Saddam Hussein needs to go - give me one good reason why not

[Supermodel]

Can anyone give me one good reason why Saddam Hussein should be left in power in Iraq?

Here are good reasons for the US to take his sorry ass out now:

He has murdered tens of thousands of his own people using chemical and other weapons.
He is in violation of peace treaties and UN weapons restrictions
He has weapons of mass destruction that he intends to use to attack other nations
He already invaded Kuwait and other than losing his armed forces and having econ sanctions, the bastard hasn’t been made to pay
He is a major threat to all his neighboring countries because of his clear disregard for anyone’s right to self-determination.
He has supplied terrorists with weapons and training

Why the US? …….Who else will do it?

Why now? ……..Why not now?

Give peace a chance?……What kind of peace does Iraq have?

On this BB, folks have accused the US of errors of Omission and Comission.

Omission: failing to stop Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Amin, Noriega, Pinochet

Comission: Support to right wing factions in South America, Africa, Asia; and prosecuting war efforts in Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, Kuwait, Vietnam, Korea, and in the European and Pacific theatres.

So it’s clear that fighting or delaying fighting have equally devastating effects.


!!!Soccermoms for Che!!!

[Anonymous]

Hes got a nice moustache................na thats not a reason fuck it just take him out, but dont the people in Iraq love him, anytime i see him he is surrounded by people, if they like him well he should stay there
????

[komsomol]

Yeah it seems he has brainwashed people through control of the press, a bit like Hitler then. Its all mass hysteria.

[TheDerminator]

The military-industrial complex thrives on fear. If Sadaam goes, it is one more step down the slippery slope of falling profits. The fall of the Soviet Empire was bad enough. How hard to want to hit them?
Maybe as long as there are many foreign enemies, the leftwing in the USA is on safer ground! If the external were to vanish, it might be the turn of the internal!
Who knows? Except the US could have got rid of the bastard during the Iraq-Kuwait war. I know if I was a cynic and had shares in the military industrial companies, I would be a long-termist. We need enemies, and Sadaam is the biggest one left. What about my portfolio in the New York stock exchange.
I mean there is no reason to lose money out of Sept 11? Taking ideals a bit too far!

Be afraid, be very afraid...

Resistance is Futile!

May the Force be with [b]U[b]!

derminated

[Moskitto]

He has murdered tens of thousands of his own people using chemical and other weapons.

Over a million excess deaths in Iraq since 1969.

[Guest]

Thats me Derar....

anyways . about saddam

Since the irani-iraqi war , that was ofcourse started by the US ( cia ) ....... and ofcourse u all know how the US funded saddam with weapons ... lots of them , the ppl of iraq were against saddam atleast 80 % of them ,and saddam is just onother case of the US's selfishness and stupidity ..... but after he started producing some high tech weapons , and ofcourse u all heard about the largest cannon on earth that was saddam going to make .... the US got pissed off , and found in iraq a threat to its interests . again the cia played with their cards , and gave iraq the green light to invade kuwait , and after they did ..... the USA acted like a hero and bombed the hell out of iraq . but their plan wasnt 100% complete ...... coz saddam was still in power , but ofcourse in a country demolished by US bombs , and a country with no weapons .

so the US then put sanctions on iraq to remove saddam from power ..... and if saddam killed thousands , then u gotta know that the US killed millions by the sanctions and the constant bombing . and since then 90% of ppl in iraq now support saddam !!!!

not becoz he brainwashed them , but becoz they see in him a leader that is gonna defend their country..... till the end , and will save their pride , even if it costs lives .

SO NO TO BOMBING IRAQ , NO TO THE KILLING OF CIVILIANS , AND YES TO LIFTING THE SANCTIONS OF IRAQ that already have killed a million of children since 1991.

[CheGuevara]

I think capitalist soccermoms should be less vocal about their support for Che, as they are giving him a bad name. You think you can fool us and pull the wool over our eyes by tacking your little catchphrase on the end, well it isn't going to work on all of us princess.

