KrustyKidd

RB Like they always did. Too scared to make a move for fear of disproval. Shuffle the paperwork around on the desk to keep busy until next election. That's the Liberal way. Bush and Blair stood for something. Some might hate them and disagree with what they did but none can disagree that they were, and are courageous men. Leaders, men that put it all on the line for what they believed, right or wrong. What does Martin believe? Does he believe that everything on this planet is just hunky dory? If not, why does he not show some leadership and do something instead of shuffling paperwork? Answer: He is just a Liberal.

and I see a need to wait, right now the council in charge is viewed as an American Puppet. To have any credibility to the Arab world, Saddam must be tried by Arabs. Like I said, Iraq has to try him. Not a transitional Iraq but Iraq. Free, elected Iraq. Will the free elected Iraq reinstate the death penalty? Probably, but not for sure. If they don't, it will definitely be a gentler nation than any other in the Middle East. Here are some stats. CAPITAL CASE LAWYERS FEES Not a hellofa lot of defence is it? I'd certainly say that I would have my reservations about many of these cases. I guess you are right about the appeals though. However, if the job had been done right the first time then there would be a lot less of them. SOME DEATH ROW STATS Yes indeed, a lot of luck, for sure. With lesser lawyers he would have lost in a big way. Another thing, if he had lost, we would have known that it was not for lack of legal representation. That's my point.

I think it is pretty clear and simple. 'Do unto others as you would have done unto you.' Cultures all over the planet that until the seventeenth and eighteenth century had no contact with the outside world held this same common belief. It's pretty easy as I'm sure you know. Forgive me but I just wanted to throw a cuple examples out. You don't like having your stuff stolen so go figure, it is wrong to steal. You don't want to be tortured, so it is wrong to torture. What I am trying to say is that almost all religions say this rule in one form or another. It's not the religion itself that invented it but the concience of man himself. On initial glance yes. However, the sadist knows that to kill is wrong, he knows that to hurt and steal is wrong too. More than likely, he has justified these actions in some way to make them acceptable to himself whereas the Mormon was able to resist the temptation to steal and whatever. Maybe he used fear of God as a reason or maybe he was just a good guy to begin with. Who knows? Religion deals with the soul, of course it's center will be far removed from capitalism. You will note however that in America it gets along quite well with capitalism. Prospering with it, using it to further it's goals of spreading it's message to the world. In turn, it gives comfort and a grounding for many of the richest people in the world. As long as they are separate that's fine with me.

Exactly what I was thinking of. You would never hear the end of it. Why he was killed by the French/Israelis/NKoreans/Russians/US/Kuwaitis/Egyptians/Joprdinians etc. Mainly though, the US would be the ones that did it to hide something. No, I think Mr Hussein will have better medical care than the President himself for the next year of so. Rubber room with styrafoam floors. Lots of rice so he can't choke on a piece of meat and using those paper knives and forks!

That's up to the Iraqis. If the US pulls crap like that then what message does plea bargining put out? Just what they are trying to avooid, special stuff for special people. They can interrogate him till the cows come home, put sand bags over his head and dunk him in a toilet, whatever they do in secret but on trial he has to be like everybody else, subject to the same laws and the same punishments. Morgan anbd Righturn. in retrospect, I will conceed a special war crimes tribunal verses the normal Iraqi court. Not for the reasons of justice but rather ease of dealing with the sheer volume of suspects facing justice. Given the fact that much of the evidence will be overlapping with same dates/locations and orders given, it will require a specialized court system to keep track of it. Here, is where the penalty may differ from the normal Iraqi justice system. It may, scince it is specialy set up, have different punishments from the normal court system as well.

