View Full Version : Saddam Dead by Sunday
Divinus Arma
12-29-2006, 06:12
Saddam to be hanged by Sunday
Ex-dictator’s execution expected to be carried out by start of Eid holiday
NBC News and news services
Updated: 2 hours, 51 minutes ago
Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, sentenced to death for his role in 148 killings in 1982, will have his sentence carried out by Sunday, NBC News reported Thursday. According to a U.S. military officer who spoke on condition of anonymity, Saddam will be hanged before the start of the Eid religious holiday, which begins at sundown Saturday.
The hanging could take place as early as Friday, NBC’s Richard Engel reported.
The U.S. military received a formal request from the Iraqi government to transfer Saddam to Iraqi authorities, NBC reported on Thursday, which is one of the final steps required before his execution. His sentence, handed down last month, ordered that he be hanged within 30 days.
Etc... Article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16384738/)
An interesting development...
Will he die a slow and agonizing death...or will they let him fall from so high that his neck will snap?
Proletariat
12-29-2006, 07:18
As long we (Americans) are contributing to guys like these hanging high instead of propping them up high, I'm happy.
:hanged: :skull: :2thumbsup:
Do your Dictator's hang low?
Do they wobble too and fro?
Can you tie them in a knot?
Can you tie them in a bow?
Can you throw them over your shoulder like a continental soldier?
Do your dictators
Hang
Low?
Happy New Years Eve Saddam ~:wave: :party:
Prince of the Poodles
12-29-2006, 07:43
:thumbsup:
Samurai Waki
12-29-2006, 07:45
... I was just starting to enjoy his bizarre rants. :no:
Allah akbar. :yes:
They should fashion a good ol medieval gallows. Down with the fabric wire, use inch thick ol fashioned rope.
Samurai Waki
12-29-2006, 07:54
Yeah and while we're at it, why don't we hang him until he's nearly dead, cut him down, and repeat the process. ~:rolleyes:
Yeah and while we're at it, why don't we hang him until he's nearly dead, cut him down, and repeat the process. ~:rolleyes:
That would be stooping to his own pathetic level of inhumanity. You sir, are a savage.
Louis VI the Fat
12-29-2006, 08:08
You too can hang Saddam - in your own home! :beam:
http://www.flexi.net.au/~dmulliss/saddam/cutout.jpg
Alexander the Pretty Good
12-29-2006, 08:10
:laugh4: That's terrible, Louis!
Hang a giant saddam doll on your flagpoll.
Good riddance... he's a monster.
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
The soldiers who found him might as well have shot him the head when he came out of the spider hole. At least then the murder of Saddam wouldn't have tried to have been covered up via a totally illegitimate, fake trial.
Totally disgusting that some posts are making a joke out of Saddam's murder.
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
The soldiers who found him might as well have shot him the head when he came out of the spider hole. At least then the murder of Saddam wouldn't have tried to have been covered up via a totally illegitimate, fake trial.
Totally disgusting that some posts are making a joke out of Saddam's murder.
The trial was far from a farce. Sure it was near pointless when the end result of the trial was already known. His crimes were all well documented, all of them were well known. It's hard to cover up the fact that he brutally murdered thousands and torchered countless others. Any highly publicized trial with such a well known end result will end up looking like a circus.
It is far from disgusting to celebrate justice against a man who unjustly killed so many. It is human nature.
I personally look forward near years eve, to see the great Coliseum of Rome ablaze with lights celebrating the execution of this crazed psychotic murderer.
AntiochusIII
12-29-2006, 10:58
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
The soldiers who found him might as well have shot him the head when he came out of the spider hole. At least then the murder of Saddam wouldn't have tried to have been covered up via a totally illegitimate, fake trial.
Totally disgusting that some posts are making a joke out of Saddam's murder.Nav, you do realize Saddam was a totalitarian who violently and aggressively opposed the cause you seem to favor, those of the Islamists? He was also noticeably lacking in any religious convictions, as well...
Moreover, the trial was not a farce. It was a necessity. Now, personally I don't want anyone to die, not even Saddam, especially since he's already in captivity as is...
Louis: that picture is wicked! :beam:
Saddam is a monster, no doubt about that. He committed heinous crimes against Iraqis, Iranians, and Kuwaitis, and for that he should be punished. Even so I am no supporter of the death penalty, not even in his case. Though believe me, I have no pity for that man.
I am concerned however with the trial, and I do think Navaros is right when he calls it a farce. I think that many people outside Iraq want to see Saddam dead. Because then at least one figure of authority will pay for the current mess in Iraq. As if the death of Saddam will appease the insurgents.
But really, is injustice against the unjust justifiable? And if so, why was Iraq invaded at all?
Pannonian
12-29-2006, 11:44
Saddam is political poison, but we are praying for someone like him to take over, since that's the best chance we have of leaving an Iraq that satisfies our national interests. A secular ruler guaranteeing stability and a certain degree of social liberalism in Iraq, who is fanatically opposed to Bin Laden and Iran alike - what's not to like?
Personally, I would have popped him out of prison, given him 10 billion dollars and free use of coalition troops inside Iraq, and told him there's another 50 billion in regular installments over the next 10 years if he does a good job of stabilising the place and behaves himself. Simplest and cheapest solution to the problems we're facing over there.
