The W
Views: 98644186
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
3.9.07 0224
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Saddam possibly captured Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2(1172 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (36 total)
Lexus
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 470/1820
EXP: 5281371
For next: 150873

Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 21 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#21 Posted on 15.12.03 0028.14
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0028.37
First off, I salute all the soldiers involved in capturing Saddam.

Secondly, I'm in agreeance with Palpatine that Saddam does have a head full of information, and it's far too quick to lop it off. As rockdotcom has pointed out, Saddam is a rather intelligent man; he evaded our forces for quite a while in the very place they occupy. While it is a distinct act of cunning, it was futile in the end.

Perhaps he realizes that co-operation will gain him some sort of leniency, be it a 'less painful' execution, a forced exile into a foreign prison system, etc. After all, if he gives one clue that leads to the capture of any high ranking Al-Queda forces, weapons caches, or other secrets, then they will continue to feed and clothe him so long as he can provide the information. Again, after this long a duration, Saddam has proven himself to be a survivalist, and is known for his ruthlessness. He says the magic words, "Bin Laden", and he's alive until he tells where to find him. Granted, he probably won't spout off where Bin Laden is hiding, at least in the beginning, but at least those who are close to him. Then again, maybe (and I hope) he will lead to Usama, or maybe not give any information at all. Maybe he doesn't even know.

Long and short, one down, one to go.

Lastly, not to name names, but it's kind of silly to hear somebody lay blame to the government for 9/11. In all honesty, please tell me you'd say the same thing if the President was a Democrat. Not only that, but if seeing is believing, I have a copy of the official rules for Horseshoe Pitching, and I highly doubt very many people have went out of their way to seek this pamphlet. Do you doubt it's existence, though? (really trying to lighten this up and not come off as a flamer, but a person with an argument, albeit cheeky.)

That's what I think, if you care.
Merc
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 150/680
EXP: 1206039
For next: 27838

Since: 3.1.02
From: Brisbane, Australia

Since last post: 1238 days
Last activity: 1217 days
#22 Posted on 15.12.03 0633.39
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0634.05
    Originally posted by Barbwire Mike
    DNA tests confirmed it is really him, and apparently they weren't going to announce this until they knew it wasn't a double

That's the bit that makes me skeptical. Where/how did they get the original sample to make the comparison? I'm 99.9% sure it IS him mind you, I just really have trouble believing a press conference that starts with a quip and some cheering.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2587/4700
EXP: 21462416
For next: 374246

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1219 days
Last activity: 1016 days
#23 Posted on 15.12.03 0703.16
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0703.41
Regarding the trial of Saddam Hussein, here is an interesting blog take on where it should happen and who should do it:

I find it savagely ironic that (1) people who claimed that Saddam Hussein was no threat to any other countries now think other countries should have a part in his trial, (2) people who want Iraqis to run their own affairs right now don't want them to run this trial and, (3) people actually think that the UN should try him for the crimes it consistently refused to do anything about.

That pretty much hits it on the head

(edited by Grimis on 15.12.03 0804)
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 789/1857
EXP: 5331693
For next: 100551

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 467 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#24 Posted on 15.12.03 0709.11
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0709.15
I know this is a very good thing, but how much do I have to pay news organizations to stop saying "We caught Saddam woohoo woohoo woohoo woohoo we caught Saddam"?
A-MOL
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 711/777
EXP: 1445116
For next: 40821

Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3823 days
Last activity: 3765 days
#25 Posted on 15.12.03 0714.36
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0715.28
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Regarding the trial of Saddam Hussein, here is an interesting blog take on where it should happen and who should do it:

    I find it savagely ironic that (1) people who claimed that Saddam Hussein was no threat to any other countries now think other countries should have a part in his trial, (2) people who want Iraqis to run their own affairs right now don't want them to run this trial and, (3) people actually think that the UN should try him for the crimes it consistently refused to do anything about.

    That pretty much hits it on the head

    (edited by Grimis on 15.12.03 0804)


Just a question on this front. If he is tried by the US or a US created Iraqi judicial system, isn't the trial put in jeopardy by the comments of various high-ranking officials, calling him "evil" and "a tyrant", because such comments could prejudice the case?
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1540/2042
EXP: 6275762
For next: 117037

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2983 days
Last activity: 197 days
#26 Posted on 15.12.03 0737.57
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0739.54
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Regarding the trial of Saddam Hussein, here is an interesting blog take on where it should happen and who should do it:

    I find it savagely ironic that (1) people who claimed that Saddam Hussein was no threat to any other countries now think other countries should have a part in his trial, (2) people who want Iraqis to run their own affairs right now don't want them to run this trial and, (3) people actually think that the UN should try him for the crimes it consistently refused to do anything about.

