Saddam Hussein's Excecution [Archive]

RebelDog

1st January 2007, 04:42

Saddam Hussein was an evil tyrant who deserved to be punished. I'm not going to comment on the fairness/unfairness of the trial because he was clearly a man guilty of atrocities against human beings. What I will say that if we were to be apply the same justice to politicians guilty of murdering civillians then we would have to hang Bush/Blair and co. But that is of course seen as an absurd notion because Bush/Blair are above the law, won the war over Saddam and either control the institutions/laws that might seek to bring them to justice or they simply ignore them. The powerful do what they want and the weak must bend to their will. Had Saddam Hussein stayed true to the US grand strategy for the middle east he would be alive today and killing as many of his own people as he wants with the latest US military technology. Maybe even Rumsfeld would still have his job and be over in Iraq right now shaking Saddam's hand sealing another weapons deal.

RNK

1st January 2007, 07:28

My reaction was something along the lines of...

'Right. One down, two more to go.'

Sadly, the majority of the western world will not really understand that at the time these crimes were being committed, Saddam was an ally and weapons trade partner with the US, and that they're fully responsible and are, at the very least, accessories to the crimes.

Funny, not a single mention of that. Perhaps that's why they pushed for Saddam to be executed before he could be tried for the crimes committed against the Kurds -- they wanted to dim the spotlight as much as possible, considering that the actions taken against the Kurds have the most US involvement.

Demogorgon

1st January 2007, 18:46

I am always against the Death Penalty. At first my reaction was more along the lines of Naybe Rumsfield should be on the gallos with him, but watching the video, all I see is an old man being put to death. The tyrant was long gone, overthrown in a despicable manner, but gone nonetheless. That was just revenge. No justice there. I can't wish that on anybody, neither Hussein nor Bush and Blair.

Senor Jimi

1st January 2007, 19:10

Janus

1st January 2007, 22:30

It seems that the execution didn't go as smoothly as it should've either and that there may be some protests by the Sunni population up ahead over the behavior of the Shiite executioners.

Fawkes

1st January 2007, 23:14

I feel rather indifferent over it. Of course I'm not crying over the corpse of that fuckin' piece of shit, but I don't think executing him really accomplished anything good. I was really hoping he would get tried for the mass murder of all of those Kurds using Reagan's chemical weapons.

Come on, I wanna see what Restricted Members think, post.

Political_Punk

1st January 2007, 23:25

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 01, 2007 11:14 pm
I feel rather indifferent over it. Of course I'm not crying over the corpse of that fuckin' piece of shit, but I don't think executing him really accomplished anything good. I was really hoping he would get tried for the mass murder of all of those Kurds using Reagan's chemical weapons.

Come on, I wanna see what Restricted Members think, post.
Ok, well, I think I agree w/ you and most of what I read in here.

It doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference, and as someone mentioned earlier, he used to be an asset and even friend of the US gov't.

And, just as a side note, I just want to state for the record that I find not only Hussein a disgusting creature, but Bush as well.

I'm neither left nor right, but an individualist. I believe in freedom of choice in a free market, private property rights and contract law. I am whole-heartedly am against any tyrant be it a neo-conservative monster like Bush, or a big gov't proponent like Castro. Both are big-gov't collectivists.

Johnny Anarcho

3rd January 2007, 16:21

He deserved a re-trial and his death will only fuel Sunni violence.

Jazzratt

3rd January 2007, 17:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 11:25 pm
I'm neither left nor right, but an individualist. I believe in freedom of choice in a free market, private property rights and contract law.
:huh: Neither left nor right but you believe in all the things the right wing do? Either you have no idea what you're talking about or you've some how deluded yourself into believing individualism isn't just another piece of right-wing nutjobbery.

powertothepeople

3rd January 2007, 17:29

the only thing that the execution proved was that now the shiiri are going to kill the sunni like saddam did to them there is no difference between the president now and saddam

Rhyknow

11th January 2007, 18:52

Well if it was the US's plan to start a civil fucking war I think executing Saddam was the right thing to do.

