 |
| |
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:33
|
|
MtG, exactly. Plus, if Kurds did in fact catch him first, that's kind of a victory to the allied forces, which are lead by the US, so it's not so far fetched to say that even if so, the US captured Saddam. It doesn't matter who the individual was who first touched Saddam. And even if Kurds did it single handedly, it doesn't matter. Kudos to them. But it's a good time to get little feel good going on, so why not take the opportunity? It's not like the US didn't do a thing about it. If it wasn't for the US, Saddam would be still free. It was a little part, the actual capture in the whole process.
Let's say I was interested in the fee for catching Saddam. I'd get into my Susie Q and bust his bunker with it. Knock him out cold with outstanding over right hand and carry the slobby punk into the backseat and drive him to the nearest US base. What would the headlines read? It would read 'Saddam captured!' like it read with this case too. And the US would get credit for it, but hey, they should. I'd collect my fee and get myself to the Bahamas and not worry about if they didn't mention my name. Better that way anyway, wouldn't want 10 000 old loyal Saddamists to chase me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
To get one particular greasy little mother****ing murderer. |
How do you know he is a murderer? Is it not innocent until proven guilty.
After the first gulf war, there was an internal insurrection in Iraq, a country whose borders are generally accepted I would think. That insurrection was stamped out by use of force, and presumably 300.000 died, although this is hardly confirmed. Where is the crime in that? What international crime has been breached here?
Also there was an insurrection in the north where 4.500 Kurds were gassed. Is this a crime? To stamp out insurrection.
I remember that Bush specifically laid down the ultimatum that Bush and his two sons had to leave the country. So he has his rear covered on that one. However the whole discuusion revolved around the issue of WMD. It was because that Saddam, presumably, would not say whether or not he in fact had WMD. Actually this was flatly denied by the Iiraqi authorities.
Now Saddam has been captured and 20,000 more people are dead, and many will continue to die for many years. This is actually a crime, a violation of international law.
Then you add the 1.500.000 dead as a result of the embargo. This was done through legal means too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by skywalker
quote:
ignorance and apathy... |
You post a random news article claiming something that's been told by the mainstream media is false (yup, BBC is soooo pro-Bush, isn't it ) and then complain that we are just willing to believe anything as long as it supports our ideology? |
what exactly is my ideology? I'd like to know because I don't know... I don't follow an ideology. I don't contribute to political parties... I'm not a member of any interest group.
My ideology is truth. So yes... I post something that supports it. 
quote:
Do you go around telling people that the sky is blue, the atmosphere contains oxygen and the sun rises in the east? |
that's basically what I have to do...  btw, the sun doesn't "rise" the earth rotates giving the illusion of "rising" and "setting". 
Pekka: don't misunderstand me... I don't care who caught him... I care about a bunch of radical corrupt politicians taking credit for his capture and misleading America for their own political gain. It is wrong for Bush to do it... it would be wrong if Clinton would do it... or Howard Dean... or ANYONE ELSE. The fact that others don't think there's anything wrong with this appauls me.
quote:
Or did I say any were "trustworthy?" |
your previous statement lead me to think you know of some objective news sources... btw, I think the Christian Science Monitor is trustworthy... generally... I don't necessarily trust CommonDreams.org... which is why I always try to find confirmation from other independent sources. CNN and MSNBC have their uses... but they are corporate conglomerates with definite agendas... both political and ideological, as well as economical. The BBC, PBS, and NPR are the three news sources that have a higher degree of trustworthiness. I read the NYTimes, USAToday, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, and some local papers also... I try to read as much as I can before I form a theory or conclusion. But, when corporate media doesn't report something this newsworthy, I get suspicious.
Even publications like the National Inquirer are somewhat trustworthy. MSNBC's editor in chief Jerry Nachtman said this about the NI, "People mock the NI, but they are generally accurate in their reporting, especially when it comes to celebrities. So many people are looking to sue them, they have to cover their asses."
Is it possible the US caught Saddam? Sure... I'm not saying I'm 100% convinced either way. But knowing the ineptitude of the US intelligence community, and the lack of effective human intelligence, I suspect it's more likely the Kurds did pull this off. It did happen in the North (Tikrit) where the Kurds have a significant presence. And I do think local groups like the Kurds probably have greater capabilities in finding someone like Saddam.