So, Iraq can't have the same weapons that the US has, eh? He's not even a threat to us. The only way he has to get a nuke here is probably by means of a fishing boat. We should put in another dictatorship in his place, except one that will kiss the US's ass, right? From 1991 to 1998, malnutrition and malnutrition related diseases killed 5,000 children under five per month. That's just in that very limited age group alone. Saddam's a shithead, but why more war and suffering if the US is going to put another shithead in his place? The Gulf War bombing killed thousands of Iraqi civilians, and that was in one where they were just trying to "liberate" Kuwait and restore its "rightful" govt that would give the US the cheapest oil prices. There would be hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties in a drive on Baghdad with the way the US runs its military campaigns, preferring hundreds of enemy civilian deaths to the death of one American soldier. Saddam has definitely brainwashed many people, I don't know to what extent however. Colin Powell said Iraq needs a "regime change." Regime has a certain connotation to it that I don't exactly like. Look at the Mubarak government in Egypt. Gee, he sure is friendly to the US, but are his people anymore free than under Nasser? Probably not, probably even less so.

Supermodel, you want to suck GWBush's cock, go somewhere else. We don't need to see or hear it here.

[El Che]

Guevara is right. Personaly I have said this before behind closed doors and I want to say it now in front of you, I object to your posting outside the SxC forum due to your capitalist mentality. But it seems the majority of the members think your funny or something, dont ask me why... So they want you to stay... again dont ask me why... Anyway the least you could do is learn, and you should have learned by now to recognise imperialism, and imperialist hypocrisy and brutality. You should have learned to recognise american opression around the world, and also to recognise CNN propaganda for what it is.

[MJM]

Here is a prime example of why everyone hates the US. Iraq is not your fucking country SM and until you go and live there you have no right to pass judgement on Sadaam or anything at all. I've never said the US should involve itself in any other countries affairs and I've never said they stand idly by. I don't give a flying fuck about what they do until they start fucking over other countries.
As far as Stalin goes( the reasons why I hate Stalin bashing as it leads to fools like this using it against us) I would accuse him and the USSR of omission when they failed to start an international revolution to free us all from the likes of you.

(Edited by MJM at 12:58 pm on Mar. 15, 2002)

[I Will Deny You]

"Why not?" does not make a good foreign policy, Supermodel. We can't just overthrow another government because we don't like them.

So I'm no fan of Hussein, but we can't tell him he's not allowed to stay because of the "War on Terror."

[Son of Scargill]

After the invasion of Iraq,during the gulf war,both the British and French forces wanted to push on to Baghdad.They believed they could have toppled Saddam ,and the B'Ath party at that point.Whether that would have happened is now a matter of conjecture.Stormin' Norman ordered them to halt,and then pull back.Methinks TheDerminator has a big point.
Saddam Hussien is a totally despicable character,but if it wasn't for his little"faux pas"he would still be attending garden parties with George W.I think these two bastards have more in common than you think.
Also,the american weapons inspector(apologies,I forget his name),believes that Iraq is no threat to world peace in the state it's in.But let's not let that get in the way of some fireworks,the high-level bombing type.Everyone loves fireworks,yee-ha!Onwards to another election victory.
My solution-George W.backs down,apologises for the grief he's caused to the civillian population of Iraq.Flys to Baghdad to sign very generous peace accord with Saddam.After shaking hands,GWB opens his jacket to reveal a shed load of semtex,laughs maniacally...BOOM!....two bastards for the price of one bomb.
Well,a man has to hope.

[Derar]

The un inspectors in 1998 were ordered by the US to leave iraq immediatly without any reason .
and after they did the usa said that iraq has kicked out the un investigators , and bombed it along side their dog ( British goverment ).......
The iraqi authorities also found out that every place the investigators were at , was bombed accurately ...... which means some of them were just spies working with the cia .

[pastradamus]

what about the fact that he has great suport form his people?
well he has won the last group of elections.
And has won them by millions of votes.

[Supermodel]

So, CheGuevara, I forgot, it pisses you off when I post spanish. Yeah, a real subversive threat on Che's board, that is. I forgot that only socialists can pretend to speak spanish.

No my point is simply that there are a lot of critics of the US who will criticise anything the US government does at this point, action or lack thereof, Clinton or Bush.

Yes, even soccermoms can see the good in Che, Lenin, Reagan, Yoko Ono, and Monica Lewinski. I know not to prostitute my sense of good and evil because of blind partisan loyalty. I'm not the blind loyal cocksucker on this board.

Saddam is a bloody tyrant whose time was up long ago and regardless of whatever or whoever put him in power, the US is going to take him out. Bush will be the leader that finally takes this bastard down, and this enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend bullshit is piling up real high.......