Then again the fact that he wasn't given a fair trial and was executed by HANGING makes me feel quite angry. Any human being deserves a fair trial at least. No matter who they are

cormacobear

11th January 2007, 19:04

I've read a great deal of the trial manuscripts and his trial was more fair than any trial given at Guantanamo. The people who held dieing bullet and shrapnel ridden children thought it was justice.

I'm against the death penalty but what's done is done and I have trouble conjuring any sympathy for Saddam.

Sumac

11th January 2007, 19:40

I'm against the death penalty no matter who it's for. I'm glad I live in a country that doesn't support it.

colonelguppy

12th January 2007, 04:20

Originally posted by Senor [email protected] 01, 2007 02:10 pm
I'm personally pretty angry about the execution. Saddam was the dictator of a sovereign nation-state and was recognized as such by the entire international community. It's hardly the right of any nation or group of nations to decide that he's an evil tyrant and to go in and overthrow and murder him. So far as I know, he wasn't harming anyone outside of his own borders so no country had any right to go in and make that decision for the Iraqi people.
um he was a dictator, the iraqi people weren't making any decisions at all.

the fucker deserved it.

C_Rasmussen

12th January 2007, 05:08

Originally posted by colonelguppy+January 11, 2007 10:20 pm--> (colonelguppy @ January 11, 2007 10:20 pm)
Senor [email protected] 01, 2007 02:10 pm
I'm personally pretty angry about the execution. Saddam was the dictator of a sovereign nation-state and was recognized as such by the entire international community. It's hardly the right of any nation or group of nations to decide that he's an evil tyrant and to go in and overthrow and murder him. So far as I know, he wasn't harming anyone outside of his own borders so no country had any right to go in and make that decision for the Iraqi people.
um he was a dictator, the iraqi people weren't making any decisions at all.

the fucker deserved it. [/b]
Yeah and he deserved it for killing his own people too.

RGacky3

12th January 2007, 06:46

I don't believe man has the right to take any other mans life, no matter what he did, all the killing did was satisfy a lust for revenge, and frankly I think the idea of killing someone just for the sake of revenge is horrible, killing ANYONE is horrible.

Saddam was a horrible person, killed many people ruined his country, he was taken out of power, good (but replaced with domination from another source, bad). But killing him does'nt achieve anything, just revenge, which is WRONG.

Raisa

12th January 2007, 07:05

Saddam reugardless of what a motherfucker he was,
His execution was a diversion to convince the iraqi people they got power or something.
Its all propaganda and a display and doesnt mean shit.

Sabocat

12th January 2007, 10:33

I couldn't give a fuck about Saddam one way or the other, but to call it anything other than a sectarian killing is pure fabrication.

Mariam

12th January 2007, 13:01

Saddam reugardless of what a motherfucker he was,
His execution was a diversion to convince the iraqi people they got power or something.
Its all propaganda and a display and doesnt mean shit.

I have been verbally attacked for saying this in a public gathering.
I remeber after three days of the execution my boy friend (who is iraqi) and i decided to go to this "prograssive" bahraini party gathering to write some words in commemoration of the man..i just said that what difference would it make now weather he's dead or not, probably it'll grow worst..just half an hour after we left the place "some people" started a molotove party outside the building! :ph34r:

Orange Juche

12th January 2007, 22:04

I was against it, as I am always against the death penalty, but I really don't give that much of a shit either. He was an evil peice of steaming dook.

Purple

13th January 2007, 03:00

If they would have shot him when they first found him in his little "hole" in Iraq, I would not have objected.

However, when they took him out of the war, and into the courtroom, which was just one long puppet show, he was stripped of his power and disabled of all authority. Murdering him was out of vengance, not of efficency to the cause. A product of the "success" of the war had to be made, and hanging Saddam would be the easiest, and the most commerically friendly, option, as the Americans had already stated that that was the goal of the war.

Death penalty is wrong because it is degrading for a supposed "civilized" nation to still perform executions as a form of vengance. Executions are primitive forms of disabling individuals. There is no justification. He had no power. He had no more influence. It is pure hypocracy to kill a killer.

Simotix

17th January 2007, 09:44

Saddam Hussein is a footnote in America's quest for Middle East oil.

In twenty years we will have forgot who he was, where in twenty years (and about three presidents later) when we think of failure we will think of George Bush.