    That pretty much hits it on the head

    (edited by Grimis on 15.12.03 0804)


Playing Devil's Advocate:

(1) People who claimed that Saddam Hussein was no threat to any other countries believed that that includes the US. Therefore, they tend to believe that the likelihood of Saddam getting a fair and impartial trial in the US is incredibly small, and would like to see the trial take place on more neutral ground.

A serious question: what jurisdiction does the US have over Saddam? What crimes can the US formally charge him with? His treatment of POWs during the Gulf War has already been tried. He can't be a POW himself, since the US never formally declared war. Whatever atrocities he engaged in towards his own people were not on US soil. He's not connected with 9/11. So what grounds will they use?

(2) Snipping from a Salon article:
Human rights groups cautioned that the Iraqi decree establishing the new tribunal was fundamentally flawed because it was proclaimed by an unelected body and without consultation with the Iraqi people or the international community. Plus, Amnesty International will scream any time that the death penalty is an option, which may end up being the case here.

(3) If the UN is out, what other international organizations would you suggest should be involved in this?



(edited by vsp on 15.12.03 0606)
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 395/641
EXP: 1098584
For next: 58542

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3651 days
Last activity: 3310 days
#27 Posted on 15.12.03 0812.59
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0817.12
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by ThreepMe
      Can we all stop it with trying to justify this war in Iraq by connecting it to 9/11?

      Please?

      All this "new evidence" wasn't around when we decided to march into Iraq to have our war.

      So can we all stop totting the banner of "Saddam was connected to 9/11" bullshit?

      Granted he probably was, somehow, connected to 9/11. But so was half the middle east and a good portion of our own government.

      So let's stop with the digging of all these little tibits of info. Little tidbits can probably link anyone in the world to 9/11.

      Until I see the document that says, "I Saddam Hussein was fully aware and trained/financed/gave birth to the terrorists (with the intention of destroying the Twin Towers)," then I will just chalk this all up as bullshit.

      So far, all we got are some documents that "believe" he was loosley connected. Well guess what? I believe the moon is made of cheese. Stop the presses!!!

      Fleh.

      But good job by our soldiers none the less.


    Um, two things, if you agree that thier can be a link, why state the "can we please stop trying to justify this war by linking it to 9/11? If you are against it fine, thats okay, but to sit and admit that thier IS a link and then to say we should stop trying to justify the war because of the link is a bit odd to me.

    Second, since Saddam and Iraq didnt meet all the requirements of the cease fire agreement from the first gulf war, this action is justified, 9/11 or not.


It's because that's not why we went there to begin with.

If we went there with all the evidence that the cease-fire was actually being violated, then I would have been fine with the war.

But since we have yet to find the smoking gun here, our Spin-Docs in Washington have been trying to get the populace to think that Saddam was directly linked to 9/11 (to muster our hate torwads him and to hope people will feel justified with the war).

That's not why we went and that's not why we'er still there.

That's why I ask that we quit trying to justify this war with the allmighty staple of "9/11."

I swear, if you wanted to invade Canada right now you could claim "9/11" and the flock would baaa like good little sheep.

It just seems to becoming the catch phrase of our foreign policy.

And if we're going to use all these indirect links to justify our war, then let's keep up the precedent! Invade Syria, Isreal, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc etc etc...

Bah.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2588/4700
EXP: 21462416
For next: 374246

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1219 days
Last activity: 1016 days
#28 Posted on 15.12.03 0820.20
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0822.29
    Originally posted by vsp
    (3) If the UN is out, what other international organizations would you suggest should be involved in this?
None. Let's face it, the best option for everybody is for him to be tried by a jury of his peers. As much as I want to seem him fried, the US Fourth Circuit is not a jury of his peers.
JoshMann
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 92/2159
EXP: 6299013
For next: 93786

Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2242 days
Last activity: 2239 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#29 Posted on 15.12.03 0822.54
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0822.57
    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    >Otherwise, my first thought was - Wow, Hussein looked exactly like Dennis Miller when they found him


MY first thought, and this was a bit more on the personal side, though, was "OMG he looks like my mother's husband!"

