Bye Saddam...sniff...

[myata]

They do really need to stop killing each other. It's terrorist bombings of civilians that are the problem, not American's parading around slaughtering people.

I guess wishful thinking is the last (and most powerful yet) secret weapon in Bushes' clique arsenal.

[Black Dog]

Iraqi "government" to probe hanging video

The Iraqi government launched an inquiry on Monday into how guards filmed and taunted Saddam Hussein on the gallows, turning his execution into a televised spectacle that has inflamed sectarian anger.

...

But mobile phone footage on the Web showed guards shouting "Go to hell!", chanting the name of a Shi'ite militia leader and exchanging insults with Saddam before he fell through the trap in mid-prayer and his body swung, broken-necked, on the rope.

This is straight gangland shit.

[Nazia]

Im to lazy to read all 76 posts...but I will say...

Sadam Huseein was a good guy. He was killed for he was far to influencial on the Muslim's and Bush had to demolish Sadam...which was the Muslim's strength and Bush's weakness.

But I am glad he was killed on EID..a religious Muslim celebration. He shall be forgiven for his sins and sent to heaven inshallah.

[leonardcohen]

Im to lazy to read all 76 posts...but I will say...

Sadam Huseein was a good guy. He was killed for he was far to influencial on the Muslim's and Bush had to demolish Sadam...which was the Muslim's strength and Bush's weakness.

But I am glad he was killed on EID..a religious Muslim celebration. He shall be forgiven for his sins and sent to heaven inshallah.

This is intended as a joke, right?

[bush_cheney2004]

[This is intended as a joke, right?

No, but this is: EID spelled backwards = DIE....buhh-buy Saddam, have a nice trip.

[Black Dog]

Saddam aides hanged, but not as planned

Saddam Hussein’s half brother and the former chief of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court were both hanged before dawn Monday, but the half-brother's head was severed by the noose — leading to outrage from Sunnis who claim the body was mutilated.

Malice or stupidity? We report, you decide.

[Bistmaster]

You know, I find it hilarious that no one seems to understand that the US military isn't there with war on their agenda. They're there for police service now. The Iraqi Military is the one doing all the fighting. Our boys are just there to keep the dirty arabs from erupting the region into a civil war.

Which brings up another issue. I wonder if any of you have read the article that Dubai, United Arab Emirates released stating the following AND I QUOTE

Saudi Arabia has told the Bush Administration that it might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq's Shiites if the US pulls its troops out of Iraq, according to American and Arab Diplomats

The Article goes on about this and all of the technical hoodahada, but if you want the full version, I can email it to anyone who wants it.

Basically, we're damned if we do, and we're damned if we don't. If we stay there, the international community has a hay-day and accuses the Americans of being the horrible imperialist faction of the world that is trying to take over, and if we leave, there is massive civil war, and millions of people die in the massacre of all massacres.

So really, do we have a choice? We go in there to take out a brutal dictator that was killing hundreds of thousands of people, we liberate a country pleaing for our help (which by the way, the Iraqi Government right now are the ones that want us in there, not the insurgents that you keep hearing about that are blowing up our boys), we stay there and help with humanitarian reasons (building roads, schools etc.), and now, the US is getting accused of stealing oil and expanding into Iraq for more land and to oppress millions?

So lets take a look at our options here... On one hand, we have the option of staying in Iraq and loosing a couple thousand lives. On the other hand, we have the option of leaving Iraq, and eventually, almost immediatly, loosing several millions of lives and the region splinters into just a bunch of little nation-states that are run by Al-Quida and what not and different factions, each with their own view on how to run a country. Either that, or they all die.

In my opinion, leaving Iraq is NOT an option at this point in time. We should stay there a bit longer until the Iraqi government tells us to leave and they can show that they are able to support themselves.

So...Ya. That's all from me for now.

[stignasty]

Our boys are just there to keep the dirty arabs from erupting the region into a civil war.

First off, they're not my boys. Although the US is our bestest buddy in the world, I don't consider myself any more American than I consider myself Iraqi.

Second, if you want to maintain any kind of credibility, you need to stay away from terms like "dirty arabs." That's exactly where I stopped reading your post.

[Black Dog]

You know, I find it hilarious that no one seems to understand that the US military isn't there with war on their agenda. They're there for police service now. The Iraqi Military is the one doing all the fighting.

Yeah, with Sunni militias, Iraqi police units, Kurdish peshmergas, innocent civilians of the wrong sect...the Iraqi military is, at this point, a U.S. sponsored Shiite militia.

Battling With Sadr for Iraqi Soldiers' Hearts

The Iraqi soldiers broke into chants to commemorate the 86th anniversary of the creation of their army.

"Muhammad, Haider, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn!" shouted a group of dancing soldiers, bellowing the names of the prophet and other long-dead Islamic icons revered by Shiite Muslims.

