Hussein to Die Within 30 Days

[Gershom]

It just magnifies the abject hypocrasy of the US of A government. Just a few years ago, they financed and armed this same man to wreak havoc upon Iran and kill those nasty people. He did as he was told.

Now he is a criminal because he killed more people with the same weaponry he received freely from the US of A. Now the government and the people can gloat over the execution of this man.

For shame! For shame! Get back in Afghanistan where the real war is, and where the elected people of the country actually want us.

Cheers,

Jim

Yea.... the big, bad US of A. It amuses me how these people like Jim serve as apologists for evil men like Saddam. Poor Saddam.... he was just a puppet for the US government and now he's being punished. Boo-hoo. Shut up.

 

[tinytim]

Saddam was as bad as Hitler.

 

[Gershom]

Saddam was as bad as Hitler.

And another devil goes to his place. He's been hung.

 

[JamieinNH]

It just magnifies the abject hypocrasy of the US of A government. Just a few years ago, they financed and armed this same man to wreak havoc upon Iran and kill those nasty people. He did as he was told.

Now he is a criminal because he killed more people with the same weaponry he received freely from the US of A. Now the government and the people can gloat over the execution of this man.

For shame! For shame! Get back in Afghanistan where the real war is, and where the elected people of the country actually want us.

Cheers,

Jim

While I think Saddem is/was an evil man, I have to agree with Jim. We're no better than the bully on the block, with the way we misuse our powers.

Jamie

 

[JamieinNH]

It seems that at least half of the people approved of the Iraq war enough to re-elect the Commander in Cheif.

Yea, only because the * hadn't hit the fan. What happened to his "base" this past election? Yea, he still holds the "half" in his hand right? I think not.

This country has often used undesierables to control or get rid of even more undesierables.

Just because we do it/did it doesn't make it right.

We funded OBL ...

Yea, that did alot of good for us in 2001 huh?


Jamie

 

[DeeJay]

Yea, only because the * hadn't hit the fan. What happened to his "base" this past election? Yea, he still holds the "half" in his hand right? I think not.

Regardless, he was the peoples choice to lead the country.

Just because we do it/did it doesn't make it right.

Maybe it was maybe not. You know what they say about hindsight being 20/20. The choice was made based on info at the time.

Yea, that did alot of good for us in 2001 huh?
Jamie

Like I say about hindsight. The Soviet Union fell so it may have done good and who is to say that OBL would not have done the same thing or if not OBL somebody else on the same mind.

It did do us alot of good in 1945.

 

[JamieinNH]

Regardless, he was the peoples choice to lead the country.



Maybe it was maybe not. You know what they say about hindsight being 20/20. The choice was made based on info at the time.




Like I say about hindsight. The Soviet Union fell so it may have done good and who is to say that OBL would not have done the same thing or if not OBL somebody else on the same mind.

It did do us alot of good in 1945.

I give you credit, you sure do know how to beat around a bush.

The fact that the Republicans lost the Congress is a sign that American's are not for this war, among many other things that Bush and the Republicans were doing.

Bush won the second term because of the spin they had on the public back then and the fact of who he was running against. I am not sure what the Democrats were thinking when they put up Kerry.

As far as hindsight, that point would stand, if we actually used hindsight. Just look back since 2001 and see the things we have "done" to prevent it from happening again, and yet we are still not safe. Trains, Planes, Buses, Tunnels, etc. They are all still targets. Oh wait, let me guess the 'Republican' remark... "But look, we haven't been attached since...."

Well that won't work either.. give it time... give it time, under the way things are still ran, we are no safer than we were before.

Yea, hindsight is doing us good huh?

As far as 1945 goes.. your point? Dealing with Nations vers a thug like OBL, there is a difference. When countries pull together to fight a united front, to me is very different then giving money and arms to a bunch of criminals like the Taliban<sp>.

Jamie

 

[saturneptune]

Yea.... the big, bad US of A. It amuses me how these people like Jim serve as apologists for evil men like Saddam. Poor Saddam.... he was just a puppet for the US government and now he's being punished. Boo-hoo. Shut up.

First of all, you have no right to tell anyone to shut up. This board is open to all opinions, and the last time I checked, the First Amendment protects that right. In the second place, Saddam got well what he deserved for his treatment of the Iraqi people.