Gaddaffi and Lybia did not have the right combination to make it a candidate for democracy seeding. That is what this is about, not WMDs, not terrorist associations. His geographical location, the fact that Iraq had enough oil to facilitate a quick and sucessful transition into democracy, the fact Saddam had invaded other countries and was a threat to same who would not miss him, the people would be happy to see him go and would co-operate with the occupying power. US security from Iraq itself was pretty low on the priority scale. If Saddam had turned over all his WMD material the US would have faced a fork in the road. Invent another reason to take him out or move to Syria. BTW, did you notice the sudden shift from WMD to 'Regieme Change?' Lybia is not in the heart of anything and once occupied did not provide a springboard for further seeding as required so probably would not be taken over.

Looks like your OJ buddy Buckly has a little of the view that Iraq has no law to deal with it either. See how he writes about how 'we' should show the Iraqis? Go ahead WB, show the Iraqis justice American style. A sure way to lose total touch with what we are trying to achieve there - their independance. As for not being linier, here, I'll try again. Saddam should be held, as a prisoner of war, interrogated and guarded by the US until there is an ELECTED Iraqi government to turn him over to. Once done, it's done. That's it. Their business until they see fit to turn him over to somebody else such as Iran's revolutionary Council or the Hague. I said that it would be a good gesture to give him a fair trial One without a pre determined conclusion. You see something muddled about that? I also said that if Iraq has no death penalty then they sould not make a special case for this as it sends out as message that there is diffeent laws for different people. That seems pretty clear to me as well. I think where you and I part ways is where I say try him in the highest court in Iraq using the laws that they have for the normal citizen. You, on the other hand figure that he is guilty and therefore, because the crimes are of such magnitude that he should have an 'extra special' court to go to. Are not all courts that are set up properly able to hear evidence and refutations? I mean, there is ample opportunity to show how much of an evil being he is in any properly set up court. What better way to show how the Iraqi Democratic Court is set up than to try thier old Dictator in it? Nurembourg was not a German court, it was an post war occupying power's court. That's why it was different. What we are talking about here is the Iraqi people trying one of their own, and if they have no death penalty, he does the max time on the book Any clearer or should I try again? BTW, where did I touch on health care?

I do. There is probably only about two people on the whole planet not watching for that. I doubt not that there is every homo leftist government agency in the galaxy standing just outside his cell making sure that nothing of that sort of thing happens. Wonder why the US allowed the photos to be taken upon capture so liberally? Simply to show what he looked like upon capture and that's how he's going to look like when he goes to trial. The worst nightmare for the US is that he suffers a heart attack or something. It would fuel rhetoric for decades to come. The US has videos, doctors, lawyers, dentists and who else knows what probably not twenty feet from him.

You think my point is muddled. Wow, I thought it was starkly clear. Here it is again in different condensed words; Saddam is Iraqi, captured in Iraq and first, a criminal to the Iraqis then second, to the world. Those are the priorities that he should be tried under. As for Iraq having a four thousand year old highly civilized set of rules and regs - whatever. Doesn’t mean squat now. This is democracy, a whole new game unless I’ve missed something. If you figure the old ways are going to be the same ways, prepare to be disappointed. They have not set up a constitution yet so to surmise that it will or will not include the death penalty is just guessing.. I guess that it will, but it may not. You and others assume that 'the guilty bastard' will be strung up or whatever like he actually does IMHO. However, what if their constitution has no death penalty? it would send a message to the world if a special court is not set up and he is tried by the same law as every one else and subsequently is spared. The message would be that Iraq truely is a democracy with one set of rules for all. Straining? They can do what they want. Why do you use that term? Because you think that I think they are dumb? The two places on earth I do not want to see Saddam are the USA and The Haugue. It's not being openminded, it's common sense. Is the democratic belief that all men are created equal and justice is blind a western belief? I think that it is an inherrent part of democracy no matter what race, color or religion you are. You know, what they are building in Iraq at this moment. For the first time in it's history. Where did you read that into what I said? These people are working on a constitution so that mob rule does not take place. I said that to try him fair is the only way. I also said that to have different rules for different people is crap. One for you and another for me? That sends out the same message that Saddam did by giving prefferential treatment to regieme members, you know, the system that the US spent $500 billion and a lot of lives to rip out. The answer is no. There is no constitution yet so there is not, nor is there no death penalty, there is nothing. So first they have one and now they don't but here they are shooting from the hip using an old set of laws that they had lying around. Why don't we simply call a spade a spade and say that they don't have a set of laws in place YET for the new Iraq? Granted they will use lots of stuff from everywhere, maybe even some stuff from the US, to say what is going to be is as I said, just guessing. As for me and my stand on the death penalty, I am for it with a provision. That provision being that the defendant be given two million dollars so that he may hire the best lawyers money can buy. All too often proper proceedure is not followed because those on trial do not have either the money or publicity that high profile deffendants get. I say let 'em fry, torture them before you do it too, but make sure you have the right person. I was, in Saddams case making an intelligent observation that it would send out a clear message that if his life can be spared then truley they are a democracy in every sense of the word. Open for business.