AntiochusIII
12-29-2006, 12:00
Saddam is political poison, but we are praying for someone like him to take over, since that's the best chance we have of leaving an Iraq that satisfies our national interests. A secular ruler guaranteeing stability and a certain degree of social liberalism in Iraq, who is fanatically opposed to Bin Laden and Iran alike - what's not to like?
Personally, I would have popped him out of prison, given him 10 billion dollars and free use of coalition troops inside Iraq, and told him there's another 50 billion in regular installments over the next 10 years if he does a good job of stabilising the place and behaves himself. Simplest and cheapest solution to the problems we're facing over there.You know that'd be something America would never be able to do, of course.
It means they've just stormed in, took him out, waste billions (and thousands of lives), then put him back in. No politicians responsible for this would ever survive the storm unleashed upon him at home.
Sjakihata
12-29-2006, 12:29
The civilized crowd of the backroom sickens me. To read that people are enjoying even jubilating another individuals death makes me wonder how far our supposed western liberal-deomocratic tradition have actually come?
I will ask the mods to make sure that no triumphing is done (it has been illegal before here to do that) and I see no difference in this thread.
On punishments. You punish someone for a crime he has done, in order to return to the harmony or balance there once were between the perpetrator and the community. When he is punished that balance is once again restored and thus the actions of the criminal have been paid for or in other word has been justified and his actions forgiven. I do not see how mass-murderers and evil tyrants can ever be forgiven their actions and thus a punishment cannot be given. This is the problem Hannah Arendt raises in the book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Makes you think, no?
AntiochusIII
12-29-2006, 12:47
On punishments. You punish someone for a crime he has done, in order to return to the harmony or balance there once were between the perpetrator and the community. When he is punished that balance is once again restored and thus the actions of the criminal have been paid for or in other word has been justified and his actions forgiven. I do not see how mass-murderers and evil tyrants can ever be forgiven their actions and thus a punishment cannot be given. This is the problem Hannah Arendt raises in the book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Makes you think, no?Your premise of what punishment is, I'm sure, is a position some would contest, thus rendering the conclusion in dispute.
Pannonian
12-29-2006, 12:48
You know that'd be something America would never be able to do, of course.
It means they've just stormed in, took him out, waste billions (and thousands of lives), then put him back in. No politicians responsible for this would ever survive the storm unleashed upon him at home.
That's why the whole enterprise should have been under British control from the start. We've never been averse to u-turns and doublethink. Jomo Kenyatta, the loathsome Mau-Mau terrorist whom we condemned to years of hard labour, was the same Jomo Kenyatta who became the enlightened 1st president of Kenya, who maintained close links with the British after independence. Perfidious and hypocritical Albion we may be, but we know how to get results.
"I like the English - in England. The Whites must go. Africa is for the Africans."
- Jomo Kenyatta
Banquo's Ghost
12-29-2006, 12:49
I will ask the mods to make sure that no triumphing is done (it has been illegal before here to do that) and I see no difference in this thread.
I'm keeping an eye on it.
Celebrating the death of any individual is not a good thing, but as one who is implacably opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances, I have to recognise that Saddam's career is likely to provoke strong feelings of vengeance.
People understandably rejoice when justice is done unto evil men, however flawed the judicial process.
However, any continuance of the speculation about a lingering death or additional tortures will be frowned upon.
The civilized crowd of the backroom sickens me. To read that people are enjoying even jubilating another individuals death makes me wonder how far our supposed western liberal-deomocratic tradition have actually come?
I will ask the mods to make sure that no triumphing is done (it has been illegal before here to do that) and I see no difference in this thread.
On punishments. You punish someone for a crime he has done, in order to return to the harmony or balance there once were between the perpetrator and the community. When he is punished that balance is once again restored and thus the actions of the criminal have been paid for or in other word has been justified and his actions forgiven. I do not see how mass-murderers and evil tyrants can ever be forgiven their actions and thus a punishment cannot be given. This is the problem Hannah Arendt raises in the book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Makes you think, no?
Sarcasm aside, it is a joyess event when a wicked and despicable man is removed from society. He murdered thousands indiscriminately, torchered untold numbers of innocent. Western democracy has come far from what it was by just doing this. Western Democracy has removed a tyrant, instead of proping one up and giving them candy if their nice, we have removed him and he has recieved punishment for his actions against his countrymen. This in it self is an event worthy of praise and jubilation.
You bring up a good point on punishment. For mass murderes they can never be forgiven. As no punishment is enough, as nothing will be equivilent to their actions. The only suitable action is to remove from them what they have removed from countless others.
When the slack in that rope is gone and Saddam swings it will definately be a joyess event for those who have lost family members, for those that have been torchered by his secrety police. When Saddam swings, Iraqi courts will have proven themselves strong enough to try even a totalitarian dictator fairly. When Saddam swings it will go along way to making Iraq a more stable country.
The Coliseum of Rome will definately be a beautiful site this New Years eve.
Kagemusha
12-29-2006, 16:37
Killing will not end killing.But i wont miss him.
Killing will not end killing.But i wont miss him.