I know that's only funny to me...but take my word for it, he does.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 3142/7534
EXP: 43494056
For next: 807706

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 429 days
Last activity: 429 days
#30 Posted on 15.12.03 0929.57
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0930.37
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    He'd most likely be put on trial for crimes against humanity. Who chairs that trial...well, that's another matter entirely. Me, I'd leave him to the Kurds and let 'em party all over his bones.







Its a scary day when I agree wit OSH. Of course, I'd be a little more creative, bring in Cheetum the Midget, and Spin the Wheel to see whether the Sunnis/Iranians/Kurds/Kuwaitis get to have fun with Saddam, and how he gets to go to his final resting place. My preference: Stone him.
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 792/1857
EXP: 5331693
For next: 100551

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 467 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#31 Posted on 15.12.03 0949.45
Reposted on: 15.12.10 0951.59
    Originally posted by vsp
    (1) People who claimed that Saddam Hussein was no threat to any other countries believed that that includes the US. Therefore, they tend to believe that the likelihood of Saddam getting a fair and impartial trial in the US is incredibly small, and would like to see the trial take place on more neutral ground.


The likelihood of Saddam getting a fair and impartial trial anywhere is nonexistant. The best place for this trial is Baghdad, or possibly Tikrit.

    Originally posted by vsp
    A serious question: what jurisdiction does the US have over Saddam? What crimes can the US formally charge him with? ... So what grounds will they use?


The US has no jurisdiction over Saddam, but Iraq is another matter entirely. They can try him for damn near anything.

    Originally posted by vsp
    (2) Snipping from a Salon article:
    Human rights groups cautioned that the Iraqi decree establishing the new tribunal was fundamentally flawed because it was proclaimed by an unelected body and without consultation with the Iraqi people or the international community.


If that's the case, then it would be in everybody's best interest to hold Saddam for a while and let an election happen. And please, don't shove women and minorities down the Iraqi throats. If they want to elect someone, they will. If we (the US) thrust a leader onto the Iraqi people that they didn't vote for, there's likely to be serious rioting and probably more American deaths.

    Originally posted by vsp
    (3) If the UN is out, what other international organizations would you suggest should be involved in this?


I don't think any international organizations are needed.

    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    Of course, I'd be a little more creative, bring in Cheetum the [Evil] Midget, and Spin the Wheel to see whether the Sunnis/Iranians/Kurds/Kuwaitis get to have fun with Saddam, and how he gets to go to his final resting place. My preference: Stone him.


I like the idea, as long as Public Disembowelment and the old-fashioned Draw & Quarter are on the wheel.
Barbwire Mike
Boudin rouge
Level: 46

Posts: 97/502
EXP: 707176
For next: 4603

Since: 6.11.03
From: Dudleyville

Since last post: 3249 days
Last activity: 3242 days
#32 Posted on 15.12.03 1016.20
Reposted on: 15.12.10 1016.20
Just to keep everyone updated, it looks like the trial will definitely handled by the Iraqi council, death penalty is on the table, and the proceedings will probably be televised:

http://apnews.myway.com/ article/20031215/D7VETDS81.html

Official: Saddam Could Face Execution

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Saddam Hussein could be tried "in the next few weeks" and could be executed if convicted, an Iraqi Governing Council member said Monday. Other council members said the televised trial would likely begin later, perhaps by summer.

The trial will begin "very soon, in the next few weeks," Mouwafak al-Rabii, a Shiite Muslim council member, told The Associated Press.

He and other council members said they were sure the United States would hand Saddam over to the new Iraqi special tribunal for crimes against humanity, but differed on how soon a trial could be mounted against the former dictator.

"I can tell you he is going to be the first," al-Rabii said.

But Dara Noor al-Din, another council member, told AP that the order of trials would depend on the evidence.

"Maybe he will be the first one, maybe he won't," he said.

Noor al-Din, a leading Kurdish judge, offered a more conservative estimate for the trial date: "Maybe four to six months." A third council member, Adnan Pachachi, said he expected the trial to start "sometime in March."

That would still be close to the July 1 deadline for the U.S.-led occupation authority to hand over sovereignty to a new, transitional Iraqi government. The occupation authority has suspended executions in Iraq, but al-Rabii said it wouldn't take long for them to be reinstated - especially for Saddam.

"We will get sovereignty on the 30th of June, and I can tell you, he could be executed on the 1st of July," said al-Rabii, a longtime human rights activist.

