Should Saddam be executed??

[Phi for All]

No one is mentioning alternatives.

 

A simple arguement about WMD or the morality of capital punishment only goes prt way. What are the possiblities' date=' life imprisonment, exile, torture?

 

Any ideas?[/quote']IMO, for his crimes, life imprisonment is the only way to go. Unfortunately, I don't think the Arab culture is big on taking care of criminals for life, plus this leaves the possibility of him being freed at a later date by some means. Exile means he can find sympathizers, and torture is more barbaric than capital punishment, plus it creates a martyr even more than executing him would.

[YT2095]

thinking about it logisticly, anything done, including the media coverage will be sellective and devicive to support favour towards the interim Gov (and the Americans).

"Propaganda" is the keyword with all of it, be in no doubt!

[Aardvark]

Are you saying that is a good or a bad thing?

[YT2095]

good or bad is all dependant upon the outcome, I`m saying it`s a Manipulative thing. as for good or bad, no one knows until the outcome, I hope it`ll be a good thing

[bloodhound]

I can imagine the american admin blushing when saddan throws all the dirt on them about how they supported him and such

[YT2095]

that`s quite likely to happen also!

 

whether it`ll be shown televised or not is a different story! )

[Aardvark]

There is lots of vague talk about how much the West supported Saddam before falling out with him.

 

Does anyone have any hard facts or is it all just lazy hot air?

[bloodhound]

u obviously haven't seen pictures of donald rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam himself!! and they were't manipulated in anyway. I am sure somewill will explore on how the west supported iraq in the iran-iraq war. etc.

[bloodhound]

the actual video clip and information can be viewed here

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2038.htm

[Aardvark]

Shaking hands doesnt mean anything, get real.

[bloodhound]

ok. ill just let YT to come back and explore on some of the stuff.

 

i am sure if u just google for it, u can find plenty of stuff. but u will probably just dismiss as liberal rubbish

[Aardvark]

I'm not arguing that the West has no guilt here, ( how do you know if i'm a liberal or not? ) i'm simply asking for some kind of evidence. A handshake doesnt count.

[bloodhound]

honestly, i just can't be bothered.

[Aardvark]

If you cant back up your opinions why are you bothering to post at all?

[bloodhound]

I could if I wanted to, but I am kinda lazy. and I got better things to do than looking round the net for articles on western support of saddam. like for example increasing my post count.

 

well i just googled anyway.

 

here are the first few quotes

 

"Fresh controversy about Donald Rumsfeld's personal dealings with Saddam Hussein was provoked yesterday by new documents that reveal he went to Iraq to show America's support for the regime despite its use of chemical weapons. "

 

from

http://www.worldrevolution.org/article/1049

 

and

"The US removed Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism in 1982.

 

Two years later it re-established diplomatic relations, which had been severed since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

 

Iraq’s principal arms source was its long-time ally the USSR.

 

But several western nations, including Britain, France, and the US, also supplied weapons or military equipment to Iraq, and the US shared intelligence with Saddam Hussein’s regime."

 

from

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/02/iraq_events/html/western_support.stm

[Aardvark]

If thats all you can come up with it's pathetic.

 

Donald Rumsfeld made a weak protest at Iraqs use of chemical weapons, maybe a bit feeble but not support.

 

Removing Iraq from a list of nations supporting terrorism in 1983, perhaps because Iraq didnt support any terrorists in 1983!

 

Establishing diplomatic ties, GASP! How wicked.

 

Selling a small quantity of weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. A simple case of the lesser of two evils.

 

If thats the case for the prosecution, then there is no case to answer.

 

As i suspected, a lot of lazy hot air.

[Phi for All]

Here's an article that talks about US support of Iraq over Iran.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/

[Aardvark]

A great many words to simply say that in the Iran-Iraq war the USA saw Iraq as the lesser of two evils. Big deal.

[Phi for All]

A great many words to simply say that in the Iran-Iraq war the USA saw Iraq as the lesser of two evils. Big deal.

Ahhh, the "whatever" school of debate. Ask for hard facts, get them, say "big deal".

 

How droll.

[bloodhound]

I would ask Aardvark to show some facts that the west didn't support Saddam, now that we have gave a couple of articles which say that they did.

[atinymonkey]

There is lots of vague talk about how much the West supported Saddam before falling out with him.

 

Does anyone have any hard facts or is it all just lazy hot air?

 

 

Talking of lazy hot air' date=' do you ever read the full thread? Evidence is posted in it, but if you want to pretend that the US dosn't make mistakes I suggest to warn people that's the limit of your ability to comprehend.

 

 

Interesting linkage:-

 

 

Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein during the Iraq Iran war:-

 

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv'>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/shakinghands_high.wmv

 

An excise statement for the export of chemical for weapons production:-

 

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq42.pdf'>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq42.pdf

 

All after the original attack on the Kurds of which we are now meant to think the US was 'outraged' about and felt the need to protect the world from.

 

Full story:-

 

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

[Dave]

A great many words to simply say that in the Iran-Iraq war the USA saw Iraq as the lesser of two evils. Big deal.

 

Sounds like you're just not looking at the facts tbh.

[Aardvark]

That's your problem, lack of facts.

 

A photo of a handshake doesnt mean anything and the link atinymonkey gives is of a chemical order being CANCELLED because of fears it could be used in chemical weapons.

 

I'm not saying the west has never done anything wrong but none of you have produced any hard evidence of support and backing for Saddams regime that you keep vaguely refering to. Yes, during the Iran-Iraq war the west did not want to see an Iranian victory, that doesnt extend to being major supporters of Sadaam.

 

Like i said, a load of lazy hot air.

[J'Dona]

Here are two links for your Aardvark, found in 5 minutes on Google:

 

http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/ShalomIranIraq.html (all 155 information sources at bottom of page)

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/26/column.novak.opinion.iraq.history/

[atinymonkey]

That's your problem' date=' lack of facts.

[/quote']

 

Pack it in. This is not politics of History 101 we are not here to teach you or present swathes of evidence for you to dismiss. We really don't need to convince you of anything. Another rebuke and quite clearly you'll deserve to get the 'screwball' tag.