Just like imprisoning criminals doesnt stop theives. Executions serve as a deterent, a public statement of what happens if your caught.
By the way, Louis those print out quite nicely.
Death is appropriate for a monstrous dictator. This doesn't make me happy, exactly, but it seems like the right thing.
As an American, however, I think we paid too much in blood and gold for this outcome.
Pannonian
12-29-2006, 17:02
Just like imprisoning criminals doesnt stop theives. Executions serve as a deterent, a public statement of what happens if your caught.
But the situation in Iraq is tantamount to blowing up the house to catch the burglar. Catching the burglar is, in theory, a good thing. But once you factor in the costs, you start to think whether it would have been a better idea to let it go and claim from insurance. And from the police point of view, if the thief patrols his stretch of the nieghbourhood and prevents anyone else from muscling in, tolerating him might actually keep overall crime levels down. It's not ideal, but faced with a choice between the bad and the worse, it might be preferable to keep the bad.
All this is hypothetical, as the man's going to hang within the week whatever we say. Let's just hope that we find another Saddam pretty soon, and put him in power so we can get out of there before things get even worse than they already are.
Hosakawa Tito
12-29-2006, 17:08
Saddam is reaping what he has sown. Hopefully those that feel execution is not just revenge for the victims and surviving family members will never have their beliefs and resolve tested by being placed in a similar circumstance.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-29-2006, 17:33
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
No he wasn't. You know why? He wasn't giving a "fair trial" to the 100 or so Shiites he killed and gassed. Why do you even give these people trials? We know he's guilty, hang the guy. I think the execution method is highly innapropriate. Let's kill him by the way he's lived: by gas or gun.
Kagemusha
12-29-2006, 18:55
My opinion is that those Spec ops who found him from that hole he was hiding should have shot him on that hole and presented that body to masses.As ridiculous it might sound,some people will now see him as Martyr and try to avenge him.
Reenk Roink
12-29-2006, 19:15
The civilized crowd of the backroom sickens me. To read that people are enjoying even jubilating another individuals death makes me wonder how far our supposed western liberal-deomocratic tradition have actually come?
I will ask the mods to make sure that no triumphing is done (it has been illegal before here to do that) and I see no difference in this thread.
On punishments. You punish someone for a crime he has done, in order to return to the harmony or balance there once were between the perpetrator and the community. When he is punished that balance is once again restored and thus the actions of the criminal have been paid for or in other word has been justified and his actions forgiven. I do not see how mass-murderers and evil tyrants can ever be forgiven their actions and thus a punishment cannot be given. This is the problem Hannah Arendt raises in the book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Makes you think, no?
Sjakihata. I agree that the glee that some are portraying is weird, but I don't think it is "sickening" (just a natural emotional reaction that some do not suppress).
On the issue of punishment, you hold that punishment is used "in order to return to the harmony..." Others (like me) hold that punishment also serves a retribution function, and thus Saddam's execution is completely justifiable.
Navaros: Saddam was a secularist who used to put down religion by force when he deemed it necessary.
Sjakihata
12-29-2006, 21:17
Saddam Hussein may be hanged within hours, senior Iraqi officials and the ousted president's defence team said on Friday.
One senior Iraqi source told Reuters key legal issues had been resolved and he could go to the gallows shortly. Another official said Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was meeting key figures, including the Justice Minister, to agree the details.
Article (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-12-29T193028Z_01_PAR965996_RTRUKOC_0_UK-IRAQ.xml&WTmodLoc=World-C1-Headline-2)
Just to make things confusing: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6217725.stm)
US officials have denied reports that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been transferred to Iraqi custody, as speculation mounts about his execution.
Saddam Hussein's lawyers earlier said they had been notified of his handover ... "There has been no change in his (Saddam Hussein's) status," US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said late on Friday.
They're not going to advertise when custody is transferred or when exactly the execution is going to take place. They'll do it was quietly as possible and just videotape it for proof that it actually happened.
To make a big production of it ahead of time would only allow for the possibility of some loyalist whackos going on a killing spree to try and free him.
Just like imprisoning criminals doesnt stop theives. Executions serve as a deterent, a public statement of what happens if your caught.
.
yeah, despite what all psychological tests have shown us!
BTW: isn't he going to be killed after that Sjiietic (English word for Sjiïetisch?) holiday?
Goofball
12-29-2006, 22:41
No he wasn't. You know why? He wasn't giving a "fair trial" to the 100 or so Shiites he killed and gassed. Why do you even give these people trials? We know he's guilty, hang the guy. I think the execution method is highly innapropriate. Let's kill him by the way he's lived: by gas or gun.
He's a witch! Burn 'im!
How do you know he is a witch?
He looks like one! Burn 'im!
Honestly, are you kidding me? "Why do we even give these people trials?"
Are you seriously suggesting that death penalties (or any penalties, for that matter) should be able to be handed out without trial?
Give your head a shake...
:inquisitive:
Sjakihata
12-29-2006, 22:42
BTW: isn't he going to be killed after that Sjiietic (English word for Sjiïetisch?) holiday?
or before, which is within an hour.
