World Astonished at Suprise Saddam Trial Verdict

[Loeln]

3. Saddam never should have been targeted. There are worse groups out there. Saddam wasn't even that bad to begin with. The only offences against him are his attack on Kuwait (which he thought America would support because of hteir support of the Iraq/ Iran war) gassing the Kurds (who were rebelling against his government) and not allowing weapons inspectors to inspect (which is bad, but not worth a war over.

He murdered men, women, and children... "but only a little!"

It's still inexcusable.

[sandblaster]

In every war women and children are killed. The best way to prevent it is to not rebel. Do you think America should be over thrown for what happened in Waco Texas?

[Muninn]

The best way to prevent it is to not rebel.

Yeah it's not like America did anything like that.

[sandblaster]

They also didn't complain about the Brittish killing hteir children

[Loeln]

In every war women and children are killed. The best way to prevent it is to not rebel. Do you think America should be over thrown for what happened in Waco Texas?

The difference between civilians unintentionally caught in the crossfire, and innocent bystanders specifically targetted and killed.

Also,

The best way to prevent it is to not rebel.

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

[Rooster]

In my opinion, Iraq was justified. Saddam was a megalomaniac and a dictator. His people were murdered, gassed, and shyte just for speaking out. I also feel that we have a right to the human race to wipe such individuals off the face of the earth. I also belive that we should go into Burma and give it back ti it's democratically elected president.

We live in a great time in the west. We argue over weather or not it's right to say something on television, yet in lots of countries you get killed for even asking questions. Democracy is flawed, and frail at best, but it manages to work some how, and it's the best we've got. Everyone should have the right to have it too.

Capitalism however, is not something should ever had.

[detrius]

In my opinion, Iraq was justified. Saddam was a megalomaniac and a dictator. His people were murdered, gassed, and shyte just for speaking out. I also feel that we have a right to the human race to wipe such individuals off the face of the earth. I also believe that we should go into Burma and give it back ti it's democratically elected president.

Okay, let me conjure up a little analogy to show you how I see this matter.

Saddam Hussein and his gang of cronies had hijacked Iraq Air Flight 001 and held it's passengers as hostages. They killed some of the passengers and terrified the rest. Then the SWAT team led by George W. Bush arrived and blew up the plane to rescue the hostages.

Waging a full-scale war on Iraq was not the wisest idea.

[Rooster]

How is a "war against Iraq?" it's against the buttfinkers that want to keep them in their 14th century ways of chopping off hands for stealing bread and shyte.

Also, a better enalogy would be "Saddam takes a plane, SWAT go in and take him out. Some of of his cronies escape and start shooting both SWAT and the civvies, at which point the Civvies blame SWAT for A - not doing enough, and B - shooting at Saddam's men...who they are related to".

It's a whole sh*t heap of a craphole. I just think it was a good idea, done very f*cking badly, by the wrong people, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.

[detrius]

How is a "war against Iraq?" it's against the buttfinkers that want to keep them in their 14th century ways of chopping off hands for stealing bread and shyte.

That'd be an argument to have attacked Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq.

Also, a better enalogy would be "Saddam takes a plane, SWAT go in and take him out. Some of of his cronies escape and start shooting both SWAT and the civvies, at which point the Civvies blame SWAT for A - not doing enough, and B - shooting at Saddam's men...who they are related to".

Hmmm... I'll stick to my analogy

It's a whole sh*t heap of a craphole. I just think it was a good idea, done very f*cking badly, by the wrong people, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.

If it results in failure, then it obviously wasn't a good idea.

I concede that the US government had good intentions, but as usual, that's what the way to hell is plastered with.

[Rooster]

So we let regiems like that excist while we just kick back and get f*cking fat on fast food? We whine and moan about Iraqi freedoms, yet I guarentee not one of those people ever set foot in the place before Saddam was kicked out.

You ask the people that voted for the new president if they think it was a stupid idea. You ask the shi-ites and the kurds if they think it was a stupid idea to free them from a totalitarian state where they were persecuted and killed for their beleifs.

It it in NO way a full-scale war, as you put it. That involves TWO countries armies fighting each other...most of the insurgents aren't even Iraqi anymore!

See, it's all well and good for us to take the higher ground, but if we do nothing with that higher ground then we are worthless as countries except to ourselves. The western world has so much power sitting idle...If we only protect the freedoms of our own peoples, how far are we from the seperationalist US of the 1920s? How far are we from Switzerland, being content to sit around during WW2 while the world killed itself?

My friend is out there, right now, and I will NOT beleive that this was all in vein.

[sandblaster]

A better analogy would be Saddam and his cronies get weapons and support to hijack a plane with support from Bush.

Then later they decide to do it to another plane assuming they would get the same support and are confused as why they don't.

Then as part of his parol Saddam isn't allowed to have guns. He doesn't let people search his bathroom for guns and everbody is upset but nothing is really done about it.

Then Bush thinks Saddam might use his gun to hurt is neighbor Israel even though Israel has a bazooka and can't be hurt by bullets. Bush breaks into Saddams apartment kills him, and then Saddam's roomates fight over who gets Saddam's cd collection

[Rooster]

Haha, that is a good one, yeah.

[detrius]

My friend is out there, right now, and I will NOT beleive that this was all in vein.

I guess that makes all further discussion pretty much irrelevant.

[Loeln]

My friend is out there, right now, and I will NOT beleive that this was all in vein.

I guess that makes all further discussion pretty much irrelevant.

Only to closed minds.

[Caoimhin]

I agree with Rooster on one point, it isn't a war. Its troops from the U.S, the U.K, and other countries (I'm really not sure what the other ones are, they aren't mentioned much on the news in the U.S)going in and attacking Iraqis. There wasn't really a formal declaration of war (I'm pretty sure theres some criteria it doesn't meet) and Iraq really doesn't exist anymore. It was more of a war on Saddam than anything, the problem is ironically calling it a war is not politically correct. Although there isn't any other word that can be used, war was the most fearful sounding term to be used, something thats perfect for propaganda, a small yet strong word.

WAR

Is that not something that makes an impact? And Iraq really doesn't have a stable government yet, not to mention other countries, besides the U.S, have to acknowledge it as its own country. There is no War in Iraq. Is the fighting futile? No, something was achieved, a dictator who abused his people was brought down from power, but his manner of execution was crude and unhumane. There probably was some personal involvement with the verdict, with the large amount of people he effected, the U.S, who began this war should have intervened. Yeah sure, hes being executed, but this war was started because, actually there really isn't a reason. Just Bush being self righteous really. But as the occupier (Iraq for lack of better term is an occupied country, rather than an independent nation) we have the right to see that Saddam's rights are carried out. We wanted Iraq to emulate our version of democracy, so why does he have to face such a "cruel" death as capital punishment (its in the constitution "cruel and unusual punishment"). Tangents aren't just a math term .