I don't think we'll remain in Iraq, either. Eventually, someone will wonder "what's the point?" We have had a presence over there in SA, and other smaller places for decades, so we don't really lose anything by not being in Iraq (this assumes that the current situation doesn't improve).
The US has pulled out of Saudi Arabia. I do believe the US still has bases inside of Kuwait however.
X
Oddly enough, us Limeys seem to be going the other way. I reckon we'll pull out of Iraq but stay in Afghanistan - the argument seems to be 'we can win one but not both' and Afghanistan seems to be an easier sell politically at the moment If you guys are going the other way then all we'll do is shuffle :eek2:Quote:
Perhaps Iraq, but not the other.
The point would be runways with open airspace all the way to Iran from all directions. Weather it is publicly annonced in the media or not, US/UK bombers will most likley be parked at the brand new airforce bases the US built in both countries until either we bomb Iran or Iran's government falls, whatever happens first. Not to mention that neither Iraq or the afghans have a military to defend themselvs and likley won't for a long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Looks like they just arrested the guy who took the cell phone video of the hanging. Any one watched it yet?