Big_John
12-29-2006, 22:45
yeah, despite what all psychological tests have shown us!well, the nuremburg trials are what convinced me not to lead a populist revolution in canada, overthrowing the government, instituting a totalitarian regime and "purging" all the quebecois. i was just about to do all that, and then i was like, "man, if i get caught, they'll go straight nuremburg on me!"
so yeah, hanging saddam will be a great deterrent to future tyrants.
wait.. WHAAA!?? :dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:
or before, which is within an hour.
I don't think that will happen, as the president of Iraq would be present. Yet he will not be able to be there as he will return after the holiday. And I guess he already is gone by now. However we'll find out quite soon.
well, the nuremburg trials are what convinced me not to lead a populist revolution in canada, overthrowing the government, instituting a totalitarian regime and "purging" all the quebecois. i was just about to do all that, and then i was like, "man, if i get caught, they'll go straight nuremburg on me!"
so yeah, hanging saddam will be a great deterrent to future tyrants.
wait.. WHAAA!?? :dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:
So if you were setenced to prison for life if you got caught, you would do it?
He's a witch! Burn 'im!
How do you know he is a witch?
He looks like one! Burn 'im!
Honestly, are you kidding me? "Why do we even give these people trials?"
Are you seriously suggesting that death penalties (or any penalties, for that matter) should be able to be handed out without trial?
Give your head a shake...
:inquisitive:
Do you think there's even the remotest possibility that Saddam was innocent? That it was all just a big misunderstanding?
Divinus Arma
12-29-2006, 23:33
I am always amused by the fact that Atheists oppose the death penalty and Christians favor it. (Generally speaking of course.)
And so-called bleeding heart liberals actually give less despite being wealthier. http://www.arthurbrooks.net/about.html
heh heh
*Scampers away from pot whilst holding spoon.*
I am always amused by the fact that Atheists oppose the death penalty and Christians favor it. (Generally speaking of course.)
You're only capturing half of the irony there, DA. Not to utterly derail the thread, but to extend your comparison, Christian fundamentalists tend to favor the death penalty but oppose abortion. Atheists tend to oppose the death penalty and favor abortion.
I guess it's all in the timing.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-29-2006, 23:43
He's a witch! Burn 'im!
How do you know he is a witch?
He looks like one! Burn 'im!
Honestly, are you kidding me? "Why do we even give these people trials?"
Are you seriously suggesting that death penalties (or any penalties, for that matter) should be able to be handed out without trial?
Give your head a shake...
:inquisitive:
You're right. He never did anything. He never killed those Shiites or Kurds. He never invaded Kuwait. His regime never fell. Those were all propaganda lies. Really the whole witch thing made no sense. You don't recognize a crazy totalarian who kills by his looks, but by his actions.
YOU should be giving your head a shake.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
12-30-2006, 00:35
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
The soldiers who found him might as well have shot him the head when he came out of the spider hole. At least then the murder of Saddam wouldn't have tried to have been covered up via a totally illegitimate, fake trial.
Totally disgusting that some posts are making a joke out of Saddam's murder.
Did he give those Shiites A Fair trial? Did he give all the people he killed a fair trial. Last time I check, he didn't.:no: :inquisitive:
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-30-2006, 01:20
Did he give those Shiites A Fair trial? Did he give all the people he killed a fair trial. Last time I check, he didn't.:no: :inquisitive:
HEY! :furious3: Copier! :no:
:beam:
Strike For The South
12-30-2006, 01:21
less than 3 hours....
lancelot
12-30-2006, 01:25
Im actually gonna play devils advocate here and agree with the posters who have not applauded the trial and conviction of saddam.
I also think many here are missing the point- the issue is not if saddam is guilty or not...its about 1 million to 1 that he is actually innocent- the primary issue is the legality of the court to judge him in the first place.
Lets look at the recent history of Iraq-
1-US invades without even the decency of a formal declaration of war.
2-Invasion justified on the grounds of finding and removing WMDs.
3-No WMD were (or have been) found and 'surprisingly' the invasion then changes to a 'regime change' mission...ethically questionable and certainly miles away from the original plan (even if the original goal was justified...)
4-US occupiers install provisional government and then Iraqi people forced into a 'democratic' election process (regardless of whether they want it or not) where Ba'ath party members are not allowed to run for office...(good start for a democracy eh?)
5-Quasi legitimate (at best) government (with some heavy US poking) tries saddam.
So- some questions to ponder...
If saddam was the legitimate leader of a sovereign nation- who are we to pass judgement on how the law/the rules/whatever you want to call it
are dispeansed?
How can a court concieved in such a manner be considered true and just to dispense punishment?
Can anyone honestly say that the killing of a killer is ultimately better than adherence to and respect of- the law?
(please no - 'but saddam didnt respect the law' and such statements- coz that is not the issue.
Commence ranting! :beam:
Soulforged
12-30-2006, 01:31
Good riddance... he's a monster.
I wonder how many politicians and leaders throught history could receive that title. Yet there's only a few whom apparently had fell from humanity and ended being hanged, where others were praised.
My intention is not to defend Saddam, but to defend humanity. If this kind of appreaciation threads keep popping up I think it speaks for itself what an HUMAN can do and is willing to accept to feel comfortable. Not a MONSTER but an HUMAN.
In other news an human is going to be executed on sunday...
