SADDAM IS DEAD

saddam should have been killed a long time ago! He finally got what he deserved.

exactly. he got what was comming to him.

He shouldent have even been allowed to rise to power.

Saddam should never have been executed, the current Iraqi government is very seen as being backed by the USA and in many Muslim countries, it really isn't a good thing.

Actually, the reason why Saddam actually managed to get where he's got is because, the American government was backing him before he went to war against Iran.

And Saddam was actually a Sunni, while the Iraqi government that got him killed was Chiite.

Maybe he was seen as a tyrant to many Iraqi, but he was also seen as a hero to the Sunni.

And that's a great recipe for disaster, or at least turn the entire country into Chaos.

So...All that execution did in the end was replacing a dictator that was at least keeping the country in some order by another form of dictatorship.

I'm not condonning any form of Capital Punishment, never have, never will.

Adrocles wrote:

Saddam should never have been executed, the current Iraqi government is very seen as being backed by the USA and in many Muslim countries, it really isn't a good thing.

Why souldn't he have been executed? He bombed ENTIRE towns. How would you like it if one day was going on very normal and then you, your family, friends, eveyone you knew was wiped off the face of the planet? I'm sure you would feel very different about that....

Adrocles wrote:

Actually, the reason why Saddam actually managed to get where he's got is because, the American government was backing him before he went to war against Iran.

America? Or the then President? The reason we're having all the problems we're having right now is because the Former President Clinton (or Hilary) didn't do anything about it when it surfaced.

Adrocles wrote:

And Saddam was actually a Sunni, while the Iraqi government that got him killed was Chiite.

Maybe he was seen as a tyrant to many Iraqi, but he was also seen as a hero to the Sunni..

As some german people thought Hitler was, too. Do you think Hitler was a hero? I hope not.

Adrocles wrote:

So...All that execution did in the end was replacing a dictator that was at least keeping the country in some order by another form of dictatorship.

You can never win! If America had left Iraq like some people wanted him to, they would have said he was just like former President Bush Sr. If we stayed, people keep saying "you need to just leave them and get out of Iraq."

Adrocles wrote:

I'm not condonning any form of Capital Punishment, never have, never will.

I'm sure you would feel quite different if your mom or sister was murdered or something and they found the killer.

Personally Adro, I don't think you really have a right to talk about this stuff seeing as how you don't even live IN the states. Please don't take offense to that.

Civ, there are United Kingdom troops in Iraq I think, so Andro would have a right to speak in that respect. And I don't see what's the harm in letting him voice his opinion anyway. (Andro, please excuse Civ, she's very steadfast and determined in her stance on this issue) And rightly so lol.

But some people seem to think that the world would be a peaceful paradise if we hadn't gone into Iraq. Am I the only one who remembers Saddam threatening all of the Western hemisphere, most notably the US, with nukes?

Remember, our intelligence had him down as nuke-positive. So did Russian, French, and English intel. And for cryin' out loud, when the man himself is shouting that he has nukes, are you going to doubt him? Especially after 9-11?

Am I the only one that remembers that Saddam's brother-in-law escaped Iraq, before we went in, held a news conference, and told the world that Hussein had WMDs? You might say this was a set-up. Well, this same guy was conned back to Iraq by Saddam only weeks later. Only to be found dead within days. So, either Saddam was very mad at him for running away and embarrassing Iraq like he did, or, he would go to any extent to make it look like he had WMDs.

If only one good thing has resulted from the Iraq War, it's that the fighting has been moved to the Middle East, and away from out cities and people. Regretably, it has been at the incalcuable expense of our soldiers' lives, but I think it more than safe to say that it has prevented another 9-11. And when I hear people say that such a thing can't be proved, I can't help but feel that such people almost hope for another such attack on our nation, if only to prove their point. Which is incredibly sad in itself, and fully shows the through-and-through selfishness, and self-serving attitudes of such individuals. I am ashamed to acknowledge such people as Americans, or citizens of the Free World.

Undoubtedly, the occupation of Iraq has been bungled from the start, in many respects. But some people seem to have the misguided notion that our entire goal there is to kill all the terrorists and insurgents. This is not our goal at all.

The entire point of our being in Iraq right now, is to provide the people of Iraq with a stable, balanced, democratic government. If we are successful in creating such an bastion of freedom in the Middle East, it will will be a huge victory in the war on terror throughout the world.

