They're going to hang Saddam
05 November 2006, 04:12 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Einstein RA
Possibly, appeal to follow yet. Plus hanging may turn him into a martyr not something that is wanted. Watch this space...................
he should be dead by sunrise tommorow, thats the way to do it.
look at cauchescau(sp) they did him & her that afternoon without any fuss
if he,s dead, he cant be news any more
Mart
05 November 2006, 04:30 PM
#34
Originally Posted by mart360
They said that the first time round, and llook what happened, they had to go back.
he should be dead by sunrise tommorow, thats the way to do it.
look at cauchescau(sp) they did him & her that afternoon without any fuss
if he,s dead, he cant be news any more
Mart
he should be dead by sunrise tommorow, thats the way to do it.
look at cauchescau(sp) they did him & her that afternoon without any fuss
if he,s dead, he cant be news any more
Mart
Valid point. Caeusescu BTW.
05 November 2006, 04:46 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tellins, Home of Super Leagues finest, and where a "split" is not all it seems.
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I met Saddam once in the Bullion Bar in St Helens. He seemed OK to me. We chatted about the change of fillings in a Pimbletts Meat and Perterter pie before I headed off to Burtons to buy some smalls.
I dont know why he was so unpopular, yeah he's a bit weird, but he's harmless enough if you ask me.
I dont know why he was so unpopular, yeah he's a bit weird, but he's harmless enough if you ask me.
06 November 2006, 11:01 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 4,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good, this b$stard deserves all he gets
Apparently he’s **** scared of being hanged too! & prefers a firing squad as he’s a “Military Man” – my ****, self appointed “Military Man” more like
Bet he never thought of how **** scared the people were when he killed them
Apparently he’s **** scared of being hanged too! & prefers a firing squad as he’s a “Military Man” – my ****, self appointed “Military Man” more like
Bet he never thought of how **** scared the people were when he killed them
06 November 2006, 11:26 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Goole, East Yorkshire
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we should have just left him to it - he wasnt doing us any harm to be honest
we only decided to invade iraq cos we couldnt find Bin Laden in afghanistan
if we were to kill sadam we should have "accidently" wiped him out with an air strike or something - if they hang him now there will be uproar in iraq and all hell will break loose
we only decided to invade iraq cos we couldnt find Bin Laden in afghanistan
if we were to kill sadam we should have "accidently" wiped him out with an air strike or something - if they hang him now there will be uproar in iraq and all hell will break loose
06 November 2006, 11:40 AM
#41
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AndyWalker
there will be uproar in iraq and all hell will break loose
i meant more than the current crazyness
06 November 2006, 12:07 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, the days when we can just leave these countries alone as they're not doing us any harm are long gone.
I'm not saying that we've handled it well, but with terrorism and nuclear weapons around, you can't just leave them unchecked anymore.
I'm not saying that we've handled it well, but with terrorism and nuclear weapons around, you can't just leave them unchecked anymore.
06 November 2006, 12:19 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I preferred the days when we used to just be suspicious of Russia.
Everyone is nuts nowadays.
Sincerely hope it all kicks off when he is executed.Can't believe the amount of people that die there very day.Wonder if the figures are worse than when he was in control?
Everyone is nuts nowadays.
Sincerely hope it all kicks off when he is executed.Can't believe the amount of people that die there very day.Wonder if the figures are worse than when he was in control?
06 November 2006, 12:33 PM
#45
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Yorks.
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Paul3446
I'm not saying that we've handled it well, but with terrorism and nuclear weapons around, you can't just leave them unchecked anymore.
06 November 2006, 12:35 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Far Corfe
Posts: 3,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You had a better chance in Iraq (sorry Eye rack for any Americans) of getting to old age with Saddam in charge than you do now ................
Cost us 40 Billion pounds so far, now there's money well spent......
Cost us 40 Billion pounds so far, now there's money well spent......
06 November 2006, 12:41 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Goole, East Yorkshire
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MJW
Shame we invaded the wrong country really, aren't all the nukes in North Korea and Iran ? There wasn't even a real terrorist threat from Iraq until the troops and tanks rolled into Baghdad either. On the plus side there is the second largest reserve of oil in the world in Iraq, so I guess it was worth invading after all. The million or so civilians killed as a result of coalition military action can't really complain about it can they ?
couldnt agree more mate!
we sent a weapons inspector in - found nothing so invaded anyway
yet - we thought north korea were planning a second nuclear test as we saw movements of trucks/people around the area of the first from a spy satellite?
definately in iraq for the oil, ran out of excuses to get in there so just jumped in with both feet and skimmed over the reasons
06 November 2006, 12:47 PM
#48
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're in Iraq due to the fact that there is no other place where we could launch a first strike against Iran, you know Iran the muslims very own 'nuclear power'........ 