I don't have a problem either. OK, now that you see that it was all worth it and how mistaken so many were about how we should not go in, does it become clear now that every justification had to come to bear to ensure we did this? Does it not become clear that most of the 'questioning' you speak of was not simply questioning but rather 'attacking' the principles, the integrity and honor of the President and every soldier who went to free Iraq. This wasn't curiousity and trying to steer the country's path, it was all out and out vicious attacks on the President, the USA and an attempt to change the course of history to their point of view by distorting facts, slinging inuendo and rumors in the face of truth, everytime. Like where is the WMDs dude? Answer, probably in the two thirds of the country that has not been inspected man. Remember, Saddam has scuds. A canister of chemical in a nose cone = WMD. Are these people so sure there is not a canister of chemical agent in Iraq and a warhead of some kind? I think not, but scince they risked squat, unlike Bush who laid his reputation and carreer along with all the others of the administration they just fire this crap. That's all it ever was, crap. Like a rabid lap dog they yapped. I remember who they were.

It's racial bigotry towards persons of Jewish ancestry. Pretty much pure hatred of a group of people. A fatwah is a muslim religious edict. Harmless enough however, scince their government and ruling bodies are so intertwined with their religious leaders it is basicly a order for all to obey once given. Hope this helps ma.

As I said, this is their country. Will they have the death penalty? I think it is pretty messed if they make a special order just for one man. Kind of makes it like they change the rules case to case. Not a true democracy then is it? Believe it or not, I would love to have him visit me for a weekend to burn him with a torch and try out my Mastercraft plier set. But that is not democracy and Iraq today is all about that. He is nothing compared to what the US and the Council are trying to say to the people of Iraq and the world. All the more reason to be calm, collected and make sure justice is done in the way the new Iraqi constitution says. He is the test case. To throw him into a hole with a bullet in the back of the head is sending out a message that they are afraid. They will do this to anybody that scrrews with them. Is that the message that a democracy should send out? Seriously, I'd love to try out the pliers in my basement with this guy and a couple of two fours over a weekend. I can judge him pretty good already. Why go through the stupidity of a trial? I mean, when a kid is almost eighteen and commits a crime, let's throw the young offenders act out the window if we're pissed at him. As well, is the speed limit 80 KM as posted or is it 85? Are we making rules up as we go along to suit each case or trying all under the same set? Of course you do. I do too. It is however, more imprtent for the new state of Iraq to prove themselves true venders of justice than to kill the 'guilty bastard.' Think of the message that sends if he is given life in prison with hard labor; even the worst of society gets justice. Even the worst gets heard and suffers not under mob rule. Serious, if mob rule were unleashed a parking offender might get a five dollar ticket from me on a monday when I'm not in a hurry to get to a clothing store but on a friday when I'm pissed and paying a lawyer a hundred bucks an hour to wait and there is some scum not paying for a space I need, only one verdict - death. I said earlier that I have no problem 'frying the guilty bastard' except for the fact that frequently he is not given the big money defense that high profile types get. Saddam, if Iraq ends up having a death penalty, I am sure will get his and it will be the right thing to do. My message was simply that Saddam alive may well be worth more than Saddam dead. Solidtary confinment. They spare him, show Iraq they are humanitarian and he dies of despair in two years. It's a golden opportunity to kick off a democracy. The rest of this post is off topic but holds water very well. This is where government fails many. I have a pension that covers me as well as private insurance that also covers me as well as OHIP and life insurance. Many do not have this. I assume you are American and know that many of the Americans I come in contact with left jobs in the private sector to work in the factories that I go to specifically for this heath care reason. Why don't you start a thread on this subject? I'd join in to better understand it for sure.

