Saddam's on Trial


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 Crazy Gringo

Crazy Gringo

    War is hell and war never changes therefore hell never changes

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Albertslund, Denmark

Posted 11 August 2006 - 05:28 PM

Well Bush got people to do bad things for him and he's got the protection of his posse aka. his very rich and influencial family and friends.
The stories of the web that the Bush Clan has spun around the world and their connections to the darker side of society pales in comparison with the story about the rise and fall of the goat herder from Tikrit.
Words to live by from Sergent Gunnery Highway: ' You adapt, improvise and overcome!'

'To kill a dream it is not enough to kill the dreamer', -Quote by Crazy Gringo until proven otherwise.

Mental Father of Air Morelman and Air Wargot!

Official StrategyCore UFO: Afterlight previewer. Preview here!

Has joined the league of 'The Crazy 8800s'

#22 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 11 August 2006 - 10:36 PM

Actually, Bush has had plenty of people executed. He's signed death warrents same as Saddam.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#23 Accounting Troll

Accounting Troll

    Bridge troll

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Location:Wales

Posted 11 August 2006 - 11:03 PM

Yes but it was their own fault - they had every opportunity to make a donation to the Republican Party :drink:

#24 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 05 November 2006 - 11:41 AM

So my land lord gets back today, and on going out this evening asks me to tape a show for him. In the first time in ages, I turn on a TV, and what should appear but a newsreader -

"This just in - Saddam Hussein has been given the death penalty for crimes against humanity."

So, straight away, questions again jump to mind. Can he appeal? I've a vague memory that if the jury is biased you can call a mistrial, and I reckon it wouldn't be hard to portray them as such. Has a date been set? If so, is it in the near future, or what?

What does Australia, who is against the death penalty and yet helped capture Saddam, think about the matter? What about the other invading countries? Do they support the death penalty? If not, what do they think about it's application to the overthrown leader of Iraq?

And again the question comes to mind, what has Saddam tried to do that Bush hasn't? Is the difference between their fates tied to the fact that Bush had weapons of mass destruction, and Saddam did not?

Mind that I've yet to research these matters online, so I have yet to know what the "public opinion" is. Catch is it's so hard to know which news sources to trust these days. There are a million half truths surrounding just about any "terrorism" related story.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#25 Zombie

Zombie

    Mr. Grognard of X-COM

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,535 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin, USA

Posted 06 November 2006 - 07:34 AM

View PostBomb Bloke, on 5th November 2006, 5:41am, said:

What does Australia, who is against the death penalty and yet helped capture Saddam, think about the matter? What about the other invading countries? Do they support the death penalty? If not, what do they think about it's application to the overthrown leader of Iraq?
Well, the countries which do not support the death penalty will obviously dislike the ruling. But it is an Iraqi tribunal which hands down the sentence - not other countires or the UN. Since it is an internal matter, countries can complain all they want but it will not affect the result (especially since Bush openly supports the death penalty in this case). That is the power of a democratic government (or pseudo-government/puppet regime). :D

- Zombie

My X-COM Patch Kit For UFO Defense | Emergency XCOM Meeting spoof on YouTube




JellyfishGreen said:

Zombie: Empirical data's your only man, when formulating a research plan.
A soldier's death is never in vain if it makes the formula more plain.
A few dozen make a better case for refining that third decimal place.
They call me Zombie because I don't sleep, as I slowly struggle to climb this heap,
of corpses, data points, and trials, but from the top - I'll see for miles!

#26 FullAuto

FullAuto

    Catching the next pimpmobile outta here!

  • Chief Editor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,853 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 November 2006 - 08:05 AM

He can appeal, but they'll be rushing that as fast as possible, so they can kill him and get it over with.  Even if he was innocent, which he's not, he's done up like a kipper.  There's still another trial going on against him, but I don't think they're going to hang (hur hur) around for that, either.

Was the verdict ever in any doubt?

Erfworld - the finest comic about turn-based gaming ever.