And the entire goal of the terrorists and insurgents who oppose us there? To kill enough of our soldiers to discourage the American people before the mission is complete.

But success can only be achieved if the Iraqi people meet us halfway. And so far, they have caved in to their religious disputes with their neighbors, and created a civil war within Iraq that the new Iraqi government is either unwilling or unable to stop. The country is riven with Sunnis and Shiites, two religious sects that hate each others' guts.

So, within Iraq there are a handful of different groups, all fighting to attain a seperate goal.

You have al-Qaida in Iraq, who wishes nothing but death and torture to all Free People everywhere, and seek to spread Islam throughout the globe.

You have the Sunni insurgents, who colaborate with al-Qaida and other terrorist networks, in an effort to exterminate their Shiite enemies/countrymen and the US soldiers, who they feel are only there to protect the Shiites.

Then there are the Shiites, who caved in and retaliated to the Sunni attacks, and helped to create a civil war within Iraq, which should never have happened.

Then you have the National Iraqi Forces, who are supposedly still in training from US agents, and so far haven't been able to do squat in stopping their countrymen from killing eachother, or stopping terrorists from infiltrating the country.

And finally you have the United States of America, whose soldiers are in Iraq, to give the new democratic government a jump-start. So far, Iraq has been non-responsive, and our soldiers are getting caught between pro-US Shiites and anti-US Sunnis, who will both kill anything and anyone who tries to stop them from killing each other. Not to mention the endless attacks from terrorists who have followed the US to Iraq, and revel in the thought of taking an "infidel" with them in death.

This might make for a good video game, but in reality it's a deathtrap. But what are the alternatives? IMHO, there are none. Either we stay until some fortunate turn of events provides Iraq with a semi-stable government and the means to protect itself, or, we admit defeat, give terrorists everywhere something to crow over, and invite countless more 9-11s. The biggest asset the terrorists have, is that 'Allah' is supposedly working for them, and if they think that their ideals are proving true, and that allah is responding, we will find millions of muslims suddenly ready to sacrifice themselves in assaults upon "the infidel".

General Stuart wrote:

Civ, there are United Kingdom troops in Iraq I think, so Andro would have a right to speak in that respect. And I don't see what's the harm in letting him voice his opinion anyway. (Andro, please excuse Civ, she's very steadfast and determined in her stance on this issue) And rightly so lol.

I'm not saying that he doesn't have the right to talk about it at all. I'm just saying he doesn't have the right to argue and bash the US and the president when he doesn't even live here,

Alright. Well, he might not be totally justified in his arguments, but he'll probably continue to bash us anyway.

That fine with me, though this means I shan't hear anything about it when I say something about France or Europe.


Quite shady in France isn't it?

I hear they're having their own problems with rebellion. No wonder Chirac is such a wussy. The frog, honestly...

Well, only problems when 25% of men ages 18-25 don't have a job becasue they don't WANT one..... HMmmmmmm

[quote="Civility_C"]

Adrocles wrote:

Saddam should never have been executed, the current Iraqi government is very seen as being backed by the USA and in many Muslim countries, it really isn't a good thing.

Actually, the reason why Saddam actually managed to get where he's got is because, the American government was backing him before he went to war against Iran.


Are you saying your own military never bombed Hanoi or some Viet-Nam Cities during your War with Viet-Nam, or never bombed Belgrade when you stepped in against Yugoslavia, and in Viet-Nam you even used Napalm against Civilians.

You've also bombed Civilian targets in Italy, Germany and Japan, during WW2, Hitler did bombed many cities in England and many parts of western Europe but is killing those who killed will bring back the dead to you? So what's your point about Capital Punishment? You do know that just about all European Governments were aginst Saddam's execution don't you?

My own country is mostly against it too.

In fact, there's a little statement in the Canadian constitution, if anyone on Canadian soil might be deported to a place where there's a chance he could be tortured or executed, then we don't turn him over, even if he's an illegal, so he's now treated as a refugee.

I never heard about weapons of mass destruction, except when they showed up on propaganda stuff. So President Bush goes about Iraq having WMD yet he doesn't want to show these evidence to allied governments or even to allied High Commands, when your boys show up in Iraq, President Bush doesn't find WMDs so he claims having booted a bloody dictator out of office, big deal, I'm afraid I have to remind you that Preident Franklin D Roosevelt allied himself with Stalin who probably was worst than Hitler himself.

