Saddam sentenced to death (1 Viewer)

[frog12986]

Nolanistic makes a valid point.. the deaths that are occurring are not from reckless slaughter by the US troops, but rather the conflict between the two brands of Islam..

One of the most pertinent point to come out of this whole saga is that in some parts of the world, such as the Middle East, tyrants and autocratic governments seize and maintain power in order to maintain stability. These people are either too irrational to coexist peacefully and without conflict, or truly believe in their convictions (A trait that used to exist in the western world)..

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

I don't think he should be hanged. I don't think he had a fair trial at all!

There are other dictators in the world, so why did the US only go after Hussein?

I wonder if his dead body will be shown on the news, like the bodies of his sons were.......

Why was his trial not fair? What are you basing your opinion on?

The US went after Hussein because he was the leader of Iraq, the country they were invading.

Hang the bastard. Or crucify him upside down.
If he wants to be shot by firing squad, tell him those Kurds he killed would have liked to live a bit longer, then spit in his face.

 

[lengy]

So much hate for Saddam.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

So much hate for Saddam.

I understand that as a Chinese you consider the number of people he killed to be less than a small handful, but still,

http://www.arbeiterfotografie.com/g.../medien-und-krieg/2003-12-15-bild-halabja.jpg

there's 2 of the roughly 100,000 Kurds he genocide'd.

 

[lengy]

I still don't feel anything. =\

 

[onebytwo]

Nolanistic makes a valid point.. the deaths that are occurring are not from reckless slaughter by the US troops, but rather the conflict between the two brands of Islam..

which is a direct result of US troop presence

 

[lengy]

Ah well he's going to die anyways.

 

[gerhard]

theres lots of reasons to think the trial wasnt fair. i mean i dont think anyone really expected the trial to be fair. the first judge quit because he said he was getting pressured by politicians. second judge was fired, proving that they were getting pressured by politicians. amnesty and a few other int'l organisations have queried the fairness of the trial. good article in todays smh by paul sheehan that mentions all of this, cant find it on smh.com.au though.

also,

Quote:
Originally Posted by gerhard
its so funny how shit plays itself out for the congressional elections.

on one side, it leaks just in time that some huge respected evangelical guy is cheating on his wife with a male prostitute. on the other side, saddam verdict just happens to be fall a week before the elections.

Ha Ha, lets not forget the John Kerry comment suggesting that the US troops are idiots

How does this have anything to do with what I am saying? Jesus.

 

[frog12986]

which is a direct result of US troop presence

Actually its a direct result of the demise of the autocracy, whereby religious factions were controlled; which of course was an indirect result of military occupation and the overthrow of Saddam...

 

[frog12986]

Why is it that so many individuals on here, in the media and on the left in the political sphere are so eager to defend Iraqi terrorists, Saddam Hussein (and his henchmen) and the insurgents that cause 80% of the deaths that have occurred since the conflict began?

If it were John Howard or George Bush who had undertaken the actions of these groups, any death sentence, or severe punishment would be perceived to be just and fair

All the media and these sympathisers do is promote the cause of the individuals who commit these violent acts, and diminish the plight of the coalition of the willing to create relative stability and a working democracy.

Continually, the efforts are undermined by political pointscoring, and media coverage that remains ignorant to the positives (particularly as perceived by many of the Iraqi people) and hellbent on promoting the negative actions of the insurgents.

How can any nation, or group of nations for that matter, attempt to achieve its goals as a united front, if its own house is not in order. Whether the rationale for initiating the war was flawed is irrelevant.

The radicals attempting to repeat the protest era of Vietnam will yield the same results; failure and long lasting ramifications for the soldiers involved..

What is imperative now, and John Howard rightly says this time and time again, is for the tasks to be completed to the best of the ability of the forces within Iraq, and the contemplation of withdrawal should only be considered at a time when such is achieved.

 

[katietheskatie]

You do realise the majority of deaths in Iraq are not caused by the US troops... right?

It's the fact that the sunnis and the shiites are killing each other in religious warfare.

But lets pretend we've got all these American troops mercilessly slaughtering people WOOHOO.

I can't fucking believe people don't know this.

i do realise this, but it's not like there aren't tons of civilians deaths that can't be attributed to the american soldiers, not to mention the thousands of american troops that have been killed. and would the americans even be over there if it wasn't for bush? no.

whooo yeah i don't like helen clark, i think she looks like a fucking cross dresser and there are maori bikie gangs killing each other all over the place in new zealand. people are fucking sheep. excuse me while i go and bomb them in an effort to make them run their country like how i believe it should be run.

