What's new

Saddam executed ( merged threads)

Only that someone was a tyrant and tortured and slaughtered thousands of people. Let's also remember that.

And yet more people have died to violence since the "Liberation" then the Saddam years combined.

Lets also not forget that if mass mruderers should themselves die for their crimes, Tony Blair and George W Bush are prime candidates for the noose.

theres also a world of tyrants and dictators far more disgusting them Saddam, yet the US isnt fallnig overs itself to "Liberate" those countries.


It gets to the stage where one wishes America and her allies that join her little expeditions would just stop pretending and say:

"We want X resource/strategic location from X country and X regime, so were going to invade, set up a puppet regime, bleed said nation dry of said resource, and then leave a broken husk of chaos and anarchy/tyrany behind once we've got what we wanted."

Its these claims of noble intentions and liberation and for the greater good which really gets on my tits. ☝
 
And yet more people have died to violence since the "Liberation" then the Saddam years combined.

So you're saying that more than a million (which is the estimated number killed under Saddam) have died since Saddam?

Lets also not forget that if mass mruderers should themselves die for their crimes, Tony Blair and George W Bush are prime candidates for the noose.

This is a good example of the kind of hate-speak that's been going on and why there's no civil discourse in debating policies. It is one thing to disagree with a government policy, it is quite another to make idiotic statements which equates moral equivalency to the actions of a tyrant with those fighting him.
 
Saddam was a merciless sick bastard,,,, one of the worst ppl on the world, yet this doesn't justify executing him. I personally am totally againt the death penalty, thank god here in Europe we did away with it.

And this particular execution was just sick. One day before new year, so close to christmas and also one day before the muslim holiday of Bajram. AND BY HANGING....what are we in the middle ages ??? At least shoot the guy. As to how he got a fair trial I will never understand. It was a mistake killing him. If the coalition seeks to better things in Iraq it should have started with this....sure jail the guy for life what have you but not executing him. Is just wrong for so many reasons. Why cause more rouse in such a sensitive time in such a sensitive region???
 
I don't see how his execution is going to help the future of Iraq. The country is so unstable at this point right now.
 
Well, I won't lose any sleep over Saddam getting strung up since that means one less dirtbag breathing our air. However, I will agree that the monstrous problems in Iraq remain even though he's gone.

As a former member of the Armed Forces, what I really hate is that so many soldiers paid the ultimate price for Bush's half-baked invasion which was nothing more than a desperate political ploy to ensure a second term in office as he had to make someone, anyone pay for 9/11. Since he couldn't (and still can't) find Osama bin Laden, Bush went after the next available target, which just so happened to be his daddy's old sparring partner, Saddam, using a phony pretense of Hussein having WMD's and being in bed with al Qaida as an excuse to invade the country despite having no clue what to do after bringing down Saddam.

While I'm sure Bush is dancing a jig on the White House lawn now that Saddam's having brunch in hell with Hitler, the quagmire in Iraq continues on, seemingly with no end in sight. Arguing over whether is was right or wrong to excute Saddam is a non-issue in my mind, he's no longer worth worrying about as the main concern is figuring out how to stabilize Iraq once and for all and bringing our troops home.
 
Eh..Maybe because he's not the cause of these problems...

I won't argue that. No "maybe" about it. The U.S. never should've gone into Iraq in the first place. In some ways, our presence just made things worse. The sooner we find a way to get the hell out of that minefield without the country going up like a powderkeg, the better.
 
"We want X resource/strategic location from X country and X regime, so were going to invade, set up a puppet regime, bleed said nation dry of said resource, and then leave a broken husk of chaos and anarchy/tyrany behind once we've got what we wanted."
Its these claims of noble intentions and liberation and for the greater good which really gets on my tits. ☝
Although it's important to note that the level of chaos and near Civil war the country is in now actually didn't start in earnest until a year or eighteen months ago. If it was the invasion itself that sparked a national uprising with widespread support for the insurgency to target allied forces not against their own people, there would have been no possibility of victory and no doubt the US would largely be out by now. Most early supporters of the war believe there were actions that could have been taken in 2003 or early 2004 that would have brought about greater unity and minimized the terrorist threat before it reached critical mass.

I'm not sure what resources you're talking about either because so far the allies have invested far, far more in reconstruction money if nothing else than anything they've been able to return on the investment. 😊
 
So you're saying that more than a million (which is the estimated number killed under Saddam) have died since Saddam?
This is a good example of the kind of hate-speak that's been going on and why there's no civil discourse in debating policies. It is one thing to disagree with a government policy, it is quite another to make idiotic statements which equates moral equivalency to the actions of a tyrant with those fighting him.
and it is absolutely another issue - to study the question from all perspectives (without rose glasses, though)
for those who`s bothered to search Global Voices do some collection
and there is some more
and another... i always thought that these are not tyrants who are the most dangerous and detestable, but those who are beside them and carry out orders absolutely aware of what they are doing... and afterwords betraying him, stepping aside and pretending that they have nothing to do with the issue
like the opening lines of this blogger
 
What get's me is where was the outcry and protests from the EU countries where executions are banned? Not a single peep. If there were any formal protests we didn't here about them here.

I'm sorry but I will not believe he is dead until I can see the video for myself. The blurry picture they posted on CNN of him in a box was a joke. CNN says that they do not want to show the pictures or video because it is too grusome, but they will continually show pictures of dead Kurdish babies and children that Saddam gassed. What kind of hypocracy is that? And for such an important "execution" what is with the shakiness and distortion of the video?

With all the pictures floating around of Saddam shaking hands with Donald Rumsfeld and the business done with Cheney's companies over the years I, for one, believe that the video we see was made with one of his doubles and that Saddam was whisked away to live a life in seclusion, much the same as I believe happened to Bin Laden if he is not already dead from natural causes. Remember, Saddam had two doubles during his reign that, without DNA tests could not be distinguished from the real one.

And to plan the execution on a worldwide holiday weekend where people are too busy to really take notice leaves me wondering also. Remember, TV is not called "programming" for nothing.
 
It is true - he did have doubles and one of them could be killed but to have him still alive would be problematic to the occupying forces (the USA and the UK).

It was essential to stop him revealing secrets about the west's past enthusiasm in supporting and arming his regime. Hence he was tried on the relatively minor charge of killing 148 people in the village of Dujail, after a plot to assassinate him. Far better to put him away safely for that rather than risk his exposing western hypocrisy, treachery and double-dealing.

The trial itself was a sham. A clear miscarriage of justice if ever I have seen one. The trial judgment was not finished when sentence was pronounced. Saddam's defence lawyers were given less than two weeks to file their appeals against a 300-page court decision. Important evidence was not disclosed to them during the trial, and Saddam was prevented from questioning witnesses testifying against him. Several of his lawyers were threatened or actually assassinated, and the trial was subjected to continuous political interference.

Any pretence that this was an exercise of due process is farcical. Of course Saddam himself was a brutal tyrant, but the kangaroo court that tried him lacked any serious legal credibility. Yet no western leader (or Arab one for that matter) was prepared to say so, or exert any pressure to have the defendant tried by an international court.

The execution was carried out under the auspices of foreign occupying powers, and with a clear western message to Arabs: we give ourselves the right to invade a sovereign Arab state and remove its leader because he offends us; we think you Arabs are incapable of sorting out your own affairs in accordance with our interests, so we will do it for you.

Saddam was held in US custody right up to the end and only handed over to the Iraqis for the execution, his body whisked away immediately afterwards by a US helicopter for a hasty burial. Yet this was billed as an independent decision of a "sovereign state", as if any such thing were possible under occupation.
 
Back
Top Bottom