Actually, Saddam's rise to power began in the late 60s or 70s, I was talking about the then President, Iraq went to war against Iran in 1980 and that war has raged on until 1988, your military industries supplied Saddam at the time.

Adrocles wrote:

And Saddam was actually a Sunni, while the Iraqi government that got him killed was Chiite.

Maybe he was seen as a tyrant to many Iraqi, but he was also seen as a hero to the Sunni..

Hitler never was a hero to anyone, it was because of him that WW2 actually happened, and we all know about the countless casualties that turned out in only 5 years, many German soldiers or Commanders also felt that way and tried to assasinate Hitler at least twice.

Adrocles wrote:

So...All that execution did in the end was replacing a dictator that was at least keeping the country in some order by another form of dictatorship.

Was it an even better choice to invade Iraq in the first place?

Adrocles wrote:

I'm not condonning any form of Capital Punishment, never have, never will.

Nah, there's a lot of nastier stuff to do than Capital Punishment, like staying in jail for 25 odd years, that really plays lots of strange stuff on your mind, in fact, man's greatest fear is being alone.


Personally, I'd say I do have a right to talk about this since there are lots of Muslims in my own backyard, and many of them felt the same way you do, so maybe we might as well make a debate on this.

I am so freakin' mad. I just answered Adro's post with a REALLLLLLY long retort and the forum ATE IT!!!!! AHHHHHHHHH!!!

Androcles wrote:

Are you saying your own military never bombed Hanoi or some Viet-Nam Cities during your War with Viet-Nam, or never bombed Belgrade when you stepped in against Yugoslavia, and in Viet-Nam you even used Napalm against Civilians.

You've also bombed Civilian targets in Italy, Germany and Japan, during WW2, Hitler did bombed many cities in England and many parts of western Europe but is killing those who killed will bring back the dead to you? So what's your point about Capital Punishment? You do know that just about all European Governments were aginst Saddam's execution don't you?

Don't mess with me on this stuff, Andro. When we used explosives in Vietnam, it was on VC hiding amongst villagers who refused to reveal them. And since they're dead, we weren't able to bring them to court, and have them admit their crimes, which leaves room for statements such as yours. But, we did save countless American lives, and I place that as a much higher priority.

Furthermore, your point has no relevance whatsoever, since every act you stated was committed during war, and upon a declared enemy. Whereas, Saddam destroyed entire populations, of his own people. These people had no means of retaliation. They couldn't even vote him out of office. They were defenseless, and Saddam made sure to keep them that way. This hesitation and meekness of character, and total lack of independence that has been bred into the Iraqi people, is a major reason why democratic ideals aren't being embraced and thriving, as they should be in a freedom-starved nation.

And about European nations' opinions on whether or not Saddam should have been executed, frankly, I don't give a rat's @$$.

Androcles wrote:

My own country is mostly against it too.

In fact, there's a little statement in the Canadian constitution, if anyone on Canadian soil might be deported to a place where there's a chance he could be tortured or executed, then we don't turn him over, even if he's an illegal, so he's now treated as a refugee.

Well, yes, I'm pretty sure that every government has a clause to that extent. That's why people can find refuge in foreign embassies.

Androcles wrote:

I never heard about weapons of mass destruction, except when they showed up on propaganda stuff. So President Bush goes about Iraq having WMD yet he doesn't want to show these evidence to allied governments or even to allied High Commands, when your boys show up in Iraq, President Bush doesn't find WMDs so he claims having booted a bloody dictator out of office, big deal, I'm afraid I have to remind you that Preident Franklin D Roosevelt allied himself with Stalin who probably was worst than Hitler himself.

Andro, think about it this way: many nations all over the world have nuclear weapons, don't they? So, why don't we go and invade all of them? Maybe it's because, we trust the leaders of those countries to not use these WMDs? But do you really trust a dictator like Saddam? I should hope not. So, yes, it's BECAUSE Saddam was such a lowly scumbag of a dictator that we invaded. What else do you do when somebody walks up to you and tell you that he's going to wipe you off the face of the earth?

Androcles wrote:

Hitler never was a hero to anyone, it was because of him that WW2 actually happened, and we all know about the countless casualties that turned out in only 5 years, many German soldiers or Commanders also felt that way and tried to assasinate Hitler at least twice.