#27 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 06 November 2006 - 11:53 AM

No, I suppose it wasn't. I guess the thing I dislike is that the moster was caught and sentanced by fellow monsters.

I know other goverments can't have any affect on things, my point was that countries which oppose death sentances shouldn't have put him into a situation where he was going to be killed.

Sure, politicians are noted for being hypocritical, but that doesn't mean I like that, either.

I found this quote on CBS News:

Quote

The death sentence automatically goes to a nine-judge appeals panel. There's no time limit, but one court official says the appeals process could take as little as three to four weeks once the formal paperwork's submitted. If the verdicts and sentences are upheld, the executions must be carried out within 30 days.
So I suppose it isn't over yet.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#28 FullAuto

FullAuto

    Catching the next pimpmobile outta here!

  • Chief Editor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,853 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 06 November 2006 - 03:27 PM

Quote

I know other goverments can't have any affect on things, my point was that countries which oppose death sentances shouldn't have put him into a situation where he was going to be killed.

I understand the EU has appealed for Iraq not to carry out the death sentence.  I don't think Iraq is going to listen, though.  And the US has enough leverage in Iraq to have an effect, but they want him dead anyway.  :D

Erfworld - the finest comic about turn-based gaming ever.


#29 Crazy Gringo

Crazy Gringo

    War is hell and war never changes therefore hell never changes

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Albertslund, Denmark

Posted 06 November 2006 - 06:09 PM

Giving Saddam the short drop and sudden stop seems to me not to be worth it.
With all of the 'pain and suffering' that he has caused during his reign in Iraq he should rather live out remainder of his natural life suffering.
Since he already appears two steps away from the nuthouse why not push him those two steps.
If his has to be killed then at least to properly. Something like a .50 AE hollowpoint bullet through the the back of his head and send his corpse floating down the Tigris river.
And if there is ensuing riots after his death then there should issued a 'no BS' policy. Which would include use of the biggest stick possible to put and end to the riots (A couple of MOAB's maybe).
My question to all of this is when is it enough for somebody who 'just' cuts through all the humanism and let loose the darker side of human nature to put an end to this fragile situation.

Quote

'If you gotta defeat your enemy. Make sure that his defeat is absolute.'

Words to live by from Sergent Gunnery Highway: ' You adapt, improvise and overcome!'

'To kill a dream it is not enough to kill the dreamer', -Quote by Crazy Gringo until proven otherwise.

Mental Father of Air Morelman and Air Wargot!

Official StrategyCore UFO: Afterlight previewer. Preview here!

Has joined the league of 'The Crazy 8800s'

#30 Matri

Matri

    Official Love Nest Mascot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2006 - 09:40 PM

Yeah, well, just make sure he doesn't pull a Rasputin on those guys.
"Never be normal!" - Ron Stoppable

MechQuest. Get your mecha RPG fix.
Star Citizen.

#31 Accounting Troll

Accounting Troll

    Bridge troll

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Location:Wales

Posted 07 November 2006 - 06:50 PM

The BBC is saying that Saddam could be facing more trials for the reprisals after the 1991 uprising.  My guess is they'll keep putting him on trial until an embittered local assassinates him.  That way, we get out of turning him onto a martyr.

#32 Crazy Gringo

Crazy Gringo

    War is hell and war never changes therefore hell never changes

  • Site Staff
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Albertslund, Denmark

Posted 08 November 2006 - 06:30 AM

Then deport him to the US. They could always use one more cab driver. :D
Words to live by from Sergent Gunnery Highway: ' You adapt, improvise and overcome!'

'To kill a dream it is not enough to kill the dreamer', -Quote by Crazy Gringo until proven otherwise.

Mental Father of Air Morelman and Air Wargot!

Official StrategyCore UFO: Afterlight previewer. Preview here!

Has joined the league of 'The Crazy 8800s'

#33 Strong Bob

Strong Bob

    Sailor Jupiter is hot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 567 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 07:06 PM

Maybe I'm a little out of touch with things but...

