Saddam To Hang

You are bordering on Conspiracy Theory there Brian. Not like you.

Are you suggesting that the US State Department's claim that:

"The decision to try Saddam and the other defendants first for the crimes of Dujail was also a decision made solely by the Iraqi High Tribunal because it was seen as less complicated with fewer witnesses and that it was the "quickest to get to referral""

might not be telling the whole truth?
 
It was decided (by the Bush administration) that the Iraqi courts should try Saddam Hussein rather than an international court under the auspices of the UN.
Click to expand...

Because he wouldn't be fried by the Eurowimps at the UN of course.
 
Originally posted by betsmate@Nov 7 2006, 05:39 PM
You are bordering on Conspiracy Theory there Brian. Not like you.
Click to expand...
Not a theory - reality. They have not denied what Bill Clinton said to Larry King. Their resonse was to say that he took his mind off of dealing with Saddam Hussein while Monica Lewinsky was fulfilling his needs and anyway he is soft on "tourism".

No one disputes that only six months after the slaughter at Halabja, the White House lent Saddam Hussein another billion dollars. And in 1991, at the end of the Gulf war, US troops stood idly by while Saddam’s presidential guard ruthlessly suppressed the popular uprising by the Kurds for which Dubya himself had called.

According Iraq's report to the UN, the know-how and material for developing chemical weapons were obtained from firms in such countries as: the United States, West Germany, the United Kingdom, France and China. By far, the largest suppliers of precursors for chemical weapons production were in Singapore (4,515 tons), the Netherlands (4,261 tons), Egypt (2,400 tons), India (2,343 tons), and Federal Republic of Germany (1,027 tons). One Indian company, Exomet Plastics (now part of EPC Industrie) sent 2,292 tons of precursor chemicals to Iraq. The Kim Al-Khaleej firm, located in Singapore and affiliated to United Arab Emirates, supplied more than 4,500 tons of VX, sarin, and mustard gas precursors and production equipment to Iraq. The money to pay for it all came from the US State department.

It's a bloody awful world at times.
 
From today's Arab News online (abridged):

Saddam Hussein, back in court two days after being sentenced to hang for crimes against humanity, urged Iraqis to seek reconciliation. Invoking the prophet Muhammad and Jesus, he told a court trying him for genocide against Kurds, "I call on all Iraqis - Arabs and Kurds - to forgive, reconcile, and shake hands."

Up to 180,000 Kurds were killed by Hussein's regime, many by gas attacks.

The ousted President's fate after the earlier trial is now in the hands of an apellate chamber. No execution is likely before next year.

Meanwhile, some 250 Jordanian lawyers staged a one-hour strike to protest against the death sentence, while in Iran a government spokesman called on Iraq to carry it out, saying the dictator, who waged an 8-year war with Iran, was a criminal who deserved to die. Gholam Hussein Elham told a news conference in Tehran, "We hope the fair, correct and legal verdict against this criminal is enforced. We hope no pressure will be applied on the government not to carry out this verdict."
 
Originally posted by krizon@Nov 8 2006, 12:23 AM
From today's Arab News online (abridged):

Saddam Hussein, back in court two days after being sentenced to hang for crimes against humanity, urged Iraqis to seek reconciliation. Invoking the prophet Muhammad and Jesus, he told a court trying him for genocide against Kurds, "I call on all Iraqis - Arabs and Kurds - to forgive, reconcile, and shake hands."
Click to expand...
My God!!! You don't suppose Saddam reads TH do you?

I quite like the idea of Bush and the Iranians being in the same camp now though. And the Iranians calling on others not to apply pressure, which is of course tantamount to...... er ....... applying pressure. I'd have thought an appeal by Tehran for his execution is probably more likely to save him to be honest.

As regards the actual execution, I heard it reported today that the Iraqi government said they'll be able to do it my Christmas. Wonderful thing this concept of appeal, :brows: I'm not sure the Iraqi's have necessarily grasped it yet though. I suppose you could say they're being refreshingly honest by discussing the sentance prior to the appeal being heard, but as Brian said, they've replaced the odd judge here and there, and killed half his defence team, so they either don't feel it necessary to present the facade of fairness or are still on a pretty steep learning curve.

To be honest, I would be really tempted to make him a deal, and spare his life in return for him trying to temper his followers from his prison cell. As I said previously, you can only kill him once, and a golden opportunity might be passing through our hands, however bizzare and unpalatable it appears at first sight. The more I think about it though, the more I'm coming around to the idea that it could be the shrewder longer term call
 
All this Sadam affair is very unfair.
When he was ruling Iraq that was a peace place.

It would be better to propose him to the Peace Nobel Prize than hang him.
He looks as nice guy as was Arafat.
 
You can say what you like about Yasser Arafat, suny, but he did not cold-bloodedly murder tens of thousands of Palestinians, which is the equivalent of what Hussein did. There's no comparison. There's a lesser comparison (by several million) to Pol Pot, who slaughtered his own people, and Hitler, who slaughtered his German Jews, but not Aryans. Try as hard as you might, you will not find that Arafat ever ordered the gassing of his own on the grounds of their tribal or religious attachments, shot or hanged his opponents, and disappeared tens more thousands of Shi'ites into mass graves strewn all over the countryside.

You're not really very good with facts or the notion of comparison, are you?
 
