Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Saddam Hussein Has Been Captured In Iraq
The Other Side forums - suitable for mature readers! > The Other Side forums > The Issues Forum
Pages: 1, 2
karismaklysm
look. everyone deserves humane treatment. we're all humans. argument against basic truth like that makes organizations like the UN completely useless. and we dont know jack about the true crimes he committed or even how much of it was considered criminal by iraqi standards. stupid freakin media.... like, i love this line from the article:

QUOTE
The arrest, which took place without a single shot being fired, was a major victory for coalition officials, who have spent months in a bloody offensive to stem guerrilla attacks by supposed Saddam loyalists, and for President Bush, who has been stung by criticism for failing to find the toppled Iraqi leader.


i think that's a pretty bold statement.
miss_spunk
OK, first of all, to the point that he was hiding in his hometown, the most obvious place ever, then why the hell wasn't he found before. They searched that place through and through.

Secondly, this is far from over. In Afghanistan, a similar occurance, nothing there is being resolved. It's still quite bloody, there is no proper system for practically anything, forget about justice. It's going to take a long while to sort it out, for the most part that country is completely ruined. Iraq may be able to hold herself a bit more, but not by much. The capture is a boost of morale for the majority, but really in the long run that will be it. There are still pockets of resistance, and there's no telling how long that will last for.

Someone said that the news getting through to the media is filtered. I suggest looking at some online newspapers. Preferably some Arabic ones. Try a few and then judge for yourself which is least biased etc etc.

He should be tried in Iraq with a board of Iraqi judges...they're not all corrupt ya know. And I'm not even going to bother replying to Sir Maxerpopple...or whatever. I'm just hoping that you phrased your posts badly cause some of them were just... *shakes head*

QUOTE
saudi arabia is our ALLY, and they're an oppressive monarchy that openly supports terrorism. they've probably caused somewhat close to the amount of deaths that saddam has.


That needs revising.

Aysha xxx
leopold
QUOTE (CommieBastard @ Dec 15 2003, 08:18 AM)
Okay. I must have have missed something because I was sure the whole point we invaded Iraq was because Hussein was doing nasty things like, let's say, MURDERING PEOPLE. Killing somebody unless it is in self-defence and without due process of the law IS MURDER. Plain and simple. How can we invade a country ostensibly to bring justice, and then deny justice to the conquered?

I guess ya missed summat, Commie... Iraq wasn't invaded cos of Saddam's murdering ways. If that was the case, then why not invade Algeria? Or Israel? Or Cyprus? or Korea?

Oh, hang on a tick... are any of those major oil producers? Well, I suppose Algeria is in OPEC...

No, I still think Iraq was invaded for two reasons:

1) Cos they have a huge cache of oil (third behind Canada and Saudi Arabia, apparently, and both of which are pretty much secured) which I can assume the US Government want to put first dibs on. I think the current on/off status of Iraq in OPEC doesn't help.

2) Cos that evil Saddaaaaam tried to kill daddy!

I've been reading up a little on OPEC, and it turns out that OPEC members are net exporters of oil (ie export more than they import or sell internally), and that they have their production capped to conserve the supply. Interestingly, the US is the largest producer of oil in the world (although the quality of the refineries puts it there), and it is not an OPEC member. Maybe it should be?
CommieBastard
I have as many doubts as you about the Bush administration's true motives, Lee, hence "ostensibly". However, their true motives are not the issue. They claimed to have invaded to end Saddam's, as you put it, "murdering ways". That, therefore, is what they have to abide by.

Oh, and unless US forces are lying, that is Saddam - he apparently passed a DNA test.

On a sideline, it's altogether possible that Saddam's capture will increase the violence and murder in Iraq. A journalist for today's Independent reported that the only reason many of the Iraqis he talked to had not fought against US occupation was because they were worried that, should the US withdraw, Saddam would regain power. Now that that threat is removed, they feel free to take up arms against the occupying forces.
CommieBastard
Oh, and the US said that Hussein and his top-ranking leuitenants will have a huge (Nuremberg-scale) war crimes trial and that it will be an Iraqi trial rather than a UN one.
oobunnie
QUOTE (CommieBastard @ Dec 15 2003, 06:05 PM)
Oh, and the US said that Hussein and his top-ranking leuitenants will have a huge (Nuremberg-scale) war crimes trial and that it will be an Iraqi trial rather than a UN one.

And by this do you mean that the US is going to use there new puppet government to convict these people (nothing wrong with that) and then hand out what ever punishment they see fit, or rather they think will boost the popularity at home.

Myself I figure this is going to work out in a Sadam is gunna end up hanging upside down tied by his foot, and just to keep it historical he will have to be naked sort of a way. Oh and ofcourse this will have to take place in a public sqaure where American troops will more then likely be giving out free food. So wether or not the Iraqi people support the idea, to the camera's they will still be smiling.