No other Arab country would allow us to set up military airbases, so we invade a tin-pot one that nobody likes and build our own........
No other Arab country would allow us to set up military airbases, so we invade a tin-pot one that nobody likes and build our own........
06 November 2006, 12:49 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Goole, East Yorkshire
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DCI Gene Hunt
so we invade a tin-pot one that nobody likes and build our own........
06 November 2006, 12:54 PM
#50
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KiwiGTI
I think it's a disgrace, it's a pity Bush and Blair aren't joining him on the gallows.
Unfortunately, one will be holding the video camera and the other holding the microphone, as there has been the suggestion that it will be televised.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorism 146
06 November 2006, 12:55 PM
#51
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AndyWalker
looks to me like we underestimated the level of difficulty of invading said "tin-pot"
06 November 2006, 12:56 PM
#52
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DCI Gene Hunt
We're in Iraq due to the fact that there is no other place where we could launch a first strike against Iran, you know Iran the muslims very own 'nuclear power'........
No other Arab country would allow us to set up military airbases, so we invade a tin-pot one that nobody likes and build our own........
No other Arab country would allow us to set up military airbases, so we invade a tin-pot one that nobody likes and build our own........
But you've got the reason the USA are there right
06 November 2006, 02:12 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KiwiGTI
So essentially he is being hung for ordering the killing of 148 males, while Bush and Blair have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands and yet they are righteous and innocent.
no - it's a specimen case. he will also be charged tomorrow with further charges of killing 200,000 others. he's as guilty as sin and everyone knows it; even the good old apologist UN estimates he ordered the murder of up to 2 million people during his reign. that's a matter of public record.
i wonder, would you have blinked at the trial and execution of adolf hitler had he not committed suicide? of course not. why should saddam be any different?
as to bush & blair having the blood of "hundreds of thousands" on their hands is a very, very moot point, subjective, sensationalised and unproven.
the BMA stats of 650,000 civilian deaths since 2003 are dubious to say the least - does anyone really believe that coalition forces have killed more iraqi civilians in three years than the 600,000 german civilians killed by intensive urban area bombing between 1941-1945 when 80 major cities were utterly and totally laid waste? the very idea is just ... preposterous and an insult to the intelligence.
have coalition forces been killing civilians at a rate of 15,000 per month and 500 per day? in the age of smart weaponry and attention to collateral damage, common sense says that figure just doesn't stack up. is the BMA a recognised expert in battlefield damage assessment? er, probably no. is the association's politics showing? er, probably yes.
Last edited by Holy Ghost; 06 November 2006 at 02:25 PM.
06 November 2006, 02:47 PM
#54
Originally Posted by Holy Ghost
**
no - it's a specimen case. he will also be charged tomorrow with further charges of killing 200,000 others. he's as guilty as sin and everyone knows it; even the good old apologist UN estimates he ordered the murder of up to 2 million people during his reign. that's a matter of public record.
i wonder, would you have blinked at the trial and execution of adolf hitler had he not committed suicide? of course not. why should saddam be any different?
as to bush & blair having the blood of "hundreds of thousands" on their hands is a very, very moot point, subjective, sensationalised and unproven.
the BMA stats of 650,000 civilian deaths since 2003 are dubious to say the least - does anyone really believe that coalition forces have killed more iraqi civilians in three years than the 600,000 german civilians killed by intensive urban area bombing between 1941-1945 when 80 major cities were utterly and totally laid waste? the very idea is just ... preposterous and an insult to the intelligence.
have coalition forces been killing civilians at a rate of 15,000 per month and 500 per day? in the age of smart weaponry and attention to collateral damage, common sense says that figure just doesn't stack up. is the BMA a recognised expert in battlefield damage assessment? er, probably no. is the association's politics showing? er, probably yes.
no - it's a specimen case. he will also be charged tomorrow with further charges of killing 200,000 others. he's as guilty as sin and everyone knows it; even the good old apologist UN estimates he ordered the murder of up to 2 million people during his reign. that's a matter of public record.
i wonder, would you have blinked at the trial and execution of adolf hitler had he not committed suicide? of course not. why should saddam be any different?