Logical, you are nearly there but are befuddled in your logic. Seriously, things are a lot simpler than you precieve them to be. Ever hear of the "Golden rule?" Course you have. The ten commandments is merely a detailing of the same rule for those who were trying to find loopholes in it. Today we have over a hundred thousand laws in which to corner those who know they did wrong but are still trying to find ways to circumnavigate it. Most people are good, a prisoner will hold a door open for another because it is the right thing to do. People know what they are supposed to do, religion is for two reasons; one , to scare those who don't get the golden rule into doing it. Two, to be a conduit from this world into the next for those that know the rule and wish to reaffirm their contact with God. To these people it is more than a scare tactic, it is becomming one with God. By who's ethical behavior? I imagine the person that owns the soul. All others can get stuffed. This is where humans get really human. Logical one, I know you are not dumb but seem oto have glossed over the whole issue that is going on. It ain't religion. It's the have nots VS the haves. The have nots are without hope and are victim to anybody who gives them a purpose, reason, hope. At present it is guys like OBL who preach religion. If not religion it would have been simply Anti America. The enemy is poverty and hoplessness. By building a free Iraq and letting the oil revenue be used to give the people a life is venting their valve and showing the poor of the world that it is possible for them as well. We hope that other dictators will see the writing on the wall and grant concessions of some kind. With freedom comes prosperity. It is oppression that is the enemy, not religion. It is very easy to mix the two as you have proved. Know any religiously oppressive societies that are free?

In my opinion as a right wing type, for the US to take justice for Saddam out of the hands of Iraq is unthinkable. They have worked too hard, weathered so many battles both militarily and politically to lose credibility now. In my world there is only justice for Saddam by a free Iraq. Failing that, I would join the anti US crowd in a big way. As I said before, this guy wasn't boarded on the high seas in international waters so the Hague can go stuff themselves and help Milosovik with his re-election campaign but Saddam is the symbol of a new Iraq. A better Iraq, a fair Iraq. Will the new Iraq have a death penalty? . Why is it obvious? Why is it a given that the new Iraq will have the death penalty? Do you not think that it is quite possible that Iraq will become a place where justice for all is a given? A place wheree a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty, especially in the begining? Saddam would send a clear message to all what the new country is all about, to spare him and send him to be pumped from behind for life is humane. Is the new Iraq humane? I believe the death penalty is a good deterrent. I am glad we do not have it as I believe that no state should lower themselves to the level of murderer. However, my biggest problem with the death penalty is that most who suffer from it do not get the high powered defense lawyers afforded to the likes of OJ, Beltway Sniper, Saddam etc. Just Joe Blow and the Judge working against a tee off time. You want to go for the death penalty? Hand the defendant two million dollars and go for it. That's what I believe. You had better be sure of your case, you had better be sure of his guilt, and you had better be sure you really want it.

Ok, I'm stretching it but at least I didn't bring back the dead.