The truth is we dont learn history to aviod tragedy but rather for lack imagination in ways to yet again screw things up.
monkey_called_narth
befor we go about condemming hussien read this:link
it seems that he isnt the only person to have killed anyone. now since everyone is calling for hussiens death because hi ordered people to kill people i call for bushes death, and hired hitmen normally go down with the person pay for them so that would be the us army, and any other involved in the war.
gerbilfromhell
narth: ok, so that makes BOTH sides 'bad'. not equally 'bad', obviously, but 'bad' nonetheless. does that make saddam any better? huh.gif

oh, and note that that only is talking about BAGDHAD. there's a lot more of iraq than just bagdhad

and did anyone hear about how we bombed an afghani village last week-ish? we killed about 10 or so children and an old man. apparently the army was looking for an al queda leader who'd left the village a week before.....
miss_spunk
^^^I know. Terrible isn't it. It can REALLY sicken you. And its not just a one-off
Sir Maxerpopple
I don't want the US to punish him, because then we would be obligated to give him rights and humane treattment.

I want him handed over the the families of the Iraqis he has murdered so they can make him pay. They deserve retribution, and the rest of the world can wait until he answers for his crime at their hands.

Secondly the issue here is not why we went to Iraq. The issue is, we have Saddam...so what should we do with him?

I don't think it matters why we went into Iraq in this discussion, just what we should do with him.
Ocean!
QUOTE (Overfriendly_Kitten @ Dec 15 2003, 02:24 PM)
QUOTE (cait @ Dec 14 2003, 06:44 PM)
Naw dude, it was totally santa claus they captured.








I told you! It's Saddanta!

Ocean!
Mr Fuzzy
QUOTE (Overfriendly_Kitten @ Dec 15 2003, 03:05 PM)
He should be tried in an International Human Rights Tribunal based in Iraq (the International Criminal Court would have been an ideal place to try him but the US doesn't like the ICC as it might find against US soldiers currently posted in various countries).

He should be tried before a panel of Iraqi judges (if there are any who are free from any taint of the old regieme) with international judges appointed from the UN to assist and add credibility to the matter.

i agree entirely. the iraquis should deal with it, but because of its international fascination the only way to keep everyone happen is to have full supervision to prove that it is a real trial to the world.
Fandangohead676
They caugth him hazzah can we all get back to our lives now
sammi
Let's see... Debate-ness mode... happy.gif

I think he should be tried like Overfriendly_Kitten stated... Agreement. *nods* M-hm. I also agree that this never was or even currently *IS* our issue. It was the Iraqi's problem to begin with, and they should close the case as well. I'm not saying we should not've done anything to help them out, but war is never truly the best solution. I'm too peaceful to agree with it. happy.gif;

Nurp, it wasn't Santa Claus... He passed a DNA test before they even started publishing things all over the place. Too bad it wasn't tho'. I wish Santa existed so once I become an adult I wouldn't actually have to pay for stuff, and that Bush's campaign for 2004's presidency hadn't been so positively affected by his capture. laugh.gif ; Lord knows I'm not a Bush fan in general; no offense to anyone who is.

And as for the oil issue -- yes, it's true. We do want the oil back, terribly badly, but I'm not so sure that's the entire reason behind it. Anyone considered that perhaps it was almost a pride issue? I'm not saying that it's the biggest reason on the planet either, but couldn't it be possible that little Bush Jr. wanted to finish what Daddy started and clean up the mess he left behind?

To Gerb: Yeah, I heard about it. Wondering if anyone else had, but anyways. @_@; It really is a disgusting and grotesque way to handle this situation, period. War and violence is rarely ever the answer to anything. (IMHO) So yar. That be all, I think. <3
Pab
I wanna know why he was captured in a concrete bolt-hole, with the ultra-symbolic chest of cash and 2 kalashnikovs. He has been doing what for the last months? Hiding? in a hole? are you kidding? To me, he delivered himself to the 'Iraqi police' and the US war-mongers. Why? Its not a believable situation to me. Somebody has organised this, with full pomp-and-circumstance. Him? maybe. Them (with his coopoeration)? maybe. But it aint as clear cut as 'Saddam was hiding in a cellar for 2 months'. nope.
Sir Maxerpopple
He was not lying in a ditch for two months. He went into that ditch after soldiers raided the house near it, it was his hiding place. I doubt this was orchestrated, Saddam had a gun but had no more fighting spirit. Maybe instead of jumping to conspiracy theories we should examine the plausible.

And fandango...hazzah?
sammi
Eh, I'm one for conspiracies. They're much more interesting. ^^; And occasionally make a lot of sense. I see Saddam's capture as perhaps being something to temporarily distract the US gov't. since we're all happy and la dee dah about finally getting him. From what it's distracting our attention, I don't know. US security? Again, me dunno. sleep.gif

I still feel like someone organized this, somehow. Perhaps the tip actually came from some of his "people" or whatever you call his supporter-ish fellow terrorists and we simply didn't know it... e_e I mean, they (US gov't.) never revealed the origin of the tip, least as far as I know. Not to say that he directly delivered himself, because it's not as though he called us and said, "Oh yeah, by the way, I'm hiding in a little hut in my hometown, come and get me~!" or anything like that. But... yeah. dry.gif
Righteous
Here are some articles/columns I found.

