REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

My gut reaction is that its tactically the wrong move. It's going to be near on impossible to predict how things will pan out, but given our track record of calling it, the evidence points to things deteriorating further.

Is it not the simple case that in terms of practical resistance and the leadership of it etc new organisations and loyalties have started to emerge anyway, and have effectively passed Saddam by? I'm far from convinced that his execution changes anything materially, all it will do is corale the disperate and divided disaffected into an ever more concentrated group, and serve to unify them with the removal of one alternative/ loyalty etc. He's largely symbolic now, and for such time as he remains incarserated he remains pretty well neuted in practical terms. Therefore, it's difficult to think that the inserection will die with Saddam, (quite the opposite) and so his execution can't really be seen as being much more than symbolic in itself. If you're telling me that the bombings will stop the next day, and all will live happily ever after, then I could go with it, but I doubt anyone believes that for one second. They told us 12 months ago that holding free elections would put an end to the bloodshed too, and begin the healing process :lol:

Ironically, as the only man who was able to exercise any sense of control over the spread of radical Islam in the country, he might have had a role to play yet if the rope was dangled in front of him everytime he looked like not co-operating?

You can only execute someone once, and I reckon in a few years time we'll see the folly of having rushed into doing so. For such time as his warrants signed you could invoke at any time

<blockquote data-quote="Warbler" data-source="post: 2096095" data-attributes="member: 65228">My gut reaction is that its tactically the wrong move. It&#039;s going to be near on impossible to predict how things will pan out, but given our track record of calling it, the evidence points to things deteriorating further. Is it not the simple case that in terms of practical resistance and the leadership of it etc new organisations and loyalties have started to emerge anyway, and have effectively passed Saddam by? I&#039;m far from convinced that his execution changes anything materially, all it will do is corale the disperate and divided disaffected into an ever more concentrated group, and serve to unify them with the removal of one alternative/ loyalty etc. He&#039;s largely symbolic now, and for such time as he remains incarserated he remains pretty well neuted in practical terms. Therefore, it&#039;s difficult to think that the inserection will die with Saddam, (quite the opposite) and so his execution can&#039;t really be seen as being much more than symbolic in itself. If you&#039;re telling me that the bombings will stop the next day, and all will live happily ever after, then I could go with it, but I doubt anyone believes that for one second. They told us 12 months ago that holding free elections would put an end to the bloodshed too, and begin the healing process :lol: Ironically, as the only man who was able to exercise any sense of control over the spread of radical Islam in the country, he might have had a role to play yet if the rope was dangled in front of him everytime he looked like not co-operating? You can only execute someone once, and I reckon in a few years time we&#039;ll see the folly of having rushed into doing so. For such time as his warrants signed you could invoke at any time</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Warbler, post: 2096095, member: 65228"] My gut reaction is that its tactically the wrong move. It's going to be near on impossible to predict how things will pan out, but given our track record of calling it, the evidence points to things deteriorating further. Is it not the simple case that in terms of practical resistance and the leadership of it etc new organisations and loyalties have started to emerge anyway, and have effectively passed Saddam by? I'm far from convinced that his execution changes anything materially, all it will do is corale the disperate and divided disaffected into an ever more concentrated group, and serve to unify them with the removal of one alternative/ loyalty etc. He's largely symbolic now, and for such time as he remains incarserated he remains pretty well neuted in practical terms. Therefore, it's difficult to think that the inserection will die with Saddam, (quite the opposite) and so his execution can't really be seen as being much more than symbolic in itself. If you're telling me that the bombings will stop the next day, and all will live happily ever after, then I could go with it, but I doubt anyone believes that for one second. They told us 12 months ago that holding free elections would put an end to the bloodshed too, and begin the healing process :lol: Ironically, as the only man who was able to exercise any sense of control over the spread of radical Islam in the country, he might have had a role to play yet if the rope was dangled in front of him everytime he looked like not co-operating? You can only execute someone once, and I reckon in a few years time we'll see the folly of having rushed into doing so. For such time as his warrants signed you could invoke at any time [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?