The US military is an awesome force. Awesome for killing tanks, bombing cities, kicking the **** out of armies... but they SUCK at infiltration... they SUCK at guerilla urban war.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
Has there not yet been made an official dossier where the coalition specifically points out what crimes Saddam has done?
And is Saddam the only one being accused? He must have had officers and bureaucrats who were following orders. As it was shown in the Eichman trial it is not an excuse to say that one simply followed orders.
Then Saddam might have been in breach of Iraqi law. However would that be an excuse for actually invading the country?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kingof the Apes
If the Kurds actually did catch him, it's a surprise he's still alive. I don't believe they hold him in very high regard, and wouldn't you still get the reward if you produced a corpse? |
Ah yes. The Kurds are simply primitive savages and heathens too. Simply incapable of spotting a good political opportunity when it falls into their turban.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:33
|
|
Tripledoc, well, the US (or whoever) has captured many key players. You can see the deck, and it has only few players out there but they are being hunt down as we speak relentesly by the US soldiers and the coalition forces. Not all of them are dead either, they have live prisoners.
They are making their case also, but now is the time when they acutally get to speak with Iraqi citizens who wouldn't talk earlier because of the fear of Saddam being back. Now he's not coming back, so people are more open and talkative, helping to gather the evidence.
Furthermore, you don't need 100% evidence to capture a person. It's enough that you suspect the person and have some backing up. That's why his is captured and not tried at the same moment of his capture. They're building the case, which is strong I'm sure. If Saddam is not guilty, I'm sure he has nothing to worry about.
And yes, following orders is not enough if you know what you're doing is crime, you are as guilty as you can be.. well at least in front of your military justice, I think this goes for international ones as well. I think it's common sense.
Would it be enough to invade? This war is about lot of things not just Saddam. It was also about the WMD, which is a subject we touch and this thread goes ballistics.
I wish, that someone in Europe would have figured it out earlier what kind of a man with a plan Hitler was, so we could have taken him out as well. Who knows, only thing I can say for sure is that if Saddam was not ousted, he'd be oppressing like a mofo and there would be LOTS of bodies every year. When he would eventually die, his sons would have taken over and we know what kind of animals they were, executing people right and left if they felt like it. Or at least the other one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
|
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by skywalker
despite all you deny it, you are a democrat (don't give us the "I hate Clinton too" crap). You consistently troll ONLY right-wingers. |
fine... but if you believe I'm a democrat, you = wrong...
I troll mostly "right wingers" because most of their views come in conflict with my own... yes, I agree MORE with some Democrats, but that party is crap. There aren't two political ideologies in the whole world you know, boy. When (I would say if, but you seem like a promising, potentially intelligent individual) you go to college, and learn a thing or two about history, politics, and social sciences, you will understand me a little more.
But there are "right wingers" I can respect and agree to disagree with... like John McCain and pre-"I'm a neo-con *****"-Colin Powell.
On the political spectrum www.politicalspectrum.org, I'm moderately economically left (about -5 to -4) and socially libertarian (-6 to -5). That puts me in direct conflict with economically right wing and socially authoritarian people... like Bush, Hitler, Reagan, Thatcher, etc... but I also don't agree with the majority of the Democratic Party. Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards, Gephardt, Braun, Clark, and EVEN DEAN... but I'm going for Dean because he (and Clark) are the only ones going after the Bush admin about Iraq (and they didn't enable Bush like the Washington Democratic establishment candidates **except Kucinich).
So skywalker, don't insult yourself by jumping to false conclusions about my political affiliations or my "ideology". I do follow an ideology... the Sava ideology. Probably nobody else on the planet would agree 100% with me...
and for the record, I troll mostly dishonest, corrupt, pieces of ****... which the Republican party has MORE of than the Democrats. But don't mistake hating most Republicans for adoring Democrats.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kingof the Apes
Saddam was the Kurd's archenemy, their equivelant to America's Osama.
If a bunch of Americans had captured Osama, do you think he would be alive, or in good shape? |
Probably in better shape than if the Taliban caught Bush.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-01-2004 08:59
Attachment: 
|