I remember hearing that the publication of Saddam's capture, and the trial thereafter, was a breach of Geneva Conventions. I could've sworn this was the case, because when American prisoners were being publicized by Al Qaeda, a lot of people were outraged and quoted Geneva Conventions non-stop... Yet, I didn't hear much complaining at all when we had captured Saddam. Anyone know anything about this?

To be honest, I have a hard time seeing what the trial was all about. Everyone knew he would not be able to fight back. Every shred of media material I ever read about the case had twisted his words to sound as though he were speaking mindlessly and without a shred of logic. (Kinda odd, considering this man was once a world leader. Even Bush doesn't strike me as so random.) I guess that's why I don't watch American news anymore... But what difference does it make, exactly? The mere fact that a trial was held, that suddenly parties are exonerated of all guilt, save for whomever the judge says otherwise? Christ, OJ Simpson himself was deemed not guilty in his trial, do you think people consider him "innocent" at all, despite the fact the law said he is? This farce isn't going to mask anything. The man was as good as dead the moment we captured him.

Also, as an American... I'm still shocked and depressed at how most of my fellow countrymen still adamently claim that Iraq and Afghani terrorists were working in unison. At work the other night, I heard someone comment: "Well, I'm glad he's going to die for what he did on 9/11." It's so unbelievable at this point, it's not even funny to me... *Recalls a particular Bush voter back on X-com.co.uk that was convinced of this as well, during the elections*
Strong Bob's random Star Trek quote of the year:

*Scans rock* "It's dead, Jim." - McCoy

"Very funny, Bones." - Kirk

#34 Zombie

Zombie

    Mr. Grognard of X-COM

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,535 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin, USA

Posted 27 November 2006 - 07:17 PM

View PostStrong Bob, on 27th November 2006, 1:06pm, said:

Also, as an American... I'm still shocked and depressed at how most of my fellow countrymen still adamently claim that Iraq and Afghani terrorists were working in unison. At work the other night, I heard someone comment: "Well, I'm glad he's going to die for what he did on 9/11." It's so unbelievable at this point, it's not even funny to me... *Recalls a particular Bush voter back on X-com.co.uk that was convinced of this as well, during the elections*
Chalk that up to media brainwashing (and the Bush administration for fabricating the terrorist connection between Iraq and Afghanistan).  :D

- Zombie

My X-COM Patch Kit For UFO Defense | Emergency XCOM Meeting spoof on YouTube




JellyfishGreen said:

Zombie: Empirical data's your only man, when formulating a research plan.
A soldier's death is never in vain if it makes the formula more plain.
A few dozen make a better case for refining that third decimal place.
They call me Zombie because I don't sleep, as I slowly struggle to climb this heap,
of corpses, data points, and trials, but from the top - I'll see for miles!

#35 Strong Bob

Strong Bob

    Sailor Jupiter is hot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 567 posts

Posted 27 November 2006 - 07:50 PM

I know exactly what's to "blame" (Using the term loosely, since I think the real culprit is apathy/ignorance towards political education and people's habitual jumping to conclusions before properly accumulating data...) but my real problem is that the Bush administration hasn't been pushing for that in so long. The man even went and made an apology at one point, for 'making it seem like he was acusing Iraq for having weapons'. I'm just wondering...

Why is this being perpetuated? How is this being perpetuated? Especially when the news so glaringly admits the mistake, from both the Republican and Democratic views.

And in regards to Saddam... I am now wondering how many people really know what he is on trial for. Personally, I wasn't really all that clear until recently... I couldn't see him as a "War Criminal" because he didn't start the war, he was playing the defensive now, wasn't he? He wasn't a terrorist, or any kind of threat otherwise. He may have broken Geneva Conventions, but as I mentioned in my last post... Hypocrisy. At most he was just a sick dictator that we "randomly" decided to handle.