[CheGuevara]

I'd be careful who you suggest is "pretending to speak spanish." It pisses me off because it's part of your cute little act, along with "soccermoms for che" which you extraneously stuck in at the end of your post in order to try to cool our tempers after reading your blatantly capitalist post.

Well, knowing Bush, Saddam has nothing to fear. Look how well Bush has done with Bin Laden.

Yes, this enemy of my enemy bullshit has been piling up for a long time. I'm glad princess has taken the time to come out of her palace and see that. It's been going on for the last 50 years, and it's called US foreign policy.

(Edited by CheGuevara at 5:01 pm on Mar. 15, 2002)

[peaccenicked]

http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/mettoc.htm
this site alone sholud give all who support US military intervention, pause for thought.
Albright's comment that the lives of 500,000 children
were worth it in the cause to get rid of Saddam is another. Then maybe some real thought about what America is actually doing to the world could emerge.

[Supermodel]

I have to completely agree with you CheGuevara on this one. The primary flaw of US foreign policy has been the enemy-of-ya know. Yet it continues to this day. Why is it so hard for politicians to grab onto the truth that this policy is an unmitigated disaster????

Now I am glad to see you recognize me as a princess. That Borg shit is so...shall we say....vulgar (LMAO)!!

Hey, I just sent an email to congresswoman Iliana Ros-Leitnen about her poke-in-the-eye politics against Castro. Since the US is sheltering the Miami Mafia, I guess Bush should point those nukes due south...maybe Castro can help us out with that "war on terrorism" LOL

Oh wait, George is back, he'll be lookin for a blow job right about now.....

(Edited by Supermodel at 5:51 pm on Mar. 15, 2002)

[Bakunjin]

Oh, come on Supermodel... if anyone is causing so much trouble in Iraq, it is USA... Do you know that Iraq is not allowed to import MEDICINE (including other sanctions)? And it is all because of sanctions...Who put sanctions? Uncle Sam... And when someone wanted opinion from Madeleine Albright about that fact she said: "If we consider all the facts, I think we did the right thing"!!!!
Why not USA? Who else? i'll tell you why not. BECAUSE THEY INSTALLED HIM! And interest of US is that Saddam is there, so they can always bomb Iraq and bring on more forces in Arabia, to be closer to oilfields they want! that's why they didn't help oposition in Iraq in late 90s to gain power by rebbelion...
you know that US bombs Iraq every day? But that isn't shown in western countries?

[Derar]

Saddam in power , onother leader in power , donkey in power ...... it wont matter ...... the USA will still come up with something to stay in the Arabian gulf .... next to the precious oilfields in saudi arabia .

[PunkRawker677]

SM - your 'theory' is all flawed

<He is in violation of peace treaties and UN weapons restrictions>
and why does anyone have the right to search another coutry for weapons.. the US has enough nukes to overkill the planet 100 times.. no one comes and threatens us to get rid of them, so stay the FUCK out of everyone elses business!

<He has weapons of mass destruction that he intends to use to attack other nations>
We have nukes too, and everything else PLUS a bag of chips.. and WE HAVE USED THEM!!!! TWICE!!!! and we still have the intention of using them if we need too.. so, whats your problem??

<He already invaded Kuwait and other than losing his armed forces and having econ sanctions, the bastard hasn’t been made to pay>
we killed indians, stole their land, placed goverments in a bunch of coutries, and more.. so.. wheres your point?
i have yet to find a logical one..

<He is a major threat to all his neighboring countries because of his clear disregard for anyone’s right to self-determination. > and the US is no threat to its neighboring coutries, using biological warfare to destroy sugar crops and swine population in cuba, but thats okay right?? cause they are the US.. damn if someone else even owns the ingridients...

<He has supplied terrorists with weapons and training>
as have we... the IRA, and the taliban itself!

so.. SM.. why the fuck are u on this board if you support US policies??????

[Supermodel]

Punky, I just support this particular action. If you want to support Saddam, fine.

I'm just wondering what alternatives anyone can offer, other than the obvious "leave him alone". That in itself is an action. I guess he has his apologists who think that is the right course of action. But I don't see the logic in leave him alone because the US sucks/put him there/invaded Normandy/rouuted the natives.

Did I miss a memo or something? Since when did being a lefty mean hating america and supporting anything in contrast? Are you so polarized that your vision does not permit a clear view of Saddam?