Orange Juche

17th January 2007, 15:43

Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 03, 2007 12:21 pm
He deserved a re-trial
Well its not like he was innocent!

Redeye

19th January 2007, 11:32

No Human has the right to take anothers.

colonelguppy

20th January 2007, 00:51

i'll reserve the right to kill opressors and agressors, thank you very much.

Jazzratt

20th January 2007, 16:22

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 11:32 am
No Human has the right to take anothers.
Another's what? Virginity?

Anyway, anyone who thinks we shouldn't murder/excecute people, please give me a sensisble propostion for what we should do with:
Counter Revolutionaries
The Bourgeoise
Serial Killers
Serial Rapists (of adults and/or children)

C_Rasmussen

20th January 2007, 18:53

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 12:46 am
I don't believe man has the right to take any other mans life, no matter what he did, all the killing did was satisfy a lust for revenge, and frankly I think the idea of killing someone just for the sake of revenge is horrible, killing ANYONE is horrible.

Saddam was a horrible person, killed many people ruined his country, he was taken out of power, good (but replaced with domination from another source, bad). But killing him does'nt achieve anything, just revenge, which is WRONG.
WHO FUCKING CARES? If anything killing him made him a martr (or h/e you spell the word) so if you think its revenge just think it made him happy.

Jazzratt

20th January 2007, 19:03

Originally posted by C_Rasmussen+January 20, 2007 06:53 pm--> (C_Rasmussen @ January 20, 2007 06:53 pm)
[email protected] 12, 2007 12:46 am
I don't believe man has the right to take any other mans life, no matter what he did, all the killing did was satisfy a lust for revenge, and frankly I think the idea of killing someone just for the sake of revenge is horrible, killing ANYONE is horrible.

Saddam was a horrible person, killed many people ruined his country, he was taken out of power, good (but replaced with domination from another source, bad). But killing him does'nt achieve anything, just revenge, which is WRONG.
WHO FUCKING CARES? If anything killing him made him a martr (or h/e you spell the word) [/b]
yeah.

so if you think its revenge just think it made him happy. I seriously fucking doubt he personally was very happy about it, he probably knew deep down he wasn't going to break his kneck and then fly up to seventy two rasins (or virgins or whatever). A certian group of cynics within the insurgency would have been happy, because obviously his death strengthened their cause but for the most part those that supported him mourned him and everyone else was apathetic or jubilent.

Rasta Sapian

20th January 2007, 22:21

It looked kindsa phoney to me, from that camera phone, edited or something, plus who can record a video that long, dude must of had a tonne of memory?

Rasta Sapian, a.k.a. Skeptic that killed the cat

Lenin II

23rd March 2007, 21:52

America the savior… nearly four years and Bush’s biggest achievement in Iraq has been a lynching. Bravo Americans. There is a pattern here. When Jewish states like Israel get weapons, they are talked with. When Arab states like Iraq get weapons, they are bombed. When Anglo-Saxon nations like America get weapons, they bomb the Arabs. All I can say is, what the FUCK?

Saddam was a monster, but he was OUR monster.
The former President was put to death for ordering the killing of rebels during the Iran-Iraq War, when he was an ally of the United States. International legal experts condemned the “trial,” which was financed by US taxpayers and was seen by many as a show trial and clear “victor's justice.” Similar Orwellian spectacles have been carried out against leaders of the former Yugoslavia and other regimes deemed “outlaw,” in the belief that a pantomime of legal procedure somehow lends credibility to conquest and old fashioned imperialist aggression. The fact that these men have been “tried” by new courts outside of their jurisdiction, on the instigation of their conquerors and on retroactive charges is seldom if ever mentioned, let alone condemned.

Saddam Hussein was not a nice guy, and his vision is certainly not one we would want. However, America’s coquettish pose about Hussein’s “human rights violations” is insulting. The United States has long fostered links with brutal dictators across the Third World, from Latin America and Haiti to Israel and even Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge. Even Saddam Hussein HIMSELF was a buddy of Washington when it counted; the gas he used on Iranians invading his nation was provided by the CIA, sold to him by Reagan and Bush sr. Rumsfeld shook his hand in the 80s, you saw that picture. In fact, Saddam Hussein would probably still be in power if he didn’t have all that damn oil. Oil is the sole reason for America’s commitment to the horrific war on Iraq and the only reason why Saddam’s human rights violations are important to the Neocons.