Is it just this board of is there idiots on others? Why did the US give him a physical? Why did they allow pictures to be taken of him with no bruises? What torture techniques will they use while under the close watch of every leftist news/humanitarian/amnesty organisation on the planet? As for the rest of the rant read my answer to your fellow bridge club lady below. Been watching the news lately? American kids dying while on patrol in Iraq. Whole operation going to cost $500 billion? Guess you missed all that. If things were what you say they woul have simply left everything in place and eliminated Saddam. No fuss, no muss and you would have a well heeled dictator. This is democracy building. I know you don't like it but the only way it can be done is to treat the people with kid gloves. How easy it would be to simply install fear as before with secret police instead of getting rid of the secret police then ask for volunteers. How easy it would be to install a groomed dictator instead of trying to get people who have been slaves their entire life to try and write a constitution in less than a year. Your idiocy would astound me however, I see it for the ignorant poop for brains tripe that it is. Economy skyrocketing, the only thing preventing the world from being over run by crud. Yes, totally mismanaged. That's why it can reach across the globe to rip the corruption out of a country like Iraq without destroying it. As for Saddam 'mysteriously' dying. Unthinkable. He has a date with an Iraqi supreme court, a corination of sorts to signify the first 'true' government action of the new country of Iraq. I would imagine that he is watched and looked after with almost as much securtiy as the President of the USA is. He's kinda importent. As for what to do with him. Pretty easy to answer question. America is Democracy building in Iraq. They are on the verge of allowing free elections. They capture the old dictator - in Iraq. Supposedly they are acting in the interests of the Iraqis. Once there is a legitimate Iraqi government to turn him over to, turn him over. As for International Courts and stuff, he was captured in Iraq, not on the high seas. Once Iraq has dealt their justice, the Hague can have what is left. One other point; once the US is sucessful in getting the Iraqis to form a democratic government, I hope it contains the democratic legalities that we value as well. Innocent until proven guilty and all. To make their first legal act a public stoning of Saddam is a very bad move.

I voted for Riff because I don't like things to change.

Farris, even your hero Michal Moore says they are there; He even breaks it down, like he knows. Unless you are going to tell us that he doesn't know a thing and is only a raving tub of sour cream in a drool stained t shirt. BTW, it's easy to see how the braindead get their philosophy from, this guy spews some pretty entertaining anti Bush, wait, was that US or anti war? I mean he spews some anti republican tripe or what exactly is he trying to say? He hates everything American? There is not one good thing in America or that he is just enteretaining like his Fat Buffoon opposite Limbaugh? I saw that Bowling for Columbine and I would have loved to be that K Mart lady or whatever when he brought those bullets back for a refund. I would have told him "first, we don't take back merchandise without a reciept, second for a refund it must be in it's origional packaging and for an exchange it must be unused." You have to stand your ground against shock idiots like these. MOORE'S AN IDIOT Are the WMD there or not? He says they are. Actually Farcus, I thought that WMD would be discovered too. I am not as certain that they will be found as otherS are but really I don't care one way or the other. Saddam was believed to have them. By every leader on the planet. Koffe Anon, Jaques Chirac, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy and more. The fact that they have not been found is meaningless. The threat of Iraq under Saddam has been destroyed. Period. No more invading Kuwait, Saudi, Iran. No more trying to gain an edge through building WMDs like he was. All gone now. In it's place is what will be a stable Iraq, a beacon for democracy and justice in the heart of the Middle East. It's pretty hard for Iraq's nieghbors to have a thrieving democracy right next dorr to their starving dictatorship. See how long it lasts with Syria and the rest before they start making democratic reforms. Of course you will still be asking where the WMDs are. Did Saddam fake us out? Even the inspectors thought they were there so why would you think Bush (whom you consider of sub human intelligence) would not think the same? As for the freeing of Iraq, what the heck is your problem with this?

LOL, the wheat growers of Western Canada love the government forcing them to sell at half price only to give their sweat away as foreign aid. BTW, not one oil consignment has been sold to the US. So much for the leftist Oil argument. Where are those idiots now? What crap are they spreading today that is another emotional lie?