The Truth About Every So-Called Leader

Saddam's Capture Means Trouble For U.S. Officials

The Tryrant Is Now A Prisoner

We Caught The Wrong Guy

BTW- I'm not sure that most of the sheeple realize that Saddam had been the United States' ally back in the '80s.
CommieBastard
QUOTE (Righteous @ Dec 16 2003, 05:52 PM)
BTW- I'm not sure that most of the sheeple realize that Saddam had been the United States' ally back in the '80s.

Oh, for heaven's sake. Who doesn't know that? Every single form of media which isn't actually written and published by gun-toting rednecks has been shouting it since Bush said "Iraq". I have serious issues with people who assume intellectual superiority because they can pick up a newspaper and then call everyone else "sheep".
{Gothic Angel}
QUOTE (CommieBastard @ Dec 16 2003, 07:42 PM)
Oh, for heaven's sake. Who doesn't know that? Every single form of media which isn't actually written and published by gun-toting rednecks has been shouting it since Bush said "Iraq". I have serious issues with people who assume intellectual superiority because they can pick up a newspaper and then call everyone else "sheep".

I didnt know that
MistressAlti
QUOTE ({Gothic Angel} @ Dec 16 2003, 02:06 PM)
I didnt know that

Well then, I have to ask you, how do you feel about being called "sheeple"?

Righteous, come on now, you've got to be more diplomatic in presentation...
{Gothic Angel}
QUOTE (MistressAlti @ Dec 16 2003, 08:28 PM)
Well then, I have to ask you, how do you feel about being called "sheeple"?

Righteous, come on now, you've got to be more diplomatic in presentation...

Tbh, for someone whos all anti-conflict he aint half promoting it

This leads me to suspect hypocritical tendencies

Ergo, my reply would be: Give a edit?
Tarantio
QUOTE (CommieBastard @ Dec 14 2003, 09:32 PM)
QUOTE (Sir Maxerpopple @ Dec 14 2003, 09:26 PM)
You are right Commie, he is not the US, therefore we should have no obligation to treat him humanely.

Oh, I get it now. Only Americans get human rights. Everyone else can go f*ck themselves. Thanks for clearing that up.

damn commie. u just get that one?
Tarantio
QUOTE (Mr Fuzzy @ Dec 15 2003, 11:26 PM)
QUOTE (Overfriendly_Kitten @ Dec 15 2003, 03:05 PM)
He should be tried in an International Human Rights Tribunal based in Iraq (the International Criminal Court would have been an ideal place to try him but the US doesn't like the ICC as it might find against US soldiers currently posted in various countries).

He should be tried before a panel of Iraqi judges (if there are any who are free from any taint of the old regieme) with international judges appointed from the UN to assist and add credibility to the matter.

i agree entirely. the iraquis should deal with it, but because of its international fascination the only way to keep everyone happen is to have full supervision to prove that it is a real trial to the world.

well personally i fail to see what Saddam DID in Gulf War 2 that incriminates him. He didn't kill civilians, he didn't use cluster bombs on his country (which cause as much random damage as landmines), nor did he carpet bomb the US or UK in retaliation. He had no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, nor even the projects underway. So what will any jury find him guilty of? Well he ran off and hid, didnt he? he HAS to be guilty of somethin then...

I know, the US can find him guilty of war crimes! ... wait, no he didnt commit any... not now and not in 92. so what about being a tyrant? well, he WAS a US installed tyrant... and they did force numerous embargoes and boycotts on his country, weakening its ability to support its people. when u treat someone as a villain, they dont have a lot of choice but to act like one, especially when the US is the de facto "hero".

bah humbug i say. if it were to be a fair trial, put bush on the stand too, and blair. they're guilty of REAL war crimes AND bush rules america with tyrannical methods, when much better is expected of him. Fuck this fair trial crap, and my apologies to the mod who has to edit that. its the first time ive sworn on here, but it bloody well makes me mad to see such injustices being casually shrugged off even by the intelligent people on this forum. screw bush and his regime. Hes the real crook and HE should be locked away for life, and be thankful they didnt get HIS home state to judge him. Texas would see him fry, and so would i, in a bloody instant.
Polocrunch
Well, he did commit some pretty awful crimes during the Iran-Iraq war, and he was no angel in the Second Gulf War (and by "Second Gulf War" I mean the actual second one, not the third one, as the American media seems to think it was) either. Plus he can be tried for crimes against humanity, and if they ever find any WMD, he'll have broken more than one Geneva Convention.
spiffilicious05
Okay, I haven't slept in over 24 hours due to a very long research paper I've been writing, so spare me for not being very politically correct but...

I think we should have left him in the hole, Sadam is a very proud man, to be seen laying in his own filth in fear with nothing to eat or drink is the lowest point of his life, and death is too good for him. If we killed him he'd believe himself to be a martyr and that we'd be doing him a favor and sending him to heaven.

So as I said, we shouldve left him in the friggen whole, maybe poured a mound of dirt or something over it so he can't get out. dry.gif
Sir Maxerpopple
I would rather let the Iraqis have the pleasure of doing whatever horrible things they want to him. They need to compact millions of deaths into one.
Tarantio
Saddam may be no angel, but in the face of what the self proclaimed "good guys" have done to his country I think the world has much bigger fish to fry.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.