Strike For The South
12-30-2006, 01:41
Soulforged its A human not An human. An only applies to words that start with vowles:2thumbsup:
If saddam was the legitimate leader of a sovereign nation- who are we to pass judgement on how the law/the rules/whatever you want to call it
are dispeansed?
Good arguments. As for passing judgement on him. We have the power to impose the judgements that's how we pass the laws/rules. Thats how any court can pass it's laws. We are currently the worlds super power, we not only have the ability to pass judgement, but the power to enforce those judgments irrelevant of the sovereignty of that nation. This is how it's always been. Look through history, how could one pass punishment on Napoleon?
We have not only the ability to pass judgement but the strength to enforce the judgement thats why we can dispensed us. It has always been this way, it will always be this way. The strong do as they please the weak suffer what they must
Pax Americania.
Pannonian
12-30-2006, 02:39
Good arguments. As for passing judgement on him. We have the power to impose the judgements that's how we pass the laws/rules. Thats how any court can pass it's laws. We are currently the worlds super power, we not only have the ability to pass judgement, but the power to enforce those judgments irrelevant of the sovereignty of that nation. This is how it's always been. Look through history, how could one pass punishment on Napoleon?
We have not only the ability to pass judgement but the strength to enforce the judgement thats why we can dispensed us. It has always been this way, it will always be this way. The strong do as they please the weak suffer what they must
Pax Americania.
Then hope you don't upset too many people now, because when your time passes and someone else is in the top position, people will remember how you behaved when you were strong. We managed the transition without too much rancour because, in the end, we listened to others. For someone who was at the top for so long, the British aren't hated as much as could be expected. How will America be remembered by posterity?
Then hope you don't upset too many people now, because when your time passes and someone else is in the top position, people will remember how you behaved when you were strong. We managed the transition without too much rancour because, in the end, we listened to others. For someone who was at the top for so long, the British aren't hated as much as could be expected. How will America be remembered by posterity?
This is how it was how it always will be. The strong have the ability to impose itself on the weaker, it is human nature to do so. I suspect in the coming centuries as America's power waynes others will fill it's place and continue on the traditional role of superpowers. Granted that being a whole bunch don't try to fill the growing vacume at once, that causes chaos. But is generally what follows most of the Paxes.
As for the british transition, I suppose your right. Didn't go rancour, you handled it well. The middle east and the parts of your african colonies are civilized contributers to the world. Definately no hatred of the UK being bread in those parts. Just look at them, nearly UK jr's.
Pannonian
12-30-2006, 03:18
This is how it was how it always will be. The strong have the ability to impose itself on the weaker, it is human nature to do so. I suspect in the coming centuries as America's power waynes others will fill it's place and continue on the traditional role of superpowers. Granted that being a whole bunch don't try to fill the growing vacume at once, that causes chaos. But is generally what follows most of the Paxes.
As for the british transition, I suppose your right. Didn't go rancour, you handled it well. The middle east and the parts of your african colonies are civilized contributers to the world. Definately no hatred of the UK being bread in those parts. Just look at them, nearly UK jr's.
For an example of the transition put in place by the British, you might want to look at British and Italian Somaliland. Italian Somaliland is the part of Somalia you see in the news. British Somaliland is the part of Somalia that is stable, has a fusion of Muslim culture and British civil infrastructure, and wants independence to get away from the troubles of its bigger relative. You might also want to look at how many countries voluntarily joined the British Commonwealth, a vehicle for political and cultural discussion open to former colonies of the British empire (they weren't obliged to join). Heck, even some newly independent countries who weren't part of the British empire applied to join, when there were no tangible benefits beyond being able to share the political and cultural exchanges. We accepted the first few, but turned down the others when the organisation was becoming too unwieldy. Within the Commonwealth, smaller nations who might otherwise be ignored or bullied were able to form regional alliances to take care of their respective areas, in the knowledge that the rest of the Commonwealth would support them in this.
How many former British colonies hate the British as much as you imply? Even Iraq was quite Anglophilic before the 2003 war.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-30-2006, 03:36
For an example of the transition put in place by the British, you might want to look at British and Italian Somaliland. Italian Somaliland is the part of Somalia you see in the news. British Somaliland is the part of Somalia that is stable, has a fusion of Muslim culture and British civil infrastructure, and wants independence to get away from the troubles of its bigger relative. You might also want to look at how many countries voluntarily joined the British Commonwealth, a vehicle for political and cultural discussion open to former colonies of the British empire (they weren't obliged to join). Heck, even some newly independent countries who weren't part of the British empire applied to join, when there were no tangible benefits beyond being able to share the political and cultural exchanges. We accepted the first few, but turned down the others when the organisation was becoming too unwieldy. Within the Commonwealth, smaller nations who might otherwise be ignored or bullied were able to form regional alliances to take care of their respective areas, in the knowledge that the rest of the Commonwealth would support them in this.
How many former British colonies hate the British as much as you imply? Even Iraq was quite Anglophilic before the 2003 war.
One African country (don't even remember the name) still has close ties with Britain, even though they gained independance.