The region has been transformed into a seething mess. Even Israel’s much-vaunted nuclear arsenal, while remaining a threat to the planet (and putting the lie to the US "anti-WMD" pose), is ultimately only a suicide option. Thanks to the hornet’s nest we’ve stirred up in the Middle East and around the entire globe, all of us are one minute closer to Nuclear Annilation. America, by proxy, will kill one dictator -- Saddam Hussein -- but it won’t kill the global problems we have caused, and the grief and pain caused by the war machine “our” government has built for us will only go on.
The execution of Saddam Hussein is murder, plain and simple.

Idola Mentis

24th March 2007, 18:25

Nah. This kind of "execution" isn't murder. It's *ritual* murder. The wrath of the sovereign manifested on the body of those who dare defy him. We got rid of that in Europe 150 years ago, and found more good-looking excuses to ritually torture and kill our fellow men. Even so, they had to hide it indoors; where they didn't, popular protest led to abolishment. Seems Bush hasn't even been paying attention to this development; he's stuck back in the days of the Sun King.

Cheung Mo

24th March 2007, 18:35

I have no sympathy for Saddam, but the world deserved a more complete trial dealing with the (much larger) atrocities he committed as an agent of USian imperialism. Naturally, this did not happen as it would have likely implicated a substantial proportion of the USA's political establishment in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

AnarchyKid

1st April 2007, 08:33

I oppose capital punishment (unless its against fascistscum), and i dont think he deserved to be hanged. Yes, he was a monster. But is Bush any better? What did the US do to help? They bombed their country to hell, executed Saddam and dressed the whole execution up like it was the government of Iraq who did it!! Damn, im getting angry at the reps!

ZX3

2nd April 2007, 13:48

Vargha Poralli

2nd April 2007, 13:58

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 06:18 pm
A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.

A single point

1) You seem to have missed your brain somewhere. Please search for it seriously. You need it to think,read and analyse situations.

*****************************************
He was just tried for the murder of Shias. Yet there is another case his gasing of Kurds.that case was not taken or tried before his punishment in the former case.His execution was just to cover the crimes of American Imperialists who supplied him with chemical weapons with which he carried out Mass Murders of Kurdish people during the Iran-Iraq war if that case is taken for trial.

Justice had been denied to people in reality.

ZX3

2nd April 2007, 14:22

Originally posted by g.ram+April 02, 2007 07:58 am--> (g.ram @ April 02, 2007 07:58 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 06:18 pm
A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.

A single point

1) You seem to have missed your brain somewhere. Please search for it seriously. You need it to think,read and analyse situations.

*****************************************
He was just tried for the murder of Shias. Yet there is another case his gasing of Kurds.that case was not taken or tried before his punishment in the former case.His execution was just to cover the crimes of American Imperialists who supplied him with chemical weapons with which he carried out Mass Murders of Kurdish people during the Iran-Iraq war if that case is taken for trial.

Justice had been denied to people in reality. [/b]
Oh, please!!!!!!!

The "evidence" that saddam possessed could have been revealed to the world any time in the last decade. It wasn't, because the claims are bullhunk.

Unless you wish to say saddam loved living in a hole in the ground, in jail cell, being hung, having his sons killed, being driven from office ect ect ect.
You need a serious reality check.

2nd April 2007, 14:25

The "evidence" that saddam possessed could have been revealed to the world any time in the last decade. It wasn't, because the claims are bullhunk.

Uh, it's well documented that the US assisted Iraq in its production of chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. It's also quite clear that the Halabja attack was an attack on Kurdish insurgents and not an "ethnic cleansing". Hell, when it first happened the DIA said it was Iran that did it and not Iraq! That's the DIA, not just some random organization; that's a government organization.

Lenin II

2nd April 2007, 15:48

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 12:48 pm
A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.
What mayonnaise jar have you been living in for the past few decades? The USSR supported IRAN, not Iraq. We supported Iraq in that war by selling them chemical weapons used to gas 100,000 Kurds.