Krizon

Arafat was human rubbish
It was a disgrace that someone responsible of the dead of many people was given the Peace Nobel Prize.


Many people knew how was he, but his nature was unmasked in camp David,
the level of corruption and a big portion of the problem was he.





About Sadam
I find amazing how so many people in occident are able to defend people like him because the yankees are against.


Particularly
I dont think the situation is going to change if he is hanged or not, I will not miss him very much when he is gone.
 
Suny - I couldn't care less if Hussein was bankrolled by your own lovely country, by Tahitians, by Martians, or by the Soviets - he was and still is a wicked, cruel, manipulative, sadistic, genocidal bastard.

I couldn't care less what Mr Bush thinks of him. If you haven't followed the plot YET, a number of us on here don't think that Mr Bush is capable of any rational thought whatsoever. Stop trying to link one thing to the other. Hussein was evil. Bush is a moron who thinks he's bright, which makes him highly dangerous. The sooner he, like Hussein, is gone, the better. And tragically for the British people, who protested strongly against getting involved with the American invasion of Iraq, we are linked forever with that idiot through our very own home-grown fool, Tony Blair. And we had such high hopes for 'New' Labour, too.

Suny, let me ask you this: do you just hate all Muslims, or are there any, anywhere, who you perhaps have some respect for?
 
suny, for an intelligent man you just don't seem to understand, do you? Just because people may be against the Bush administration and most of what it stands for does not mean that they are in favour of Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashar Al-Assad, Jabba the Hutt or whoever.

Hitler and Stalin were both murdering dictators who had very different political philosophies and who didn't like each other. If you hated one it didn't mean that you were in favour of the other one.
 
I agree with suny though. People responsible for mass murder should not be eligible for the Nobel Peace prize. Apart from (the Republican)Henry Kissinger of course.
 
Originally posted by BrianH@Nov 8 2006, 09:48 PM
Just because people may be against the Bush administration and most of what it stands for does not mean that they are in favour of Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashar Al-Assad, Jabba the Hutt or whoever.
Click to expand...
Some are not and others do.

I dont like Bush as much as you think, what I dont do is to blame him of all what happen in the world.
 
Originally posted by krizon@Nov 8 2006, 09:44 PM


Suny, let me ask you this: do you just hate all Muslims, or are there any, anywhere, who you perhaps have some respect for?
Click to expand...
I dont hate them.

I think most of them hate occident and our style of life.

I also would like that if most of them are moderate people, as some of you suggest , that they would try to stop the radicals that execute terrorist attacks in Europe ,USA and rest of occident.Also would be great they not justiifcated Hamas,Al qaeda ,etc.......
 
But that was only to be seen to be fair and even-handed, AC, since they'd expelled the Jews through a charming Edict in 1492. One can't accuse Spain of religious bias and favouritism. Well, maybe just a teeny bit. Here and there. Now and then. Which is why, of course, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition...
 
Spain did of course also suffer from one of the 20th century's vilest dictators - their own Saddam

Franco
 
Franco in the league of Sadam
funny stuff
It is quite clear people, in general, in this forum does not know what happended in Spain in the 2nd Republic(1931-1936).
But it is to boring to write pieces and pieces about this affair.



About the 1492 affair
I think it was a mistake sacking jewes



About the arabs
No complainings,
they stayed here much more time than the desired....... :lol:
 
Originally posted by sunybay@Nov 9 2006, 11:30 AM
Franco in the league of Sadam
funny stuff
It is quite clear people, in general, in this forum does not know what happended in Spain in the 2nd Republic(1931-1936).
But it is to boring to write pieces and pieces about this affair.



:
Click to expand...
On the contrary a very relevant comparison I'd suggest, and imho a fasciniating and very immotive part of C20th history, that is often overlooked. The population of 1930's Spain and modern day Iraq is within a couple of percent of each other afterall.

And we are confronted with similar circumstances in other respects. Someone who seizes power and becomes a military backed Dictator, with the support of foreign governments. An undercurrent of religious and quasi ethnic/ regional autonomous demands. In many respects Franco was worse, in that he was overthrowing a fledgling democracy, undeniably backed up by Hitler of no less noterity. As history was to prove.

Perhaps someone would be so good as to look at the percentage of the population killed between 1936 and 1939 in Spain, not to mention what went on before and after, and compare it with the numbers lost Iraq over a much longer time period. I think you might be quite surprised.

Which ultimately is why I'd ask why Ardross's question is "an insane comparison" why?
 


Which ultimately is why I'd ask why Ardross's question is "an insane comparison" why?

Click to expand...

simply because there is no comparison except population size

its fashionable to knock franco

the left do it all the time

i wonder why

was it becuase many countries, had in francos era, far worse dictators like slovakia rumania croatia but becuase they became part of the communist empire the deal was we (the communists) will as long as u behave keep quiet about your past and just keep bashing spain over the head

he was not a democrat certainly but like goerge bush he was certainly not responsible for all or even many crimes of his time
 
Originally posted by prince regent@Nov 9 2006, 01:40 PM


Spain did of course also suffer from one of the 20th century's vilest dictators - their own Saddam

Click to expand...


an insane comparison
Click to expand...
Not for all those in the mass graves in Spain and Iraq.
 
Back
Top