 

[darek_arsenal]

theres lots of reasons to think the trial wasnt fair. i mean i dont think anyone really expected the trial to be fair. the first judge quit because he said he was getting pressured by politicians. second judge was fired, proving that they were getting pressured by politicians. amnesty and a few other int'l organisations have queried the fairness of the trial. good article in todays smh by paul sheehan that mentions all of this, cant find it on smh.com.au though.

also,

How does this have anything to do with what I am saying? Jesus.

John Kerry Comments + Saddam Verdict = Republican Victory tommorrow...and no one gives a fuk about what u saying

 

[katietheskatie]

the republican party is for ignorant rednecks. are you an ignorant redneck, buddy?

 

[darek_arsenal]

Why is it that so many individuals on here, in the media and on the left in the political sphere are so eager to defend Iraqi terrorists, Saddam Hussein (and his henchmen) and the insurgents that cause 80% of the deaths that have occurred since the conflict began?

If it were John Howard or George Bush who had undertaken the actions of these groups, any death sentence, or severe punishment would be perceived to be just and fair

All the media and these sympathisers do is promote the cause of the individuals who commit these violent acts, and diminish the plight of the coalition of the willing to create relative stability and a working democracy.

Continually, the efforts are undermined by political pointscoring, and media coverage that remains ignorant to the positives (particularly as perceived by many of the Iraqi people) and hellbent on promoting the negative actions of the insurgents.

How can any nation, or group of nations for that matter, attempt to achieve its goals as a united front, if its own house is not in order. Whether the rationale for initiating the war was flawed is irrelevant.

The radicals attempting to repeat the protest era of Vietnam will yield the same results; failure and long lasting ramifications for the soldiers involved..

What is imperative now, and John Howard rightly says this time and time again, is for the tasks to be completed to the best of the ability of the forces within Iraq, and the contemplation of withdrawal should only be considered at a time when such is achieved.

Finally an intelligent and rational person, besides me, in the this forum

 

[darek_arsenal]

the republican party is for ignorant rednecks. are you an ignorant redneck, buddy?

No. The Republic party are for those with values. For those who are anti-isolationistic. For those who want to destroy terrorism. Maybe your the one who is ignorant...bitch?

 

[frog12986]

Finally an intelligent and rational person, besides me, in the this forum

No offence, but I don't really want to be associated with you.. No need to resort to offensive language if you can communicate your point..

 

[katietheskatie]

firstly, going and bombing every country who doesn't live up to the standards of the united states isn't exactly destroying terrorism, it's inciting it.

secondly, calling me a bitch is an awesome way to get your point across.

good work, champ. plus if you think you can handle it, you'll find that you can actually reply to more than one person's post at a time, as opposed to making multiple posts in a row every time.

 

[Ahmad786]

so here we have a bunch of little lame dumb asses, that are hardly satisfied with their own lives, and then without any valid information, go on to judge the world and the political system around them , in an attempt to feel so part of the community or just a pathetic way of considering themselves to be of the intellegent human species....

interestin....

u kids dont even have slightest clues of what evrything is realy about, yet so quick in producing useless opinions... who even cares of what u say? y not spend time towards doing something about it , rather den identifying the issues, if it is of such a matter of concern to ur fragile lil minds that hav jus hit puberty... go out dere,, find d facts thru experience,, and keep it to urself...

y do u even bother to raise tension amongst u and a few other worthless citizens by talkn about anytn dat is of no use in ur life? evrybody knwz all dis crapp.. its jus a matter of puttin it in paper...and dat doznt make u intellegent nor wise...read newspaper, watch the 9 o clock news,,,and talk like u thought of them ideas from the newspapers and t.v....and then fill ur idle heads with opinions is wat best suites u???

u dont consider dat tu b a shame? den u dont posesse no right to talk about anytn in dis world....

 

[360flip]

so what? saddam got what he deserved court's over he's dead already! now! next up george w bush charged with the murder of over 600000 iraqi civilians hahaha that'll never happen in the world as long as america is the world's superpower! THERE IS NO JUSTICE!!!

 

[gerhard]

Why is it that so many individuals on here, in the media and on the left in the political sphere are so eager to defend Iraqi terrorists, Saddam Hussein (and his henchmen) and the insurgents that cause 80% of the deaths that have occurred since the conflict began?

Why is it that so many individuals on here, in the media and on the right in the political sphere are so eager to set up a false dichotomy, whereby criticising western policy is equated with defending terrorists and dictators?