Has it been worth 3000 American lives, when our very government gave him some of the armament several years ago that probably killed our own men? Is our government any better than this guy they just executed? Does our honest and moral government have any claim to righteousness and morality? Was the premise of the war honest? Answer it for yourself.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

reconsidered

 

[DeeJay]

I give you credit, you sure do know how to beat around a bush.

bush or Bush. :laugh:

The fact that the Republicans lost the Congress is a sign that American's are not for this war, among many other things that Bush and the Republicans were doing.

Opinion may be changing however we elect presidents every 4 years and Bush is our choice.

Bush won the second term because of the spin they had on the public back then and the fact of who he was running against. I am not sure what the Democrats were thinking when they put up Kerry.

I do agree Kerry was a poor choice. Look for another just like him next time.

As far as hindsight, that point would stand, if we actually used hindsight. Just look back since 2001 and see the things we have "done" to prevent it from happening again, and yet we are still not safe. Trains, Planes, Buses, Tunnels, etc. They are all still targets. Oh wait, let me guess the 'Republican' remark... "But look, we haven't been attached since...."

Off topic. We are talking about useing undesierable people not lessons learned from 911. We will never ever be %100 safe, never have never will.

Well that won't work either.. give it time... give it time, under the way things are still ran, we are no safer than we were before.

Yea, hindsight is doing us good huh?

I think we are safer with out the USSR. We have other problems but they were a big one.

As far as 1945 goes.. your point? Dealing with Nations vers a thug like OBL, there is a difference. When countries pull together to fight a united front, to me is very different then giving money and arms to a bunch of criminals like the Taliban<sp>.

Jamie

So full circle, we began this talking about funding SH the leader of a nation. So now you reverse yourself and say we were ok dealing with Iraq to fight a united front against Iran.

Ok glad we agree.

 

[Gershom]

First of all, you have no right to tell anyone to shut up. This board is open to all opinions, and the last time I checked, the First Amendment protects that right.

As it does my right to tell you or anyone else to shut up. Doesn't mean it'll happen, but just as you have rights to express opinion, so do I. So, yes, saturneptune, I have the right to say "Shut up."

In the second place, Saddam got well what he deserved for his treatment of the Iraqi people.

He deserved worse.

Has it been worth 3000 American lives, when our very government gave him some of the armament several years ago that probably killed our own men? Is our government any better than this guy they just executed? Does our honest and moral government have any claim to righteousness and morality? Was the premise of the war honest? Answer it for yourself.

First, those 3000 troops died doing what they were called to do. They're soldiers. Soldiers are called to war whether you like it or not. Don't play judge and jury for those that are not yours. Secondly, yes, our government IS better than Saddam who tortured and executed innocent civilians including women and children. I can't believe that would even come into question. Unbelievable.

 

[tinytim]

Good point Gershom...

 

[saturneptune]

As it does my right to tell you or anyone else to shut up. Doesn't mean it'll happen, but just as you have rights to express opinion, so do I. So, yes, saturneptune, I have the right to say "Shut up."


He deserved worse.


First, those 3000 troops died doing what they were called to do. They're soldiers. Soldiers are called to war whether you like it or not. Don't play judge and jury for those that are not yours. Secondly, yes, our government IS better than Saddam who tortured and executed innocent civilians including women and children. I can't believe that would even come into question. Unbelievable.

Read the post. I didnt answer the question. You did. Those who have seen war realize it is not a game for you to enjoy your flag waving jollies. I will tell you like hillclimber, if you are so hot to trot to sacrifice more american lives, why dont you join up, lead the charge, instead of typing on a computer and eating bon bons.

 

[Rufus_1611]

As it does my right to tell you or anyone else to shut up. Doesn't mean it'll happen, but just as you have rights to express opinion, so do I. So, yes, saturneptune, I have the right to say "Shut up."

You may have the right but it is a pretty idiot thing to say, if you don't mind me exercising my right.

Secondly, yes, our government IS better than Saddam who tortured and executed innocent civilians including women and children. I can't believe that would even come into question. Unbelievable.

What do you believe the number is of innocent civilians, including women and children, who have been shocked and awed to death by the U.S. Gov't? What is the number of deaths that will cause you to believe that the U.S. gov't is on par or lesser than Saddams regime?

 

[saturneptune]

You may have the right but it is a pretty idiot thing to say, if you don't mind me exercising my right.

What do you believe the number is of innocent civilians, including women and children, who have been shocked and awed to death by the U.S. Gov't? What is the number of deaths that will cause you to believe that the U.S. gov't is on par or lesser than Saddams regime?

Amen to that. Worded much better than I could have said it

 

[Bro. James Reed]

You may have the right but it is a pretty idiot thing to say, if you don't mind me exercising my right.