Pann that's a select few countries that have managed to remain stable after the british hastily pulled out. But for the most part they have collapsed. Breed quite alot of resentment. Just look at your old middle eastern holdings. The withdrawal/collapse of the british empire has brought little good to it's old colonies. But the collapse of any empire rarely brings good tidings to it's old subjects.
As for Saddam, the deed is done, good riddance. I hope he recieves a proper islamic burrial.
So- some questions to ponder...
If saddam was the legitimate leader of a sovereign nation- who are we to pass judgement on how the law/the rules/whatever you want to call it
are dispeansed?Indeed, what business is it of ours if a murderous dictator wants to gas hundreds of thousands of his citizens... :no:
NagatsukaShumi
12-30-2006, 04:27
Iraqi State TV has confirmed that Saddam Hussein is now dead.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
12-30-2006, 04:37
Iraqi State TV has confirmed that Saddam Hussein is now dead.
you beat me to it :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:
:dancing: :boxing: ~:cheers: ~:cheers:
you beat me to it :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:
:dancing: :boxing: ~:cheers: ~:cheers:
Funny, I thought I beat both of you too it.
Again I hope all burial rights are respected. May Allah now judge him.
That includes showing the execution on TV/youtube. May the countless thousands killed and torchered by this man rest peacefully.
Originally Posted by Navaros
This is absolutely sickening that they will be murdering Saddam.
He was not given a trial. He was merely given a farce masquerading as a trial in order to pretend that murdering him via hanging will not be murder.
The soldiers who found him might as well have shot him the head when he came out of the spider hole. At least then the murder of Saddam wouldn't have tried to have been covered up via a totally illegitimate, fake trial.
Totally disgusting that some posts are making a joke out of Saddam's murder.
I Totaly agre with you! THEY SHOULD never kill Saddam. Why should idiots kill him?Why don't you dump your idiotic "funny" ideas about his death elsewhere?! Its not funny to joke about someone elses death. Your edited by Ser Clegane president has kiled hundreds of UNARMED Civilians. But at least, he says they are free. This stupid trial was a set up. Gringos judged him, not his people. NO ONE IN HIS COUNTRY WANTS HIM KILLED because so many problems will freaking ARISE!
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-30-2006, 05:01
I Totaly agre with you! THEY SHOULD never kill Saddam. Why should idiots kill him?Why don't you dump your idiotic "funny" ideas about his death elsewhere?! Its not funny to joke about someone elses death. Your f****** president has kiled hundreds of UNARMED Civilians. But at least, he says they are free. This stupid trial was a set up. Gringos judged him, not his people. NO ONE IN HIS COUNTRY WANTS HIM KILLED because so many problems will freaking ARISE!
I hope you were joking.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-30-2006, 05:01
Double Post
scooter_the_shooter
12-30-2006, 05:21
I Totaly agre with you! THEY SHOULD never kill Saddam. Why should idiots kill him?Why don't you dump your idiotic "funny" ideas about his death elsewhere?! Its not funny to joke about someone elses death. Your president has kiled hundreds of UNARMED Civilians. But at least, he says they are free. This stupid trial was a set up. Gringos judged him, not his people. NO ONE IN HIS COUNTRY WANTS HIM KILLED because so many problems will freaking ARISE!
No one in iraq wants him killed...what about the thousands of kurds he killed:idea2:
Back to the democratic underground with ya!
Anyway I think they should have killed him but not now of all times, there is a muslim holiday tomorrow where they teach "amnesty and forgiveness" he is going to be a martyr just because of the time they chose to do this.:wall:
Alexander the Pretty Good
12-30-2006, 05:30
Darn those gringos. ~:rolleyes:
And shooting him on the spot would probably have made him just as big a martyr.
Divinus Arma
12-30-2006, 05:56
Yup. Blame it on whitey.
Stupid crackers.
It's always the white man's fault for something or another. Well... pretty much everything I guess. Damn white bread crackers.
KukriKhan
12-30-2006, 05:58
Language, everyone.
And respect for the dead, please. No matter how dispicable in life, a dead man diminishes us all.
scooter_the_shooter
12-30-2006, 06:08
And respect for the dead, please. No matter how dispicable in life, a dead man diminishes us all.
I'll have to disagree with that.
Language, everyone.
And respect for the dead, please. No matter how dispicable in life, a dead man diminishes us all.
Respect for the dead is there for the family. The loss of saddam diminishes nothing, in my humble opinion.
I Totaly agre with you! THEY SHOULD never kill Saddam. Why should idiots kill him?Why don't you dump your idiotic "funny" ideas about his death elsewhere?! Its not funny to joke about someone elses death. Your president has kiled hundreds of UNARMED Civilians. But at least, he says they are free. This stupid trial was a set up. ####### judged him, not his people. NO ONE IN HIS COUNTRY WANTS HIM KILLED because so many problems will freaking ARISE!
When you start spouting off racial slur's its best not to call someone else an idiot in the next sentence. Just some advice there.
Just read this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obit_saddam) article. I thought it was quite good- reads like an obituary...
Ruthless Iraqi dictator hanged at age 69
Within days of taking power, Saddam Hussein summoned about 400 top officials and announced he had uncovered a plot against the ruling party. The conspirators, he said, were in that very room. As the 42-year-old Saddam coolly puffed on a cigar, names of the supposed plotters were read out. As each name was called, secret police led them away. Twenty-two people were executed. To make sure Iraqis got the word, Saddam videotaped the entire proceeding and distributed copies across the country.