A second later, the name of a living Shiite figure came out of the din. "Moqtada! Moqtada!" one soldier exclaimed, invoking the name of Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric and leader of the Mahdi Army militia that American officials blame for many of the worst acts of violence in Baghdad.

Standing quietly in the crowd were four U.S. Army officers, there to represent the team of American soldiers advising the Iraqis. "Sounds like the Mahdi militia is in the tent," said their interpreter, Mohammed Noshi.

...

At best, said several U.S. soldiers interviewed at the base this month, some of the Iraqi troops they advise are sympathetic to Sadr and his army. At worst, they said, some are members of the militia, also known as Jaish al-Mahdi.

Our boys are just there to keep the dirty arabs from erupting the region into a civil war.

And they are doing a real bang up job of that.

Basically, we're damned if we do, and we're damned if we don't. If we stay there, the international community has a hay-day and accuses the Americans of being the horrible imperialist faction of the world that is trying to take over, and if we leave, there is massive civil war, and millions of people die in the massacre of all massacres.

If only someone could have predicte dthis outcome. Oh wait: lots of people did and were brushed off or called traitors.

So really, do we have a choice? We go in there to take out a brutal dictator that was killing hundreds of thousands of people, we liberate a country pleaing for our help (which by the way, the Iraqi Government right now are the ones that want us in there, not the insurgents that you keep hearing about that are blowing up our boys), we stay there and help with humanitarian reasons (building roads, schools etc.), and now, the US is getting accused of stealing oil and expanding into Iraq for more land and to oppress millions?

Well, the Iraqi government, being an empty shell, is about the only faction that wants the U.S. there, as it depends on the U.S. for its survival.

Also it always bears repeating that virtually everything tht has unolded in Iraq was predictable and much of it preventable. But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery.

In my opinion, leaving Iraq is NOT an option at this point in time. We should stay there a bit longer until the Iraqi government tells us to leave and they can show that they are able to support themselves.

Basically, then, when hell freezes over.

[Bistmaster]

Our boys are just there to keep the dirty arabs from erupting the region into a civil war.

First off, they're not my boys. Although the US is our bestest buddy in the world, I don't consider myself any more American than I consider myself Iraqi.

Second, if you want to maintain any kind of credibility, you need to stay away from terms like "dirty arabs." That's exactly where I stopped reading your post.

Just a side note, when I was saying "dirty arabs" I was speaking literally. If you've ever seen video clips of CNN, Fox, CTV, CBC, BBC etc. interviewing random civilians, they are just that: dirty. Just as if I were to say some homeless guy downtown who hadn't showered in a month would be a "dirty caucasian".

You know, I find it hilarious that no one seems to understand that the US military isn't there with war on their agenda. They're there for police service now. The Iraqi Military is the one doing all the fighting.

Yeah, with Sunni militias, Iraqi police units, Kurdish peshmergas, innocent civilians of the wrong sect...the Iraqi military is, at this point, a U.S. sponsored Shiite militia.

Battling With Sadr for Iraqi Soldiers' Hearts

The Iraqi soldiers broke into chants to commemorate the 86th anniversary of the creation of their army.

"Muhammad, Haider, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn!" shouted a group of dancing soldiers, bellowing the names of the prophet and other long-dead Islamic icons revered by Shiite Muslims.

A second later, the name of a living Shiite figure came out of the din. "Moqtada! Moqtada!" one soldier exclaimed, invoking the name of Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric and leader of the Mahdi Army militia that American officials blame for many of the worst acts of violence in Baghdad.

Standing quietly in the crowd were four U.S. Army officers, there to represent the team of American soldiers advising the Iraqis. "Sounds like the Mahdi militia is in the tent," said their interpreter, Mohammed Noshi.

...

At best, said several U.S. soldiers interviewed at the base this month, some of the Iraqi troops they advise are sympathetic to Sadr and his army. At worst, they said, some are members of the militia, also known as Jaish al-Mahdi.

Our boys are just there to keep the dirty arabs from erupting the region into a civil war.

And they are doing a real bang up job of that.

Basically, we're damned if we do, and we're damned if we don't. If we stay there, the international community has a hay-day and accuses the Americans of being the horrible imperialist faction of the world that is trying to take over, and if we leave, there is massive civil war, and millions of people die in the massacre of all massacres.

If only someone could have predicte dthis outcome. Oh wait: lots of people did and were brushed off or called traitors.

So really, do we have a choice? We go in there to take out a brutal dictator that was killing hundreds of thousands of people, we liberate a country pleaing for our help (which by the way, the Iraqi Government right now are the ones that want us in there, not the insurgents that you keep hearing about that are blowing up our boys), we stay there and help with humanitarian reasons (building roads, schools etc.), and now, the US is getting accused of stealing oil and expanding into Iraq for more land and to oppress millions?