Er... If that's a War Crime, then there are plenty more people we need to be taking care of, right now. Bush supports the Death Penalty. A penalty that, recent studies show, is significantly more painful than once assumed. (For example, the lethal injection serum. It requires two sets of drugs, one is a paralyzing anesthetic designed to eliminate pain, and the other is an overdose of some lethal drug. However, when the same anesthetic was used on a woman during eye surgery, she awoke traumatized, claiming to have been perfectly conscious and aware of the entire operation, describing it as "A fate worse than death". Turns out it doesn't nullify pain as much as we thought...) So from my point of view, we are killing off people in torturous manners, just like Saddam was. We just justify it by saying "Well they killed first".
Strong Bob's random Star Trek quote of the year:

*Scans rock* "It's dead, Jim." - McCoy

"Very funny, Bones." - Kirk

#36 FullAuto

FullAuto

    Catching the next pimpmobile outta here!

  • Chief Editor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,853 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 27 November 2006 - 08:00 PM

POWs are supposed to be protected from being a public spectacle.  Seems like a lot of countries signed up to the Geneva Conventions for a laugh, because, hey, who's going to punish them if they don't abide by the rules they voluntarily signed up to?

Erfworld - the finest comic about turn-based gaming ever.


#37 Bomb Bloke

Bomb Bloke

    The Smily Admin

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania (AU)

Posted 27 November 2006 - 11:17 PM

No one wants to believe that they're the bad guys. People tend not to spend too much time researching why they're really the bastards.
BB's X-Com Projects Page - X-Com Games At GamersGate
You're just jealous 'cause the voices only talk to me :P
We love Tammy! :)

#38 DeepOne

DeepOne

    Squaddie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 12:00 AM

Quote

Strong Bob:
And in regards to Saddam... I am now wondering how many people really know what he is on trial for. Personally, I wasn't really all that clear until recently... I couldn't see him as a "War Criminal" because he didn't start the war, he was playing the defensive now, wasn't he?
He started the war in 1990 when he invaded Kuwait.  The war paused in 1991 with a ceasefire agreement.  Over the next 12 years, Saddam continually violated the terms of that agreement (see UN Resolution 1441).

Quote

He wasn't a terrorist, or any kind of threat otherwise.
Saddam supported Islamic jihad (which was the impetus behind 9/11).  Bush laid out the reasons for taking out Saddam in his 2003 State of the Union Address (scroll down about 3/4 on that page).

#39 Locutus

Locutus

    Squaddie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:58 AM

Quote

Saddam  supported  Islamic jihad (which was the impetus behind 9/11)

By using the word "supported" do you mean monetary and material support? Because I don't think there's any proof at that, as far as I know. If on the other hand you are talking about moral support, then I doubt you can hold anyone accountable for that.

#40 Accounting Troll

Accounting Troll

    Bridge troll

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Location:Wales

Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:24 PM

The money that Saddam Hussein sent to the relatives of Palestinian suicide bombers was very small change compared with Iraq's national income and the economic and military aid the USA gives towards Israel.  At the time, it was obvious to Saddam that Iraq was going to be invaded whatever he did, so his only option was a publicity stunt to present himself as the defender of oppressed Arabs across the world.  Iraq launched a series of missile attacks against Israel in 1991 for the same reason.

There are two problems with arguing that invading Iraq and putting Saddam Hussein on trial are justified because of his defiance of UN Resolution 1441:

1.  We have yet to find the Iraqi WMDs and have pretty much given up on the search.  If thousands of Iraqis had been involved in hiding them, the chances are that one of them would have confessed by now.

2.  The USA and its allies routinely veto or defy UN resolutions that don't suit us.  When do the UK and the USA ever try to enforce UN resolutions calling for an end to Israeli oppression of the Palestinians?  What about the illegal economic sanctions the USA has imposed on Cuba?  It is very difficult to come up with a legally sound argument as to why it is right for one nation to possess WMDs, defy the UN and routinely invade other countries, but wrong for another country to behave in the same way.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users