The plot claim was a lie. But in a few terrifying minutes on July 22, 1979, Saddam eliminated his potential rivals, consolidating the power he wielded until the Americans and their allies drove him from office a generation later.
Saddam, who was hanged Saturday at age 69, ruled
Iraq with singular ruthlessness. No one was safe. His two sons-in-law were killed on Saddam's orders after they defected to Jordan but returned in 1996 after receiving guarantees of safety.
Such brutality kept him in power through war with
Iran, defeat in Kuwait, rebellions by northern Kurds and southern Shiite Muslims, international sanctions, plots and conspiracies.
In the end, however, brutality was his undoing. Trusting few except kin, Saddam surrounded himself with sycophants, selected for loyalty rather than intellect and ability.
And when he was forced out in April 2003, he left a country impoverished — despite vast oil wealth — and roiling with long suppressed ethnic and sectarian hatred.
He ended up dragged from a hole by American soldiers in December 2003, bearded, disheveled and with his arms in the air.
Image and illusion were important tools for Saddam.
He sought to build an image as an all-wise, all-powerful champion of the Arab nation. His model was the great 12th century warrior Saladin. He promoted the illusion of a powerful Iraq — with the world's fourth largest army and weapons of terrible destruction.
Yet it was all hollow. His army crumbled when confronted by the Americans and their allies in Kuwait in 1991.
And in 2003, his capital fell to a single U.S. brigade task force.
Saddam's weapons of mass destruction proved a bluff to keep the Iranians, the Syrians, the Israelis — and the Americans — at bay.
He squandered vast sums on opulent palaces — a universe from the harsh poverty into which he was born on April 28, 1937, in the village of Ouja near Tikrit. His father died or disappeared before he was born. His stepfather treated Saddam harshly.
The young Saddam ran away as a boy and lived with his maternal uncle, Khairallah Talfah, a stridently anti-British, anti-Semitic man whose daughter, Sajida, would become Saddam's wife.
Under his uncle's influence, Saddam joined the Baath Party, a radical, secular Arab nationalist organization, at age 20. A year later, he fled to Egypt after taking part in an attempt to assassinate the country's ruler, Gen. Abdul-Karim Qassim, and was sentenced to death in absentia.
Saddam returned four years later after Qassim was overthrown by the Baath. But the Baath leadership was itself ousted within eight months and Saddam was imprisoned. He escaped in 1967 and took charge of the underground Baath party's secret internal security organization.
He swore he would never tolerate the internal dissent that he blamed for the party losing power.
In July 1968, Baath returned to power under the leadership of Gen. Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, who appointed Saddam, his cousin, as his deputy. Saddam systematically purged key party figures, deported thousands of Shiites of Iranian origin, supervised the state takeover of Iraq's oil industry, land reform and modernization.
Al-Bakr decided in 1979 to seek unity with neighboring
Syria, whose president would become al-Bakr's deputy, and Saddam would be marginalized. Saddam forced his cousin to resign — and then purged his rivals. Hundreds in the party and army were executed.
Saddam then turned his attention to the country's Shiite majority, whose clerical leaders had long opposed his secular policies. Saddam's fears of a Shiite challenge rose after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini seized power in Shiite-dominated Iran in 1979.
On Sept. 22, 1980, Iraqi troops crossed the Iranian border, launching a war that would last eight years, cost hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides, and devastate Saddam's plans to transform Iraq into a developed, prosperous country.
After the Iranians counterattacked, Saddam turned to the United States, France and Britain for weapons, which those countries gladly sold him to prevent an outright Iranian victory. They turned a blind eye when Saddam ruthlessly struck against Iraqi Kurds, who lived in the border area and were dealing secretly with the Iranians.
An estimated 5,000 Kurds died in a chemical weapons attack on the town of Halabja in March 1988. The United States suggested at the time that the Iranians might have been responsible.
Only two years after making peace with Iran, Saddam invaded Kuwait, whose rulers had refused to forgive Iraq's war debt and opposed increases in oil prices that Iraq desperately needed to recover from the conflict with Iran.
The
United Nations imposed economic sanctions on Iraq and a U.S.-led coalition attacked. On Iraqi radio on Jan. 17, 1991, Saddam predicted "the mother of all battles."
But the Iraqis were driven out of Kuwait. The 1991 war triggered uprisings among Iraq's Shiites, brutally crushed by Saddam, and the Kurds, who carved out a self-ruled area under U.S. and British air cover.
In April 1990, Saddam hinted that he had secret super-weapons and declared: "By God, we will make the fire eat up half of
Israel." During the
Gulf War he fired Scud missiles into Israel, and during the Palestinian uprising a decade later he paid cash grants to families of suicide bombers.
The U.N. sanctions remained in effect until his regime collapsed in 2003, devastating Iraq's economy and impoverishing a people who had been among the most prosperous in the Middle East.
The Sept. 11 terror attack on the U.S. focused attention on Saddam as a sponsor of terrorism. His refusal to meet U.N. demands for full disclosure of his illegal weapons program provided a justification for war.
