Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
but putting him in jail for Life would not have solve anything anyhow people.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
but putting him in jail for Life would not have solve anything anyhow people.
Keeping Saddam locked away for life, preferably in exile, would have prevented any further polarisation of public opinion. The execution has removed him from the equation and completed that polarisation. Old allegances will be cast off and new ones formed. People will have to choose their loyalties. The shadow of Saddam gone, the extremists and militias will now increase in power as the people see and accept them as the successors to the ba'athists. The militias are hoping that, now that the US have seemingly "got their man" (because, after all it was the US that wanted him toppled and captured in the first place), they will grow tired of the whole mess and pull out altogether. This is their goal, to terrorise the coalition forces out of the country. Bush is losing favour, possibly because of the Iraq war and the death toll (particularly the death toll as regards US service personnel), and it may be that if the militants push hard enough, the coalition will pull out, allowing them to go at it tooth and nail in a bloody free for all until a victor emerges. This is what certain people are hoping for. With the coalition forces still there they can't realise these ambitions. The Shi'ites especially being the stronger faction know full well that a win is pretty much guaranteed to them if the US and the rest of the coalition pull out of Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by {BHC}KingWarman888
I had to shake my head at this story.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.3da24bb.html
I'm not at all happy with where this is going. Saddam as a martyr? How messed up do you have to be to believe that? How messed up are we for allowing this to happen? What a mess. What a freakin' mess.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
He deserved it, though the way it was executed was shoddy and left much to be desired.
I do not accept the idea of capital punishment as immoral or wrong, either.
Far, far less than a million died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, and even then actually saved lives.Quote:
And while we are putting people to death for warcrimes - lets not forget the ones who Fire Bombed Dresden, and wiped out millions of innocent women and children in the blink of an eye in Hiroshima and Nagasaki - why arnt they on trial? Until that day - how dare we pass judgement on others.
CR
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Only hundreds of thousands.... Oh well that makes it ok then [sarcasm] :no:
I hear the holocaust numbers are exagerated too [more sarcasm]
Have you thought about whether it might be wise to do, not what is right, but what is useful? With Saddam out of the game, what purpose did his execution serve? What dangers did it bring? If he were left alive, how could he still be used? After all, leaving him alive now doesn't mean he's definitively going to be left alive, but killing him now means no turning back the clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
My suggestion of keeping him alive to threaten the Sadrists with would have been a better idea. It's not as if the Iraqis can do anything to prevent whatever decision you make - the VP proved that when he moaned about Blair rescinding a promise to pull out.
Quote:
My suggestion of keeping him alive to threaten the Sadrists
By that time, Saddam couldn't threaten or intimidate/scare anything.
No harm in trying. Why give up all your options just because you don't think they'll work? The 1st president of Kenya was once condemned by the British to several years of hard labour. Once we found the alternatives were even worse, we put him back in charge of the natives, with our backing. Despite our brutal suppression of the native Mau Mau rebellion, we've maintained fairly cordial relations with Kenya, because we were flexible enough and wise enough to backtrack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriarch of Constantinople
PS. Isn't the sig supposed to be 10K or less in size?
I never said that. I believe no war, no matter how just, to be pleasant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus Dogus
Point taken. However, it could be argued that his execution served certain purposes - to put the old regime to rest for good, to put the country on a new track unimpeded by the past, etc.Quote:
Have you thought about whether it might be wise to do, not what is right, but what is useful? With Saddam out of the game, what purpose did his execution serve?
Lemur, you're right about this being a mess. Gah, what a mess.
Saddam, for all his evilness, had a stiff upper lip. Perhaps it would have been more useful for him to spend his days in jail - though what violent attempts to free him would it provoke?
Crazed Rabbit
Saddam as Sunni martyr was a forgone conclusion.
It was the best means to capitalize upon his death for political value. The placards were probably printed up weeks ago.
In fact, had I been running the insurgency, I'd have had my Sunnis yelling "Moqtada" during the hanging knowing that somehow the scene would be broadcast.
Now, for the real question. Aside from a bit of verbal hoopla over the course of the next few weeks, will Saddam's death have made any material impact on the unfolding events of the Middle East in general and of Iraq in particular?
Saddam's murder is definitely going to motivate more people to become Jihadists to fight the infidels. That will clearly result in more tangible deaths of American soldiers and civilians who get in the crossfire.
Glad to see him go, although it took about 3 years longer than it should have.
You're stating the obvious, unfortunately there are some that see this as "justice" that needed to be done. These people can't see the bigger picture they simply look at the evil villain and want to see him getting his just deserves, if as a result of this worthless retribution, the situation in Iraq worsens with an increase in militancy, civilian and military personnel deaths, well that was just regrettable collateral damage and they had a "job to do", and will plunge on ahead regardless with the same tunnel vision approach as before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
If you're going to have a clean start, then you needed to put far more resources into Iraq than you actually did, or terrorise them so that a 100,000 strong occupation army is sufficient to intimidate the rest (say, by massacring the population of Tikrit). If you don't want to put in the boots, and you want to keep your hands relatively clean, you'll need to play the balance of power game. That game requires as much certainty on your part, and as much uncertainty on the part of others, as you can create. On one level, it means keeping as many options open as possible - you know what options you want to take, but the opposition doesn't. Removing your options for no better reason than justice is stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
I'm not saying the execution of Saddam was unjust. It's worse than that. It was stupid.
The problem is that you can't put old regimes "to rest for good" using these sort of methods. Once a leader is martyred the cause usually grows in strength, and if a new leader is found of a similar calibre the cause is often renewed. If you want to crush insurgency like this, in a country such as Iraq, you have to use much the same methods as Saddam used in the past, which makes you no better than he. The alternative is to continue as at present. Even if the supporters do evaporate, as some people seem to think they will, they will often, having lost their leadership and feeling embittered against the coaltion forces, join other militant movements adding to their numbers, and adding to the problem. The other militias will now fill the power vacuum and the average man on the street will look to them for representation. In such times, people often turn to extremism ("anything is better than the Westerners"). The main issue in Iraq is not forces loyal to Saddam anyway. Shi'ite militias look to be the next biggest problem, that really hasn't even got started yet.
I think his hanging and the circumstances surrounding it (such as prime minister Maliki declaring he wants to quit a.s.a.p.) have sent a clear signal that Shia militants are now in control of the Iraqi government, and that they are planning their own day of reckoing with the Sunnis. A very bad omen for all involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
No longer just one young boy dying as a direct result of Saddam's murder.
Several boys die copying Saddam hanging
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Future idiots taken care of - thanks to Saddam. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
EDIT: No personal attacks please. BGQuote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
*looks up how to add user to ignore list*
Easy. Go to user CP, ignore/buddylist and add the name in question and update the list. Works like a charm.Quote:
*looks up how to add user to ignore list*
Come on now, these darwin award nominees were 12 and 13 years old.
Either I was of superior than average intelligence at that age(edit: which is hard to believe), or these boys were idiots; as I certainly could comprehend the results of hanging myself.
I mean, what kind of genius sees a man die by hanging on TV, and decide to try it out himself?
Some of the members of this board are 12 and 13... such idiocy is insulting to their intelligence I would presume. :yes:
You presume too much, and not just the younger members!!!:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
What, nothing for me to edit, Dave? You're slippin' man. Wait... 'not just the younger members'... hmmmm. :)