Hitler was never a hero to anyone? Where are you getting this baloney? Germany was a pride-depraved nation, that was desperate for something to pick them back up, in their own eyes and in the eyes of the world. That's why, YES, Hitler became an instant hero to MANY Germans when he took power.

Adrocles wrote:

So...All that execution did in the end was replacing a dictator that was at least keeping the country in some order by another form of dictatorship.

Are you trying to say that the form of government in place in Iraq right now is a dictatorship? You REALLY need to stop watching CNN....

Adrocles wrote:

I'm not condonning any form of Capital Punishment, never have, never will.

Well, that's not my problem. But capital punishment, believe it or not, is the most efective form of punishment by far, obviously, for the same reason why a child doesn't touch a hot stove a second time. Who likes pain? And Andro, phycilogical pain is the same thing. Only, why should tax payers have to support this embarrassment of society for the rest of his life, or sentence? He becomes nothing but a drag on society, a dependant who destroys the government's ability to take care of unfortunate people who need assistance. Don't you think that such people deserve it more than a convicted felon? That is why I personally don't approve of a life sentence; any crime that was severe enough to take this person permanently off the streets, is enough to rid him from society altogether.

Androcles wrote:

Personally, I'd say I do have a right to talk about this since there are lots of Muslims in my own backyard, and many of them felt the same way you do, so maybe we might as well make a debate on this.

Debate? You're on.

Stuart thank you. As I was typing out my long reply to Adro, the forum killed it.

Don't I know the feeling.... lol Sorry about your post.

Noooo problem. Get on yahoo plzzzzzzz I'm freakin' boreddddddddd plz

[quote="General Stuart"]

Androcles wrote:

Are you saying your own military never bombed Hanoi or some Viet-Nam Cities during your War with Viet-Nam, or never bombed Belgrade when you stepped in against Yugoslavia, and in Viet-Nam you even used Napalm against Civilians.

You've also bombed Civilian targets in Italy, Germany and Japan, during WW2, Hitler did bombed many cities in England and many parts of western Europe but is killing those who killed will bring back the dead to you? So what's your point about Capital Punishment? You do know that just about all European Governments were aginst Saddam's execution don't you?

And what if the villagers in Viet-Nam didn't want your troops around?

Maybe you forgot about Turkey who still hasn't admited the Armenian Genocide yet it's the only Muslim country that has a military alliance with Israel right now.

Are you aware that you don't get a say in just about every Arab countries your boys have including Saudi Arabia and Jordan, on top of that, Saudi Arabia even has it's own embassy in the White House.

So by looking at your statement, you're saying that American lives make other lives like a second class type right?

Yet Franklin D Roosevelt still allied himself with Stalin, and everything Saddam did, Stalin also did.


True, right now the Draft Dodgers are coming back with a vengance




If only you knew, President Musharraf was threatened to have all of Pakistan bombed "back to the stone age" by President Bush following 9/11

And would you trust somebody like Kim Jong Il right now? Yet he's got loads of nukes and seems to enjoy firing them over Japan. And really President Putin often creeps me out







Got me on the Hitler thing




Who said I've been watching CNN? I'm only saying what's on my mind, I'm not the type to let somebody else think for me

About Capital Punishment, how would you feel if you'd have executed somebody that would have turned out to be innocent?

By your statement you're saying people living in extreme pauverty aren't worth living if they're unable for health reasons to have a job in the first place, then you have old people, or other cases.

No, about poverty, I said that by the government forcing tax payers to support convicts sitting in a prison for the rest of their lives, it's destroying the government's ability to support people of extreme pauverty, or older folks who have retired and/or can't work for health reasons. I think that those innocent people who are experiencing hard financial times deserve three meals a day more than convicted felons. Don't you?

And if a convicted felon turned out to be innocent, which rarely happens in our country, (I don't know about yours) would you rather have him experience decades of mental torture? To be honest with you, I couldn't say which is worse. But I do know that tax payers' money being pumped up the rear ends of criminals for their entire life span is wrong.

No, I don't trust Kim Jung Il, but he proved with his own stupid missle launch that he is no threat to us presently. He can't even reach Japan with his missles, never mind the US.

I'd have to admit it, but, old people, people who can't work because of bad health, or others living in pauverty really deserve better than what they get right now.