Well Martin just told Bush that Canada has been a "major participant" on the 'War on Terror' by sending 2,000 toops to Afganistan. I imagine that if any mud huts need rebuilding then we will qualify for a contract there. As for Iraq, why would anybody who was opposed to the action be allowed to bid? Seems to me that a country that was, and still is against the action would undermine the effort if allowed to interfere with something they protest. I see nothing suspect or vindictive about that. Merely good sense. After all, if a neighbor hated you, your house and your family why would you consider him to hire to mow your lawn or help you shingle your roof? Now especially france and Germany. They actively worked AGAINST this whole operation. They see something they can make money off of and you figure that they are not going to still work against it? They are pushing for immediate transfer of power when any sane person knows that is an invitation for disaster. You figure that they are morally commited to Iraq's well being? Must be a turnip truck that lost a Riff that just passed by.

Wow, talk about thinking small. I assume that every wife or mother of every soldier lost in WWII feels that the war and reason was not enough to justify the loss of their loved one. Law and order are not reason enough to sacrifice ones's life says the wife of a police officer killed in the line of duty. Same stuff, same argument. The rest of us realise that shit happens when you change the world for the better. You think a free Iraq is a bad thing?

Excellent example Craig. As for being wrong on every issue, yes pretty much. They seem to take a certain glee in any downturn of events even though anybody can see what and where this is leading. It is all so clear now, Iraq is just a steady march to total democracy. No more giant hurdles left, just a lengthy flexing of muscles, trial and error. It's pretty much in the bag. The religious groups bekon and call for elections as they are the only group organised enough to come out on top at this moment but any fool can see thaat the country needs more time, not a lot, just more. To pin a enormous event such as this transition from dictatorship to democracy at the hands of a third party is impossible. When it's ready, it's ready.

The US launched it under resolution 687 and 1441. 687 being the agreement for ceasefire from Gulf 1. After Blix went on record saying he was not gdtting total co-operation and still turning up WMD material it allowed the US to resume the war. 1441 states that Iraq would face serious consequences if it did not report and destroy it's WMD and the materials and equipment related to same. That also proivides a mandate for war. As for knowing where they were, yes. Knowing where they were moved to in the weeks after, no. Remember Gulf 1? They knew where the Scuds were, but not all the time. They were mobile remember? Which Scuds were loaded with chemicals and which were not? Iraq possessed the ability to facilitate this so all had to be treated as a threat of this nature. Considering that over 120 of the 130 weaspons stockpiles has not even been looked at, You shouldn't be in too much of a hurry to put your foot in your mouth. As well over three quarters of the country has not been gone over either. You point is meaningless. They could turn up any day, minute or second. Already enough has turned up to justify the war so your comments are only 'In your face' meaningless natter. Oil policy. Good one, I see that you guys have changed the crap cry from 'Blood for oil' to "Blood for having influence on oil policy.' FYI, there is not enough oil in Iraq to repay even five percent of what the US will have spent liberating it. Saddam has always been evil. In 1990 he demonstrated that he was evil, as well as a threat to all countries in the region. That makes him 'really evil.' Some of those countries were allies of ours as well as business partners. That makes him a threat to US interests. Then of course came 9 11 and the realisation that terrorism was a problem that wouldn't be going away as long as Arab countries stayed the way they are. A credible, prosperous Arab society had to be made. Iraq fit the bill as it had a despot who wouldn't be missed (except by the left it seems), a somewhat modern, educated industrial society and a means with which to finance itself (Oil). It's central location is a geographic bonus for more 'democracy seeding either militarily by the US or through exchange of trade with a new democratic Iraq. Providing proof that prosperity is possible and seeding it here and there it creates a breeding ground for responsible citizens with hope for a future ratrher than nutbars with nothin else to lose. Surely you can only see good in this?

Thed US should leave the UN to do whatever it does best and start a real league of nations. One who's membership is based on their values. Democracy, fair play, human rights and walking the walk. One who actually stands up to enact what it rules. The reward would be economic favoritism, common military goals and shared technology. Kinda like what is happening with Britain and the US now. Lessor nations that can't make first string can become water boys for the UN while the menfolk get stuff done.

It's leftie logic at work. I vigorously oppose a Wal Mart being built in my town then when it's up demand a job. These rats should go ask fellow rat Saddam for a job.