2nd April 2007, 16:59

What mayonnaise jar have you been living in for the past few decades? The USSR supported IRAN, not Iraq. We supported Iraq in that war by selling them chemical weapons used to gas 100,000 Kurds.

Actually Andrew we supported both sides in the killing of each other.

Black Dagger

2nd April 2007, 17:06

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 05:05 pm
Saddam reugardless of what a motherfucker he was,
His execution was a diversion to convince the iraqi people they got power or something.
Its all propaganda and a display and doesnt mean shit.

The execution of saddam is a case of the US covering their arses IMO.

Think about it... it's also a real good way to prevent Saddam from coming clean about all the dirty deals (not to mention dirty work!) he did for the US government back in the good ole' days... the trial wasnt exactly exhaustive... pass the rope its execution time!

ZX3

2nd April 2007, 18:55

Originally posted by Zampanò@April 02, 2007 08:25 am

The "evidence" that saddam possessed could have been revealed to the world any time in the last decade. It wasn't, because the claims are bullhunk.

Uh, it's well documented that the US assisted Iraq in its production of chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. It's also quite clear that the Halabja attack was an attack on Kurdish insurgents and not an "ethnic cleansing". Hell, when it first happened the DIA said it was Iran that did it and not Iraq! That's the DIA, not just some random organization; that's a government organization.
Denmark sold more.

Still, the claims that the USa tended to back both Iran and Iraq during their war in the 80s is basically true. Iraq, being a Soviet client state, armed and equipped by the USSR, and its officers trained by the USSR, was rightly seen as an aggressor state.

Iran, using the weaponry supplied to the Shah by the USa, was also rightly seen as an agressor state.

It was the world's good fortune that those two countries were aggressive against each other for the better part of a decade. Iraq never really covered, and Iran now is.

ZX3

2nd April 2007, 18:56

Originally posted by black rose+April 02, 2007 11:06 am--> (black rose @ April 02, 2007 11:06 am)
[email protected] 12, 2007 05:05 pm
Saddam reugardless of what a motherfucker he was,
His execution was a diversion to convince the iraqi people they got power or something.
Its all propaganda and a display and doesnt mean shit.

The execution of saddam is a case of the US covering their arses IMO.

Think about it... it's also a real good way to prevent Saddam from coming clean about all the dirty deals (not to mention dirty work!) he did for the US government back in the good ole' days... the trial wasnt exactly exhaustive... pass the rope its execution time! [/b]
So what prevented saddam from coming "clean" at any point during the previous decade? Or do you think Saddam enjoyed living in a hole in the ground, or a jail cell?

Nothing Human Is Alien

2nd April 2007, 22:25

I think..

You're fired! U.S. imperialists drop their former employee... from the gallows

http://www.freepeoplesmovement.org/fpm/saddamhang.jpg

In the early morning hours of December 30, 2006, masked henchmen of the puppet Iraqi government hung former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, on the thinly veiled orders of the U.S. government.

While it’s no secret that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, it should be remembered that many of the crimes he carried out were done in the interests – and often even on the direct orders – of the U.S. government.

Throughout the 70's and 80's, Hussein had thousands of communists – whose names appeared on hit lists supplied to him by the CIA – brutally tortured and murdered. In the mid-80's, his army waged biological and chemical war against Iran using weapons supplied by the U.S. government, leaving tens of thousands dead.

It wasn’t until Hussein disobeyed his masters in Washington by invading Kuwait that he became their target, resulting first in the U.S.-lead war on Iraq in 1991, then a brutal economic blockade which resulted in the deaths of at least 1.5 million Iraqi civilians, and finally, the illegal invasion of occupation of Iraq which started in 2003 and continues today.

Saddam was sentenced to death in a kangaroo court show trial for the killings of 148 Shi’as after an assassination attempt on his life. But the “Butcher of Baghdad” didn’t get to stick around long enough to face trial for the killing of tens of thousands of Kurds... because he did so using intelligence given to him by the CIA!

The same U.S. imperialists who once employed Hussein were also behind the illegal “court” that condemned him to death. Conveniently, this condemnation was carried out only days before the midterm elections in the U.S., and the sentence itself was carried out at a speed that showed just how desperate the imperialists were to get rid of any evidence of the part they played in the crimes of their former ally.

http://www.freepeoplesmovement.org/fpm/page.php?258

and..