These days, jails are often looked down as a joke, even when you're talking about a Federal Jail, it's often like that with the Organised Crime divisions.

Yeah it's a sad reality right now

Got me there Stuart.

Maybe if government could just impose a simple "ethics check", it would help stop such needless and wasteful spending of tax payers' money. That's why I can't stand Liberal politicians; they're not liberal when it comes to giving the people more freedoms, no, quite the opposite. What they ARE liberal in is their willingness to take money out of your pocket and put it into theirs. They actually reffer to tax money as "belonging to the government", and "government money". Sounds like somebody needs to go get a minimum-wage job and THEN tell us that they approve of half their paycheck being eaten by taxes (I thank God I don't have to deal with that).

A guy in out town recently won the lottery, $5 million. However, because of taxes, he'll receive less than half that amount. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to get $2 million dollars in the mail one day, but when the government feels entitled to half of all the money YOU earn, (of course in this situation, the money wasn't earned, but the prinsciple still stands) that's a wrong bordering on grand theft. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?

The federal income tax, (an unconstitutional tax btw) was first created during the Civil War, when the government decided it needed more revenue (not to fund the war, Sec. of the Treasury S.P. Chase's financial strategy was to finance the war on borrowed money, and pay government salaries and interests with tax revenue). And, like the many other unconstitutional acts passed by the Lincoln administration during the war, the income tax was repealed by the 1880's. However, it was again implemented within years to repay debts created by WWI, and when the depression struck, it was deemed too necessary to government to abandon. It was kept intact even further by the Second World War and then the following Cold War, and has become such a financial crutch of our government that I doubt we'll ever be rid of it.

General Stuart wrote:

Maybe if government could just impose a simple "ethics check", it would help stop such needless and wasteful spending of tax payers' money. That's why I can't stand Liberal politicians; they're not liberal when it comes to giving the people more freedoms, no, quite the opposite. What they ARE liberal in is their willingness to take money out of your pocket and put it into theirs. They actually reffer to tax money as "belonging to the government", and "government money". Sounds like somebody needs to go get a minimum-wage job and THEN tell us that they approve of half their paycheck being eaten by taxes (I thank God I don't have to deal with that).

A guy in out town recently won the lottery, $5 million. However, because of taxes, he'll receive less than half that amount. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to get $2 million dollars in the mail one day, but when the government feels entitled to half of all the money YOU earn, (of course in this situation, the money wasn't earned, but the prinsciple still stands) that's a wrong bordering on grand theft. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?

The federal income tax, (an unconstitutional tax btw) was first created during the Civil War, when the government decided it needed more revenue (not to fund the war, Sec. of the Treasury S.P. Chase's financial strategy was to finance the war on borrowed money, and pay government salaries and interests with tax revenue). And, like the many other unconstitutional acts passed by the Lincoln administration during the war, the income tax was repealed by the 1880's. However, it was again implemented within years to repay debts created by WWI, and when the depression struck, it was deemed too necessary to government to abandon. It was kept intact even further by the Second World War and then the following Cold War, and has become such a financial crutch of our government that I doubt we'll ever be rid of it.

Really, I wouldn't mind paying taxes if the money would go where it's needed instead of the politician's pockets, and don't I know how crooked the Liberals are? A bunch of high profile Libs have already been arrested following a serious hot potatoe.

It was known as The Gommery Scandal, and was a high level corruption case cracked down by the RCMP with possibly the Mafia involved, there have already been heads fallen to the axe.

I don't like the hassles politics bring about, but since the governments are politics, I've grown seriously cynical about them, and as a result I keep an eye on those guys wherever they hide.

The best way I know right now on busting their chops is to keep an eye on them and busting their chops is something I find entertaining some times.

So, Andro, do you still refuse to "condone" capital punishment?

Humiliating them is much more entertaining than just killing them.

At least when it comes to corruption cases.

As for the Organised Crime Divisions, although it riskier, just letting themselves kill each other isn't hurting that much tax payers money.

All we've gotta do next is pick up the pieces.

I sorta like had a lot to catch up on... My beliefs on capital punishment... Read the Bible and you are reading what I believe... All murderers such as Stalin and Saddam deserved capital punishment... from the lowest murderer to the dictating mass murderer. And Adrocles I dont believe America should have teamed with Stalin or dropped those bombs on Japan...