Well, the Iraqi government, being an empty shell, is about the only faction that wants the U.S. there, as it depends on the U.S. for its survival.

Also it always bears repeating that virtually everything tht has unolded in Iraq was predictable and much of it preventable. But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery.

In my opinion, leaving Iraq is NOT an option at this point in time. We should stay there a bit longer until the Iraqi government tells us to leave and they can show that they are able to support themselves.

Basically, then, when hell freezes over.

When were people labeled as traitors for making a prediction?

And I suppose Canada or, to a lesser extent, you could have done better? (in response to "But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery")

Well, if you know your history, and I'm gonna bet that you do, that region of the world has ALWAYS been ravaged by war, so whether or not it can be stopped is not the issue, it's whether or not it can be slowed and perhaps...shoot can't find the right word....maybe the war and violence can be less-heightened, if you get what I mean.

Also, I consider them "my boys" not your boys. So if anyone really has nothing to say, but to take it offensivly that I believe that they are fighting for the protection of my interests, just screw off and leave this to the intellects

[geoffrey]

And I suppose Canada or, to a lesser extent, you could have done better? (in response to "But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery")

I likely wouldn't have started the war in the first place. But that's just me. And that's also the past. Now everyone needs to work towards a solution to fix the problems.

Well, if you know your history, and I'm gonna bet that you do, that region of the world has ALWAYS been ravaged by war, so whether or not it can be stopped is not the issue, it's whether or not it can be slowed and perhaps...shoot can't find the right word....maybe the war and violence can be less-heightened, if you get what I mean.

All areas of the world have been ravaged by war where humans have existed. North America is one of the worst, we've only had civilization here for 400 years and we've had domestically the War of 1812, the American War of Independance, the American Civil War, attacks on NA property during WWII and 10+ civil wars and insurrections in Central America. We're hardly one to be lecturing on peaceful society.

Also, I consider them "my boys" not your boys. So if anyone really has nothing to say, but to take it offensivly that I believe that they are fighting for the protection of my interests, just screw off and leave this to the intellects

I can promise you that they don't consider themselves as your possession.

[Bistmaster]

And I suppose Canada or, to a lesser extent, you could have done better? (in response to "But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery")

I likely wouldn't have started the war in the first place. But that's just me. And that's also the past. Now everyone needs to work towards a solution to fix the problems.

Well, if you know your history, and I'm gonna bet that you do, that region of the world has ALWAYS been ravaged by war, so whether or not it can be stopped is not the issue, it's whether or not it can be slowed and perhaps...shoot can't find the right word....maybe the war and violence can be less-heightened, if you get what I mean.

All areas of the world have been ravaged by war where humans have existed. North America is one of the worst, we've only had civilization here for 400 years and we've had domestically the War of 1812, the American War of Independance, the American Civil War, attacks on NA property during WWII and 10+ civil wars and insurrections in Central America. We're hardly one to be lecturing on peaceful society.

Also, I consider them "my boys" not your boys. So if anyone really has nothing to say, but to take it offensivly that I believe that they are fighting for the protection of my interests, just screw off and leave this to the intellects

I can promise you that they don't consider themselves as your possession.

Well, the problem is that there just doesn't seem to be a solution at this time. Sure war is horrible, but sometimes neccessary. I'm not saying whether or not this one was neccessary, but I'm definatly not saying that it's not horrible.

Yes, all areas of the earth have been ravaged by war, but not to the extent and the consistancy of the Middle East and, of course, Africa.

I never considered them my possessions. I merely said that they were protecting what I believe in.

[Black Dog]

When were people labeled as traitors for making a prediction?

Terms like "traitor", "fifth columnist" etc were bandied about quite regularily in the run up to and course of the Iraq war. I'm surprised you missed that.

And I suppose Canada or, to a lesser extent, you could have done better? (in response to "But the U.S. leadership took a difficult situation and fucked it up beyond all hope of recovery")

Irrelevant.

Well, if you know your history, and I'm gonna bet that you do, that region of the world has ALWAYS been ravaged by war, so whether or not it can be stopped is not the issue, it's whether or not it can be slowed and perhaps...shoot can't find the right word....maybe the war and violence can be less-heightened, if you get what I mean.

If I recall, the war was sold on the basis that it would make the mid east more peaceful and stable, either through the floursihing of democracy or the removal of a destabalizing prescence, depending on who was talking. I don't recall "sparking a civil war with the potential to spill over into the whole region" being one of the pre war justifications. I am open to the possibility that this was the plan all along (destroying thr village in order to save it, as it were), but that doesn't reflect well on the administration.

Also, I consider them "my boys" not your boys. So if anyone really has nothing to say, but to take it offensivly that I believe that they are fighting for the protection of my interests, just screw off and leave this to the intellects

So maybe you should refrain from referring them as "our boys," then.