as to bush & blair having the blood of "hundreds of thousands" on their hands is a very, very moot point, subjective, sensationalised and unproven.
the BMA stats of 650,000 civilian deaths since 2003 are dubious to say the least - does anyone really believe that coalition forces have killed more iraqi civilians in three years than the 600,000 german civilians killed by intensive urban area bombing between 1941-1945 when 80 major cities were utterly and totally laid waste? the very idea is just ... preposterous and an insult to the intelligence.
have coalition forces been killing civilians at a rate of 15,000 per month and 500 per day? in the age of smart weaponry and attention to collateral damage, common sense says that figure just doesn't stack up. is the BMA a recognised expert in battlefield damage assessment? er, probably no. is the association's politics showing? er, probably yes.
06 November 2006, 02:59 PM
#55
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is getting a bit of topic here! I'm sure we could go on debating the justification -or lack of it- for the war all day.
Surely the central point here is that the "axis of good" (if there is such a thing) is missing a prime opportunity to say to the so called "axis of evil" that:
1) The civilised world will not tolerate barbaric dictators.
2) BUT in doing this we will not allow ourselves to degenerate into exactly the kind of bloodthirsty, callous and cowardly monsters we have sought to oust.
How does one reconcile all this talk of hanging and broadcasting it with the latter??
Do we retain a moral imperative to punish if our behaviour becomes increasingly hard distinguish from that of the guilty party?
Ns04
Surely the central point here is that the "axis of good" (if there is such a thing) is missing a prime opportunity to say to the so called "axis of evil" that:
1) The civilised world will not tolerate barbaric dictators.
2) BUT in doing this we will not allow ourselves to degenerate into exactly the kind of bloodthirsty, callous and cowardly monsters we have sought to oust.
How does one reconcile all this talk of hanging and broadcasting it with the latter??
Do we retain a moral imperative to punish if our behaviour becomes increasingly hard distinguish from that of the guilty party?
Ns04
06 November 2006, 03:05 PM
#56
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by New_scooby_04
I think this is getting a bit of topic here! I'm sure we could go on debating the justification -or lack of it- for the war all day.
Surely the central point here is that the "axis of good" (if there is such a thing) is missing a prime opportunity to say to the so called "axis of evil" that:
1) The civilised world will not tolerate barbaric dictators.
2) BUT in doing this we will not allow ourselves to degenerate into exactly the kind of bloodthirsty, callous and cowardly monsters we have sought to oust.
How does one reconcile all this talk of hanging and broadcasting it with the latter??
Do we retain a moral imperative to punish if our behaviour becomes increasingly hard distinguish from that of the guilty party?
Ns04
Surely the central point here is that the "axis of good" (if there is such a thing) is missing a prime opportunity to say to the so called "axis of evil" that:
1) The civilised world will not tolerate barbaric dictators.
2) BUT in doing this we will not allow ourselves to degenerate into exactly the kind of bloodthirsty, callous and cowardly monsters we have sought to oust.
How does one reconcile all this talk of hanging and broadcasting it with the latter??
Do we retain a moral imperative to punish if our behaviour becomes increasingly hard distinguish from that of the guilty party?
Ns04
06 November 2006, 03:05 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bush and Blair aren't to blame, Saddam kept breaching UN resolutions and brought the whole thing on himself.
I can't believe how many apologists there are on here for him!
Are you George Galloway in disguise?
I can't believe how many apologists there are on here for him!
Are you George Galloway in disguise?
06 November 2006, 03:12 PM
#58
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DCI Gene Hunt
Errrr......... it's an Iraqi court, and an iraqi verdict
Right????
Ns04
06 November 2006, 03:12 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Paul3446
Bush and Blair aren't to blame, Saddam kept breaching UN resolutions and brought the whole thing on himself.
I can't believe how many apologists there are on here for him!
Are you George Galloway in disguise?
I can't believe how many apologists there are on here for him!
Are you George Galloway in disguise?
An oppressive regime vs a destabilised country and probably generations of increased conflict where the west is even more hated than before.
And of course Bush and Blair are to blame, they both knew the truth about his weapons of mass destruction - there weren't any.
06 November 2006, 03:17 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saddam had been taking the p*ss out of us for long enough, basically he called the west's bluff and now he's paying the price.
If the US had wanted the oil they would have done it in 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. But they turned round having done what they went there to do.
If the US had wanted the oil they would have done it in 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. But they turned round having done what they went there to do.