He said Saddam would have a fair trial, and that Saddam will have "the right to employ the best lawyers in the world, if he wants."

All three council members said the trial would be televised.

Saddam was captured Saturday night in a raid by U.S. soldiers in northern Iraq. At least 300,000 people are believed to have been killed during his 23-year presidency, many of them buried in mass graves.
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 920/1493
EXP: 3921695
For next: 84384

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 121 days
Last activity: 44 days
#33 Posted on 15.12.03 1022.18
Reposted on: 15.12.10 1022.29
The only trial that makes sense here is one done by Iraqis. The U.S. doesn't have any jurisdiction here, Saddam didn't commit any crimes against us. By the same token, there is not any international organization that has any more jurisdiction over Iraq than we do. (and trying him in some international court gives those type of courts legitimacy, something I don't particularily want to see). The crimes were committed against the Iraqi people, and as a sovereign nation, they have the right to try him without outsider interference. (I know that calling Iraq a sovereign nation at this point is a stretch, but hopefully we can keep our nose out of this as much as possible. After all, if he's hated as much as we claim he is, there shouldn't be a problem with letting the Iraqis handle this).

(edited by ges7184 on 16.12.03 1559)
Barbwire Mike
Boudin rouge
Level: 46

Posts: 98/502
EXP: 707176
For next: 4603

Since: 6.11.03
From: Dudleyville

Since last post: 3249 days
Last activity: 3242 days
#34 Posted on 15.12.03 1029.11
Reposted on: 15.12.10 1029.26
    Originally posted by ges7184
    The only trial that makes sense here is one done by Iraqis. The U.S. doesn't have any jurisdiction here, Saddam didn't commit any crimes against us. By the same token, there is not any international organization that has any more jurisdiction over Iraq than we do. (and trying him in some international court gives those type of courts legitimacy, something I don't particularily want to see). The crimes were committed against the Iraqi people, and as a sovereign nation, they have the right to try him without outsider interference. (I know that calling Iraq a sovereign nation at this point is a stretch, but hopefully we got keep our nose out of this as much as possible. After all, if he's hated as much as we claim he is, there shouldn't be a problem with letting the Iraqis handle this).

Exactly. If we found evidence that Saddam had his hands in every act of terrorism involving US citizens for the last 20 years, the body count is still exponentially less than the one he racked up with his own people. Can't say I'm the biggest fan of Islam, but I gotta give them credit on knowing how to dole out the justice sometimes (hear about the trial for the guy who intentionally burned and blinded a woman with acid last week? Going to be blinded with acid by a doctor in a soccer stadium. Good look at trial, Saddam).
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 293/2697
EXP: 8839143
For next: 149676

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 20 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#35 Posted on 15.12.03 1111.31
Reposted on: 15.12.10 1113.39
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by vsp
      (3) If the UN is out, what other international organizations would you suggest should be involved in this?
    None. Let's face it, the best option for everybody is for him to be tried by a jury of his peers. As much as I want to seem him fried, the US Fourth Circuit is not a jury of his peers.


Grimis is correct. I really wish that he had offed himself or it was determined that he was long dead. The Iraqis have to try him. If they elect to execute him, okay. We can't. If we would, it would lead to his eternal martrydom and the shit will really hit the fan. I want to see him dead as much as anyone on this board but I think it would be better for him to rot eternally in one of his old torture cells. It may be all well and good to get evrything we can out of him and put him on ice until Iraq can come up with a court that looks legitimate and conduct a rigorous trial with a fervent defense that is open to the world.

The trouble here is that this will not stop the nut jobs and fervent Muslims, we (the infedels) are on Islamic soil. This is a minefield and time for the cowboying the administration is prone to to stop.
Leroy
Andouille
Level: 91

Posts: 236/2256
EXP: 7260127
For next: 208814

Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 18 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#36 Posted on 15.12.03 1130.12
Reposted on: 15.12.10 1131.08
    Originally posted by gugs
    I know this is a very good thing, but how much do I have to pay news organizations to stop saying "We caught Saddam woohoo woohoo woohoo woohoo we caught Saddam"?


You might want to look into their advertising rates. That should give you some idea.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Pages: Prev 1 2Thread ahead: Powell Has Cancer Surgery
Next thread: Strom had the fever
Previous thread: I hope Texas is ready for this
(1172 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Saddam possibly capturedRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.184 seconds.