Editorial: Saddam’s sham sentence

By now most of our readers have probably heard about the death sentence handed down to Saddam Hussein, former president of Iraq.

In fact, one would almost have had to try to avoid learning about the sentence, because the mainstream media has gone into a triumphant, bloodthirsty hysteria over it, gloating at every opportunity.

What they haven’t mentioned is that the court had no right to sentence Saddam to anything, because the court itself was illegal. It was a kangaroo court, set up by an occupying foreign power that not only sponsored Saddam’s actions for years, but today carries out atrocities on Iraqi soil itself!

It’s clear that Saddam committed crimes against the Iraqi people, and he should have to face those people and be held accountable for what he’s done. But what’s also clear – though obscured by the capitalist media’s attempted rewriting of history – is that he was put into power by the United States as a reliable anti-communist ally!

Another thing is clear; the war George W. Bush and his Republican and Democratic cohorts have launched against Iraq – in the interests of creating more profits for already filthy rich capitalists, like the owners of Haliburton – has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in five years; many more than Saddam caused in his twenty-four years in power!

With that in mind, we have to ask: when will they be put on trial?

http://www.freepeoplesmovement.org/fpm/page.php?213

3rd April 2007, 00:59

Denmark sold more.

You just admitted that the US did it. Besides, if Denmark does it does that make it right?

Still, the claims that the USa tended to back both Iran and Iraq during their war in the 80s is basically true. Iraq, being a Soviet client state, armed and equipped by the USSR, and its officers trained by the USSR, was rightly seen as an aggressor state.

Iran, using the weaponry supplied to the Shah by the USa, was also rightly seen as an agressor state.

This is completely irrelevant to the fact that the quick execution and selected crimes that Saddam was "tried" for were to cover up US involvement in such matters.

It was the world's good fortune that those two countries were aggressive against each other for the better part of a decade. Iraq never really covered, and Iran now is.

Uh, Iraq never recovered because of US destruction of infrastructure and economy and their control over the Iraqi national budget which allowed them to prohibit Iraq from recovering. This involvement caused the deaths of millions.

So what prevented saddam from coming "clean" at any point during the previous decade? Or do you think Saddam enjoyed living in a hole in the ground, or a jail cell?

How do you know he didn't?

militant1001

3rd April 2007, 02:49

A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.

Dude. We sold him the weapons he used to fight the war against Iran he was our buddy until he tried to get nukes to play with, and he was no Socialist no matter what the name of his party was, you might have heard of the National Socialist Party of Germany at some point.

P.S. Being an ally of the USSR is hardly something to be proud of

3rd April 2007, 03:06

Dude. We sold him the weapons he used to fight the war against Iran he was our buddy until he tried to get nukes to play with, and he was no Socialist no matter what the name of his party was, you might have heard of the National Socialist Party of Germany at some point.

Saddam never attempted to develop nuclear weapons. The yellow cake and the centrifuges were both fake. Also, we were never "buddies" with him; we supported both sides in the Iran-Iraq war in killing each other, then we invaded and imposed "sanctions" on Iraq. We were never allies.

Pilar

10th April 2007, 05:17

I'm personally pretty angry about the execution. Saddam was the dictator of a sovereign nation-state and was recognized as such by the entire international community. It's hardly the right of any nation or group of nations to decide that he's an evil tyrant and to go in and overthrow and murder him. So far as I know, he wasn't harming anyone outside of his own borders so no country had any right to go in and make that decision for the Iraqi people.

This is pure loony toons. This is exactly what happened to Hitler. I say good job there.

At the heart of Revolution is the killing of the leaders who bring people harm. If you're not up for that, stay home and bake cookies.

Lenin II

11th April 2007, 05:50

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 04:17 am

I'm personally pretty angry about the execution. Saddam was the dictator of a sovereign nation-state and was recognized as such by the entire international community. It's hardly the right of any nation or group of nations to decide that he's an evil tyrant and to go in and overthrow and murder him. So far as I know, he wasn't harming anyone outside of his own borders so no country had any right to go in and make that decision for the Iraqi people.