[guerrillaradio]

Quote: from Supermodel on 8:02 pm on Mar. 14, 2002
He is in violation of peace treaties and UN weapons restrictions
He has weapons of mass destruction that he intends to use to attack other nations


I wouldn't believe everything the Bush admin tells you. I agree that Saddam is a tyrant, but if we remove him, then someone else with similar ideas will take power. You can't just run around the world putting it to right. Maybe I would agree with a removal of Saddam if it produced a more liberal regime, but the question is where do the US stop?? That was one of my worries about the Afghani war.

[I Will Deny You]

If the US takes Sadaam out, that will obviously be setting a precedent. Because after Iraq will be Iran (which isn't too different from our good friend Saudi Arabia in many ways) and North Korea (which is like China, only smaller and not on the US's good side). Then, before you know it, we'll be overthrowing all of the governments we don't like. (But the regimes in control of Saudi Arabia and China will be untouched, of course.) I admit it's been a while since I sent a thank you card to the White House, but I don't hate America. I realize that America is better than Iraq--duh.

But until Iraq attacks us, we have no right to take Sadaam out. And if we do take him out, we'll piss off all of our allies . . . I realize that they don't come much worse than Hussein, but we can't judge who lives and dies.

[Supermodel]

But IWDY, we could have used the same argument to ignore Hitler in 1943.

If not the US, who?

If not now, when?

If thine eye aflicts thee, pluck it out.......

[peaccenicked]

I think there are a few facts that SM overlooks.
1)the americans put him there in the first place and supported him in the war against Iran.
2)the US did not like the oppostion to Saddam in the Gulf war, so they hindered its progress.
3) The US did not enter world war 2 for humanitarian reasons. It was attacked by one of the allies of Germany.
4) the US has no interests in the world that are not ultimately economic.

[I Will Deny You]

We have never appeased Sadaam. When France appeased Hitler they made a big mistake, but when Sadaam went into Kuwait we kicked his ass out. Sadaam is a dictator, plain and simple. Not an emperor like Hitler was. There are huge differences between Sadaam and Hitler, and if you want me to post them, fine . . . but not everyone likes long posts that don't cut to the chase.

If not now, then in 1992 when a bunch of Iraqi generals requested what would have amounted to peanuts from the US's point of view, so that they could overthrow Sadaam. They were very popular, but the US did not help them. They didn't want Sadaam in Kuwait because that would be a huge threat to Saudi Arabia, but they weren't in the mood to overthrow him. Now if the US didn't think he should have been overthrown when he was much more dangerous than he is now, why should we overthrow him now? If not now, in 1992 or the next time he tries to pull what he did back then (if there is a next time).

Like I said above, if not the US then popular leaders who are from Iraq themselves, with the help of the US.

[peaccenicked]

Do you mean that you dont want to see any evidence that points to the fact of CIA involvement with saddam
before the gulf war or that the Us armed Saddam during the war against Iran.
It is your american dreamworld mate.

[Supermodel]

Hey, I completely buy off on the evidence that the US put Saddam in power just to piss of the Iranians, and just like funding the Mujahaddin and the Contras and Batista and all the rest. Like CheGuevara said, that enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend crap has been US policy since WWII.

I don't think that's a reason not to take Saddam out.

I think like IWDY says the solution is a local insurrection funded/supported by the US. I heard the problem is that Saddam has such a tiger grip over his minions that they have no power, so it takes way more of a push to get them going. I'm sure the "subtle" (LMAO) route with the locals has been exhausted by now.

Like someone said in 1992 when we didn't go after Saddam then, "Thomas Jefferson does not suddenly step forward in these situations".

Now I'm not jingoinstic about the US, I'm not even an american, but there's no denying that some people just hate everything that the US does...and everybody that agrees with it....without analyzing the alternatives.

There is no doubt that Bush wants to go after Saddam at this particular time because a) we are already there fighting in the region and B) the "war on terror" (WTF?) is the platform on which to do it woithout waiting for further acts of aggression by Saddam.

And that moustache.....he's just a latino wannabe....... stop me before I break into Spanish again......

[Derar]

Fuck the goverment of usa , and fuck all the tyrants ..... and everyone supporting any if these 2 .

And SM how do u think USA is gonna overthrow saddam , r they gonna simply tell him leave and then he is gonna leave , no . They have to bomb the hell out of iraq before he leaves ....... and When they do that , thousands of innocent ppl will die . so fuck anyone that supports this action .

If we have to remove every fascist leader ..... Bush and his government r the first ones on the list.

so shut up .