An American-led force invaded on March 20, 2003. Within three weeks, Iraq's army had collapsed. Saddam was captured the following December.
As he went on trial in October 2005, his country engulfed in an anti-American insurgency, Saddam tried to use the proceeding to rail against the U.S. presence in Iraq in hopes of winning the approval of history if not an acquittal. But as trial dragged on, his manner calmed as he realized the inevitability of conviction and the death sentence that followed.
Tribesman
12-30-2006, 07:00
Well now , does anyone think that this yet another milestone on the roundabout to nowhere will make the slightest bit of difference ?
Or will it resolve this wondeful wasteful farce into something remotely positive ?
The crazy thing about this is that in relation to this secific set of charges he is being hung for is something that was basicly not against the laws of the country , and not really against any international laws to which the counrty was obligated .
For his real absolute murderous scum crimes he hasn't even been tried , because those trials would put his accomplices in the frame as well .
So for all those "yeah justice has been done " fools , what the hell do you think your own governments complicity in those crimes makes your governments ? would you like to string them all up for the bloody slaughter carried out for their damn political interests .
Sick warped damned hypocrits , the bloody lot of them .
Oh and before someone comes out with the rather pathetic "ooooo you love Saddam you do".
I might repeat the essence of what that Scottish gob----- said to the senate committee ,though it applies to many governments not just the representatives of the government which the dickhead was addressing .
You armed him when he was murdering , you supported him when he was murdering , you financed him when he was murdering ,you gave him the targets of whom to slaughter , you even waived your own rules to allow him to slaughter even more people .
If you want some sort of vengeful justice then line your bloody governments up in front of the noose because accesory to murder is just the bloody same as murder.
.
Wel forgiveme , did I spell accesory right ordoes ithavemor letters ?
You armed him when he was murdering , you supported him when he was murdering , you financed him when he was murdering ,you gave him the targets of whom to slaughter , you even waived your own rules to allow him to slaughter even more people .
Even if these assertions are allowed to stand, so what? As the Gyro Captain so wisely said in The Road Warrior, "It's my snake, I trained it, I'm going to eat it!"
Prince of the Poodles
12-30-2006, 07:29
Well now , does anyone think that this yet another milestone on the roundabout to nowhere will make the slightest bit of difference ?
Or will it resolve this wondeful wasteful farce into something remotely positive ?
The crazy thing about this is that in relation to this secific set of charges he is being hung for is something that was basicly not against the laws of the country , and not really against any international laws to which the counrty was obligated .
For his real absolute murderous scum crimes he hasn't even been tried , because those trials would put his accomplices in the frame as well .
So for all those "yeah justice has been done " fools , what the hell do you think your own governments complicity in those crimes makes your governments ? would you like to string them all up for the bloody slaughter carried out for their damn political interests .
Sick warped damned hypocrits , the bloody lot of them .
Oh and before someone comes out with the rather pathetic "ooooo you love Saddam you do".
I might repeat the essence of what that Scottish gob----- said to the senate committee ,though it applies to many governments not just the representatives of the government which the dickhead was addressing .
You armed him when he was murdering , you supported him when he was murdering , you financed him when he was murdering ,you gave him the targets of whom to slaughter , you even waived your own rules to allow him to slaughter even more people .
If you want some sort of vengeful justice then line your bloody governments up in front of the noose because accesory to murder is just the bloody same as murder.
.
Wel forgiveme , did I spell accesory right ordoes ithavemor letters ?
Why are you crapping on the parade?
You would think you would be happy that the person with the most responsibility for the horrible crimes that took place in Iraq has had justice served to him via the noose.
Tribesman
12-30-2006, 07:54
Even if these assertions are allowed to stand, so what?
Can you see any possible reason why those assertions would not stand ?
If not then they stand and so do the comments I made .
Why are you crapping on the parade?
well it could be for the fun of provoking thought rather than just mindless knee jerk happy feely crap
Or it could be just downright contrariness , but you will have to read what was written in this and the lastpost to decide , BTW read exactly what is written , no going off and giving the "he claimed something" when it is clearly visible that he didn't
Sorry I didn't realise it was a parade .
Am I raining on the parade ?
Is that similar to you pissing on my back and telling me that its raining ?
You would think you would be happy that the person with the most responsibility for the horrible crimes that took place in Iraq has had justice served to him via the noose.
OK leaving aside my objections to the death penalty , if you want to be happy with justice then make sure that every bugger that is complicit in those horrible crimes gets served up in front of the noose , or at least make the effort .
Until then ......what the hell are you parading for ?
Wow I found out how to use spoiler tags (hopefully):laugh4:
For my next trick I might try sentance structure , spelling and punctuation .
You damn lucky bar stewards who got that skoolin have a big head start on me:2thumbsup:
edit OK perhaps the spoiler tags coud be better placed , but heyI was having fun with this wonderful new thingemewatsit
Samurai Waki
12-30-2006, 10:03
hmm...
Well I never really knew the guy personally anyways :shrug:
I lament humanity, in all of it's cruellest forms.
Ser Clegane
12-30-2006, 10:04
This certainly went downhill.
Didn't see that one coming... :shifty:
Closed
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.