Yes, all areas of the earth have been ravaged by war, but not to the extent and the consistancy of the Middle East and, of course, Africa.

Depends on what you mean by "ravaged," eh? The Middle Easst, being the cradle of civilization and all, has known war as long as its known human life. On the whole, though, I'd say the title of "most ravaged" would have to pass to Europe.

[GostHacked]

Black Dog

Terms like "traitor", "fifth columnist" etc were bandied about quite regularily in the run up to and course of the Iraq war. I'm surprised you missed that.

Don't forget

-unpatriotic

-shortsighted

-blind

-with us, or against us,

We were told to

-have patience

-look at the long term

-stay the course

-i am the decider

And now your US civil liberties are being eroded away, day by day. I can go on and on. I can elaborate further on this if anyone wants to. I should provide links, but people hate it when the same monkey feces they threw around, gets tossed BACK in their faces.

[jbg]

And now your US civil liberties are being eroded away, day by day. I can go on and on. I can elaborate further on this if anyone wants to. I should provide links, but people hate it when the same monkey feces they threw around, gets tossed BACK in their faces.

I fast lose patience with people who snipe at some of the best countries in the world, i.e. the US and Canada, because neither are perfect.

[mcqueen625]

Dear Riverwind,

Saddam is brutal psychopath that deserves to hang - even the most rabid anti-war activist should at least acknowledge that.

Not me. At least, he wasn't the worst, and his trial and punishment far exceed how other brutal dictators have been treated...the list is too long to put here.

Finally peace will come to Iraq.

The peace of death, I suppose...as to peace in the country, I predict years of bloodshed. Which isn't much of a prediction, since it is the status quo today.

You are mistaken, it will be justice.

Justice? Pffft. The trial was a farce from beginning to end. Saddam should have been tried in The Hague, and it should have included the chemical weapon attacks. Mind you, it should have also included members of the US administration who condoned, aided and abetted Saddam at the time.

Yeah okay, whatever! Bleeding hearts like you should maybe move to the Middle East and find out just how welcome anyone is from the West. Saddam Hussien butchered his own people if they did not agree with him. Seems to me that Dion and the Liberals feel the same way about Canadians who do not feel that they are the natural governing party of Canada. Maybe they wouldn't go so far as butchering opponents but they would definitely make opposition to their ideas against the law if they thought they could get away with it. Thank God the people of Canada developed a spine and turfed this bunch of thieves and liars while we still could. Given another couple of terms, I'm sure they would have found some way to delay elections until they could figure out a way to do away with them completely. Imagine the gall of the Liberals telling Canadians that we are basically stupid if we don't believe everything they tell us, and refuse to believe that they are our saviours. From what I can see and have experienced another couple of terms with the Liberals would have completely destroyed this country.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear mcqueen625,

Thank you for providing my morning chortle. You'll note that I did call for him standing trial, but in a legitimate court (The Hague) for 'crimes against humanity' (such as using chemical weapons). You should also note that the oft (and ill-)used line

Saddam Hussien butchered his own people if they did not agree with him

isn't exactly true, but simply hysterical bleating from those who don't like to think too much. The Kurds were trying to secede through force of arms, and were quashed by force of arms. Were chemical weapons not used, no one would have said 'boo'.

As to the rest of your post, I have to admit, I have not seen such a 'ham-fisted segue' into a completely different topic in a long time. I'll note that I am also glad the Liberals are gone, about the only point in your post that is tenuously connected to reality.

[Black Dog]

I fast lose patience with people who snipe at some of the best countries in the world, i.e. the US and Canada, because neither are perfect.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that the U.S. and Canada, imperfect as they are by your own admission, should be exempt from reproach because other countries are worse? Me, I happen to think that, like charity, criticism begins at home. As citizens of democratic states, we have more of a stake in the actions of our governments and, thoretically at least, more power to change them. Certianly there's more to be gained from criticizing and attempting to affect change in our own backyard than by simply mouthing empty condemnations of other far away states.

[myata]

Yeah, with Sunni militias, Iraqi police units, Kurdish peshmergas, innocent civilians of the wrong sect...the Iraqi military is, at this point, a U.S. sponsored Shiite militia.

Battling With Sadr for Iraqi Soldiers' Hearts

True, and the pattern isn't unique to Iraq, compare:

Afganistan: links to warlords opposing Taleban;

Palestine: support Fatah against Hamaz;

Sudan: provisional government against Islamic Courts;

The list can go on. Now if the faction US was betting against happens to win (the only question I would ask is, whether US support for the opponents actually makes it more likely to win), it's hard to expect it to be very friendly to them. This simple equation may explain many unhappy episodes which would otherwise have to involve notions like "war on terror", "civilization against barbarians", "conflict lasting generations" and like.