[Lefty]

saddam is evil. maybe if the us kicks saddams ass, the trade sanctions will be lifted and the innocent will stop dying. as evil as the usa is, i think it will happen that we will help some people in iraq by taking saddam out. and the economy will benefit, too. Iraq will give us oil, methinks

[PunkRawker677]

<Punky, >
I would ask you to not call me 'punky', there is no 'y' in my name, so i dont really appreciate it, so, im asking nicely, please dont call me that.

<If you want to support Saddam, fine.>
I didnt say i was supporting Saddam, im just not supporting the US.

<Did I miss a memo or something? Since when did being a lefty mean hating america and supporting anything in contrast? Are you so polarized that your vision does not permit a clear view of Saddam?>
Hmm.. i didnt say being a leftist meant hating america.. i said why are you on this board if ou support US policies, which usually have some money scheme behind it, hence being capitalist (although, not always). Why do u think i like saddam, are you trying to make me seem like a sympathizer of his as an attack on my argument? Im arguing the course of action being taken by the U$ in this case, and the whole 'war on terrorism'..


(Edited by PunkRawker677 at 7:00 am on Mar. 16, 2002)

[pastradamus]

Well to be honst I think sadam is a bit of a facist,no im not calling him a compleate facist but he tends to side with the rich rather then the overflowing majority.

Also I saw this show on him like a few days ago & it said that in 1991 he had enough chemical wepons to destroy the worlds population.

So in my view I think he needs a kick in da ass,r he needs to be replaced by proper decent goverment.

Im not siding with america but I think that im able to see through the propaganda here & I still dislike sadam.

[Son of Scargill]

I still think the George dubya suicide bomb is the best(and cheapest) option.

[LeonardoDaVinci]

I hardly think that there are any pro-american Iraqis in this world. However, I am sure the vast majority of them will support any action that might lead to removing Saddam from power. I have a few Iraqi friends, and they are all in favour of overthrowing Saddam, without the killing of thousands of innocent civilians that is.

[jimr]

It seems to me that teh US have been more of a problem to iraq than saddam ever has. Dont give all this American "new era" foriegn policy war on terrorism bullshit. It is simply a new guise of imperialism and way of trying to attack all of americas "enemies" under false pretenses. How much shit are you going to throw.

Why should America have the right to act as world police, as judge jurer and executioner. If anyone should attack Iraq it should be something that is not dominated by Americas imperialistic notions. Nato is simply America's alternative name.

One nation should never be allowed to go about doing as it pleases. The US has a Monopoly over world power. It seems to me that in keeping with capitalist thought, that is that monopoly's are generally not good for quality, maybe america should re think its foreign policy to be in keeping with its own capitlist views.

Iraq was nothing in 1990. And it is still nothing now. It has been american sanctions that have bled the children of iraq dry, it was american non-intervention that saw thousands of kurdish resistance slaughtered. And where was America then? Dont tell me that all of a sudden they plan on doing whats good for the people of iraq. America is a nation that fears anything it cannot control. Western nations think teh same way as the US so it has nothing to fear from them. However rogue states that do not hold teh same views are an entity that Bush cannot control through propoganda, and thus has to keep down via military action.

When America intervined in Kosovo, to stop "ethnic cleansing" people believed this cause as righteous. Yet American bombing caused untold amounts of retaliations and slaughters. American military action is as much a cause of suffering as a prevention of further suffering.

To be honest i couldnt care less if America was able to take out Iraq clean and simply. But all in all, America does not have teh means. The most advanced society in teh world does not have the means to destroy iraq before iraq launches weapons of mass desctruction on Israel, destroys teh oil fields in various parts in teh middle east and screws up the world in short...

The arguement is trivial. America even if it has the right, which it does by no means have, does not have teh ability to wage a successful campaign against Iraq and saddam.

[PunkRawker677]

woo hoo!!!! EXCELLENT POST!!

[Guest1]

SM, I'm one of those people who views you as a "curious centrist", peering over the fense while walking it. I somehow think that, considering that, you're alright, not a pig. Anyway, I see a problem that no one has mentioned so far. What happens after the massacres the U.S. commits in Iraq and Saddam is overthrown? Who comes next? They're going to install an even more fascist government, but one who's extremely capitalist and will give them money.

[guerrillaradio]

Actually Che, I made the "what next?" point about 20 posts back, but hey.

And might I repeat:

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...m=11&topic=1066 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=11&topic=1066)