What do you believe the number is of innocent civilians, including women and children, who have been shocked and awed to death by the U.S. Gov't? What is the number of deaths that will cause you to believe that the U.S. gov't is on par or lesser than Saddams regime?

When's the last time the U.S. government used Chemical weapons on entire cities just for the fun of it?

How often do our troops go out and intentionally target civilians?

War is war; unfortunately, innocent people are killed. Perhaps this is a stupid war, perhaps it was an unnecessary war, perhaps we collected faulty intelligence leading up the war, but equating GWBush with Saddam Hussein is moronic.

If intelligent people can not see that there is a difference between the way we fight and deal with US citizens and the way Saddam fought and dealt with Iraqi citizens, then they either have blinders on or are lying to themselves and others.

If any leader is equated with Saddam Hussein based solely on civilian casualties inflicted during war, then every leader in history who was involved in war must be equated with Hussein. Every war has civilian casualties.

I suppose Harry Truman would be way up on the list (worse than Saddam?) because of the number of civilians killed by the A-bombs.

How about Abe Lincoln? How many civilians died on his watch? How about George Washington? Andy Jackson (who executed Indians, civilians, and his own men)?

I would not equate any of these men with Hussein and neither will I with GW Bush. Hussein took pleasure in seeing innocents slaughtered. I don't see that in GWBush. Do you?

 

[av1611jim]

Hey! Here's an idea for all of you who are spouting off about how bad we are and how much you don't like it.

MOVE SOME PLACE ELSE!!!

Those of you who are critics of the USA and do not live here......pppppphllllllllffffffffftttttttttt!!!!!!


Hah ha hah hhha aaaaah ha ha ha! The USA is STILL the best thing this planet has seen for a 1000 yrs or more.

About "Sodarn Insane". Yes, we funded him. So what? He broke the rules and has to pay. Simple.

 

[JamieinNH]

bush or Bush. :laugh:

Yea, you Republicans sure do stand tall next to him, no matter what path he takes you on. Sad really...

Opinion may be changing however we elect presidents every 4 years and Bush is our choice.

If we were talking only about elections, you would be right, however we are talking about the War in Iraq and anyone with a half of brain will be able to tell you that the opinion of the American people isn't that of support.

You're silly to even suggest it is.

I do agree Kerry was a poor choice. Look for another just like him next time.

I don't think they can do worse than Kerry. He's pretty bad, however they migh be dumb enough to try him again, but I don't think they would. In Washington, nothing would surprise me from either side with thier choices...

Off topic. We are talking about useing undesierable people not lessons learned from 911. We will never ever be %100 safe, never have never will.

It's not Off Topic. It's just that you don't want to talk about it. You brought up hindsight. I brought up a true and frim fact that we're NOT paying attention to hindsight, and you can't refute it, so you say it's off topic, and then in the same breathe you agree with me.

We could be safer than we are if we did use hindsight and what we know now, but instead the policticans in Washington, on both sides, are more concern about saving face and spending money vers protecting the people of the USA.

So full circle, we began this talking about funding SH the leader of a nation. So now you reverse yourself and say we were ok dealing with Iraq to fight a united front against Iran.

Again, there is a difference between funding a country to help us as an allies vers funding a crimnal.

If you read what I have written, you will see that I didn't come full circle, I never said we were wrong for dealing with Iraq years ago. I can see where you might have connected the dots, when I agreed with Jim's post above, but my point was that I think we misuse our 'power' we have in the USA.

Ok glad we agree.

Far from it when it comes to politics far far from it.


Jamie

 

[mnw]

It never ceases to amaze me when people equate Saddam Hussian with Bush, Blair and other western leaders.

These men take terrible decisions that very often will mean the loss of soldiers and innocents. But they are decisions that have to be made by someone.

It is easy to sit back and condemn but the commentators rarely make it to such status, let alone would do better in their place.

Critics of Bush and Blair would have the same advisors and same resources and would more than likely make the same decisions.

It is a sad, sad fact that in this world the decision may not always be about whether or not innocents die, but rather how many and in whose country. It sickens me to type such a thing, but that's the way it is.

It is leaders such as these that protect your rights to condemn them and to tell each other to shut up.

By the way, I just saw the released footage of the noose being put on Saddam's neck and then of his lifeless body after the event. For all his wickedness it is still a sad sight to see a lifeless body and to know that in all likelihood the eternal soul is lost and and damned.

 

[LadyEagle]

And, yet.....the world seems a little cleaner for a brief moment in time....