This is pure loony toons. This is exactly what happened to Hitler. I say good job there.

At the heart of Revolution is the killing of the leaders who bring people harm. If you're not up for that, stay home and bake cookies.
This is not a revolution. A revolution is an uprising BY THE PEOPLE, not an imerpailist war started on false grounds because the leader of the invading country lied and wanted to sieze the nation's natural resources. Not to mention that we had the support of many other nations around the world to take Hitler down, while we had almost none for Saddam. Saddam is just another fall guy.

Oh yes, we HAVE to take down Saddam becuse he's EVIL, EVIL, EVIL! So evil, in fact, that he used chemical weapons to kill hundreds of thousands. GASP! And how do we know that? Why, we sold them to him of course.
After all, we HAD to invade his country and kill everyone in defiance of the United Nations. He was a tyrant! Why was he a tyrant? Because he invaded foreign countries in defiance of the United Nations! Duh!

Also, a little advice. Never mention Hitler in political discussion. It makes people stop listening to you. I learned that one the hard way.

colonelguppy

11th April 2007, 06:36

Originally posted by AndrewG+April 02, 2007 09:48 am--> (AndrewG @ April 02, 2007 09:48 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 12:48 pm
A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.
What mayonnaise jar have you been living in for the past few decades? The USSR supported IRAN, not Iraq. We supported Iraq in that war by selling them chemical weapons used to gas 100,000 Kurds. [/b]
their entire conventional force was armed with soviet made weapons, i think thats really what he means. yeah, we helped him get mustard gas. our bad. that hardly absolves saddam of any guilt, however.

Tommy-K

11th April 2007, 09:23

It is undisputed fact that America sold arms to Iraq so I don't know why you're disputing it.

Saddam was found guilty of genocide and hanged. If we are hanging all those who are guilty of genocide, when are we going to hang Bush and Blair? They are responsible for a hell of a lot more deaths than Saddam Hussein.

11th April 2007, 16:56

their entire conventional force was armed with soviet made weapons, i think thats really what he means. yeah, we helped him get mustard gas. our bad. that hardly absolves saddam of any guilt, however.

Guilt of what? Going to war with Iran?

Saddam was found guilty of genocide and hanged.

He wasn't really found guilty, because it wasn't really a trial.

Lenin II

11th April 2007, 17:35

Originally posted by colonelguppy+April 11, 2007 05:36 am--> (colonelguppy @ April 11, 2007 05:36 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 09:48 am

[email protected] 02, 2007 12:48 pm
A couple of points:

It needs to be remineded that Saddam Hussein was the head of the Ba'ath Socialist Party. He was no conservative.

Nor was he an agent of American imperialism. Saddam's Iraq was squarely an ally of the USSR, Iraq a state of Moscow, who armed and supplied saddam with his arms and weaponry.
What mayonnaise jar have you been living in for the past few decades? The USSR supported IRAN, not Iraq. We supported Iraq in that war by selling them chemical weapons used to gas 100,000 Kurds.
their entire conventional force was armed with soviet made weapons, i think thats really what he means. yeah, we helped him get mustard gas. our bad. that hardly absolves saddam of any guilt, however. [/b]
"Our bad?"
"OUR BAD?"

The CIA put Saddam's party in power, the US trained him, funded him, supported him for 24 years, all the while hearing about his human rights abuses, hearing about how he killed 200,000 people, and suddenly it's "our bad?"

We start an illegal war that kills 2-3 times as many people in 4 years as Saddam killed in 24 years, and it's "our bad?"

We claim to be liberators and the bringers of democracy by rushing in, killing everyone and establishing a puppet government that will allow us to steal the country’s oil for the next 50 years, all for the alleged sake of avenging the actions of a man we created and supported for nearly three decades, and it’s “our bad?”

You are right, that doesn’t absolve him of any guilt. Nor does it absolve the American government, Reagan, Bush sr. Bush jr. or anyone else. They are all symptoms of the same disease, and eliminating one will only give more glory and power to the other. And this action only lends credibility to the administration and its Crusade-like foreign wars of imperialist aggression, greed and anti-Arab racism.