Saddam's Execution

[Ashtoreth]

Re: Saddam's Execution

We gave him what he wanted, made him a martyr, made him a hero of his country, caused the development of new radical pissed off teenage terrorists who will strap on a bomb and run at a tank to be just like their hero.....yeah lets all celebrate.

[Kiro51]

Re: Saddam's Execution

I'm against death sentence... (yeah I'm french maybe that's why...)

Staying in jail for 40 years is harder than dying. When you die, you don't feel pain. When you're in jail for a very long time, it's very very hard...



EDIT :

We gave him what he wanted, made him a martyr, made him a hero of his country, caused the development of new radical pissed off teenage terrorists who will strap on a bomb and run at a tank to be just like their hero.....yeah lets all celebrate.

+9999

[cC@Zz]

Re: Saddam's Execution

Well if Hell exists then it would probably be better to kill him so he can suffer and burn in hell. I do agree though that being in jail for the rest of your life would be very hard to endure.

[sherbtail]

Re: Saddam's Execution

But cC@Zz, who are we to judge who goes to hell or not... And while I don't believe for a second that Saddam would've renounced everything evil and become a saint, I just think if you judge one person worthy of going to hell then it becomes hard to draw a line and deem which people are worthy of hell and which people aren't. If you get me?

Also, yeah, a lifetime imprisonment is not very pleasurable...

[RB_Dreamscanner]

Re: Saddam's Execution

i seen the vid for it ...pm me for link cause im not sure if im aloud to show it >.>
if its illegal dont pm me

[marioGP87]

Re: Saddam's Execution

*sigh* either way im glad that idiot died. he killed 82,000 shiiti muslims (no, i'm not one of them), that's genocide!!!!!! he was like hitler (who died by killing himself by shooting himself).

[cC@Zz]

Re: Saddam's Execution

*sigh* either way im glad that idiot died. he killed 82,000 shiiti muslims (no, i'm not one of them), that's genocide!!!!!! he was like hitler (who died by killing himself by shooting himself).

Well he himself didn't kill them but he was responsible for their deaths.

[Afrobean]

Re: Saddam's Execution

Well he himself didn't kill them but he was responsible for their deaths.

I guess we should hang Bush then because of all the deaths caused by the Iraq war, occupation, and following civil war?

[Amaste]

Re: Saddam's Execution

I guess we should hang Bush then because of all the deaths caused by the Iraq war, occupation, and following civil war?

To my knowlege Bush hasn't gone to Los Angeles and nerve gassed the entire city for ****s and giggles because he doesn't like the people there.
<.<

[Afrobean]

Re: Saddam's Execution

To my knowlege Bush hasn't gone to Los Angeles and nerve gassed the entire city for ****s and giggles because he doesn't like the people there.
<.<

No, he just called for the invasion, occupation, and overthrow of the government of a country who, despite being anti-America, was actually not militaristically hostile toward us prior to this.

And, unless I'm mistaken, Saddam did not kill people just for "****s and giggles". He did it because he had something to gain from doing it. Obviously, that is still terrible, but killing with reason is better than without, even if the reason is not justifiable to others.

ps

he doesn't like the people there.

Sounds a lot like Bush's (and many other ignorant American rednecks) mentality towards the people of the middle east.

[waffydude]

Re: Saddam's Execution

And, unless I'm mistaken, Saddam did not kill people just for "****s and giggles". He did it because he had something to gain from doing it. Obviously, that is still terrible, but killing with reason is better than without, even if the reason is not justifiable to others.

...overthrow of the government of a country who, despite being anti-America, was actually not militaristically hostile toward us prior to this.

Just playing devil's advocate here... But wouldn't the fact that they are anti-America be a reason for Bush? That they, given the chance or opportunity, may be likely to be hostile toward America? Even if it's not justifiable to others- by your reasoning that wouldn't matter, as long as it's any reason at all.

I'm not taking either side as far as the war goes; I just don't think your argument is really the most logical way of putting it.

[Amaste]

Re: Saddam's Execution

No, he just called for the invasion, occupation, and overthrow of the government of a country who, despite being anti-America, was actually not militaristically hostile toward us prior to this.

And, unless I'm mistaken, Saddam did not kill people just for "****s and giggles". He did it because he had something to gain from doing it. Obviously, that is still terrible, but killing with reason is better than without, even if the reason is not justifiable to others.

psSounds a lot like Bush's (and many other ignorant American rednecks) mentality towards the people of the middle east.

My bad, but i seem to remember a time not *too* long on the global scale when Saddam invaded a neighboring country then refused to give it back. Took a couple months of US positioning, 2 weeks of fighting and a pre-war trident surfacing to end that stand off :P Considering that plus the restrictions placed on him after said botched invasion, the 9/11 terror attacks, and the simple fact that the president is the son of the president who gave the orders to march on his country, i don't think its a far stretch of the imagination to think he would allow Al Qaeda members to hold up in Iraq. Granted Saddam wasn't a Mao (or even a Hitler for that matter) on the geonocide scale, thats still a hefty little chop off the top there.

[Afrobean]

Re: Saddam's Execution

My bad, but i seem to remember a time not *too* long on the global scale when Saddam invaded a neighboring country then refused to give it back.

This has nothing to do with the United States. We made ourselves get involved. It's not as though the neighboring country was USA territory or even a close ally like UK is.

Considering that plus the restrictions placed on him after said botched invasion, the 9/11 terror attacks

The terror attacks of September 11th have absolutely nothing to do with Iraq, other than the fact that there are some retards out there that think Iraq had something to do with it.

and the simple fact that the president is the son of the president who gave the orders to march on his country

This is completely irrelevent.

i don't think its a far stretch of the imagination to think he would allow Al Qaeda members to hold up in Iraq.

What does this have to do with anything? We're not in Iraq because they may be harboring terrorist. The official reason now for the invasion was to liberate the people. Isn't doublethink great?]

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Saddam's Execution

This has nothing to do with the United States. We made ourselves get involved. It's not as though the neighboring country was USA territory or even a close ally like UK is.

Since when do we consider varying degrees of ally? An ally is an ally, and just because they're not as big as Britain doesn't mean we're any less justified in aiding them.

The terror attacks of September 11th have absolutely nothing to do with Iraq

No, but Iraq had PLENTY to do with the group that carried out those attacks.

Afro, do you understand that you're trying to put George W. Bush on the level of Saddam Hussein? Despite what holes in his argument that you may find or may make up, such a comparison is ludicrous, and you know that.

You started this argument because of a sentence that was poorly constructed, but which also didn't need to be better constructed due to the aforementioned ludicre that a poor construction might suggest!

Unless you actually believe that Bush is as evil as Saddam Hussein, just drop it, because this is a stupid and pointless argument.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

--Guido

[Afrobean]

Re: Saddam's Execution



Chill out, Guido. I'm just having some fun.

Obviously Bush isn't anywhere near as bad as Saddam. He's probably around half as bad as Saddam... at least Bush can make a claim of invading the country to liberate its peoples (wouldn't it have been hilarious if that had been Iraq's claim?), even if that "reason" is pretty much totally bunk.