Suddam Hussien Caputured?!

[TurboSmoke]

Originally posted by milefile
We would. But they won't. They can't.

i think its unlikely...

anyway back to the topic, i would like to see Hussein whipped and beaten while naked and shackeled through the streets of Baghdad by the families of the innocent people who lost thier loved ones to his cruel torture and execution....beaten until he was dead...

i am not usually in favour of the death penalty but in this case thats justice...

forget american or international justice, his main crimes were against the ordinary iraqi men and women...let him face thier vengence...

 

[milefile]

Throw him in a "rape room" with every Bubba from every prison in the world.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
No but most people actually have hearts and care for other human beings. Are you telling me that if you were under the rule of a cruel dictator that you wouldn't want help?

Yes, because there's no way to decide who's cruel and who isn't. Why isn't President Bush cruel for sending hundreds of American soldiers to their death then not attending any of their funerals? In my opinion, he is. Where's the UN?

You call innocent people being killed peace on prosperity? Maybe for you but not to the people under his rule.

You still don't answer the question. Who makes the decision on who has a 'cruel' rule and who hasn't? Where does it end?

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

Originally posted by M5Power


Yes, because there's no way to decide who's cruel and who isn't. Why isn't President Bush cruel for sending hundreds of American soldiers to their death then not attending any of their funerals? In my opinion, he is. Where's the UN?[/B]

As I said all of those people joined the millitary volunarily.

You still don't answer the question. Who makes the decision on who has a 'cruel' rule and who hasn't? Where does it end?

look it up in the dictionary:

cru·el:

Disposed to inflict pain or suffering.

Wasn't sadam inflicting pain and suffering? You can't say that Bush is cruel because as I said before they voluntered to join the militray while none of saddams people voluntered to be tortured or killed.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy

Wasn't sadam inflicting pain and suffering?

TO WHOM? Is President Bush inflicting pain and suffering? Can you honstely answer that question 'no'? Do we attack a country if 50% of their population believes the dictator is inflicting pain and suffering? And if it's 49%, it's okay? What will happen to those 49% of people? You still don't understand - THERE IS NO CUTOFF FOR THIS KIND OF THING. Saddam might be the beginning, but there's no telling where it could end.

You can't say that Bush is cruel because as I said before they voluntered to join the militray while none of saddams people voluntered to be tortured or killed.

And what about the liberals who believe Bush is cruel for his trade policy or his environmental ideals, or this war? Who the hell are you, we, or ANYBODY to decide what 'pain and suffering' is? No vague terms, tell me exactly - how many people need to die, in what way, by whose hands? Do injuries count? These questions can't be answered, period, which is exactly why we have no business sending our military - whose business is to protect and defend our citizens - to fight for another country's people.

Yes, Saddam inflicts pain and suffering. Apply that to every world leader and a nuclear war will start.

 

[Red Eye Racer]

Originally posted by milefile
Is it because you had more respect for him than that?

I wouldn't call it respect at all,.....

IMO, someone of his stature would be better off going down in a blaze of glory. He would attempt mardarism before just streaching out his arms and then requesting release negotiations.

Also, I dont believe he would allow them to examine his in the manor that they did. The footage, IMO, was about as humiliating as one could be to a person with that type of religious beliefs. Think about it,.... people touching his face with the bottom of their shoe was punishable by death. Do you believe he would willingly let someone put their hands in his mouth on camera, knowing full well that the footage would be broadcasted?

Meh,... I hope it's true,... but I cant help noticing some holes in the story either.

 

[ExigeEvan]

skylineGTR_guy

Quote:
As I said all of those people joined the millitary volunarily.

they volunteered for 2 reasons

1. because they were high school drop outs
2. They wanted to fight a just cause
   [/list=1]
   
   The whole thing would have been different if Bush said,'we are going to Iraq just to save the iraq people from an evil tyrant, something we should have finished in 1991'
   
   that would have given the soldiers a just reason to fight.
   
   Now he said they were going in to find WMD, but there seems to be none, so it seems America is
   a) lying or
   b) misled
   
   Either way the soldiers don't seem to be fighting for such a just cause.
   
   Let me sum up.
   Would you rather Bush had said
   • We are going in to free the suppressed people of Iraq and bring justice to a cruel man
   • or we are going in because this guy has the same weapons as us, and its not fair
     [/list=a]

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

Let me sum up.
Would you rather Bush had said

• We are going in to free the suppressed people of Iraq and bring justice to a cruel man
• or we are going in because this guy has the same weapons as us, and its not fair
  [/list=a]

• 
  
  
  The existence or not of WMDs is irrelevant. Operation Iraqi Freedom (Note that it's not called Operation WMD or anything of that sort) was successful beyond expectations. The world is minus Saddam Hussein, relatively few lives were lost, costly sanctions have been lifted, and terrorism has been put on notice.
  
  I think you are getting your news mixed up. Read the statement made by General Tommy Franks on March 22nd 2003 before the war began
  
  

  You know, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld, my boss, yesterday outlined the military objectives of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Let me review them with you.
  
  First, end the regime of Saddam Hussein.
  
  Second, to identify, isolate and eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
  Third, to search for, to capture and to drive out terrorists from that country.
  Fourth, to collect such intelligence as we can related to terrorist networks.
  Fifth, to collect such intelligence as we can related to the global network of illicit weapons of mass destruction
  Sixth, to end sanctions and to immediately deliver humanitarian support to the displaced and to many needy Iraqi citizens.
  Seventh, to secure Iraq's oil fields and resources, which belong to the Iraqi people.
  And last, to help the Iraqi people create conditions for a transition to a representative self-government.

  
  you can read the entire document here:
  http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text2003/0322franks.htm