Saddam Arrested

[diarrhea_splatter]

That's the crux of the deal. That Saddam was ousted was a good thing, though the way it was done was not. The ends do not justify the means by a long shot, not when the ends could have been achieved a different way.


*G*

Tell that to the millions of people that suffered in Iraq.

I used to think that liberals were all mushy. Now I see that they are a bunch of cruel bastards.

and in your case, ignorance is bliss

 

[ByteMe]

Russ,

As I said the last time that you brought up those quotes however, practically everyone outside the administration was pushing for one last chance of weapons inspections. Practically everyone outside the administration was doing its best to avoid a war, which is what we should do in all situations.

The majority of the american public just before the start of the war in numerous polls believed that we should let the weapons inspectors do their jobs before going to war. Why? Because no one wants war if it can be avoided.

The only people pushing for war at all costs and at every turn demonizing the UN process and the UN countries who wanted to give the weapons inspection process one last chance, were those in the administration. They were so sure that Iraq had WMD that they circumvented the UN process and UN approval, and burned bridges of nearly every major ally we have in the world, allies we desperately need in our global fight against terrorism and for economic purposes. Now we have gone in and found nothing yet. Not a virus, not a bacterium, not a spore, not a nuke, nothing.

Hell I thought Iraq had WMD. But the key difference, as I said before, is that I wanted to give the weapons inspection process one last chance to work before committing troops. If I didn't work, and I've said this since day 1, then I would have completely supported our going into Iraq. But it was never given a chance to work by this administration doing everything from insulting our allies at the UN, to in the end telling the weapons inspectors to get out because we were going in immediately, UN be damned. That is where I have a huge problem with the way in which this situation was handled.

The whole reason the administration took to tack that it did was because Saddam posed an imminent threat to our security with his WMD, not because we couldn't afford another day of Iraqis being slaughtered by that madman. So because we could not wait, because we circumvented the UN process we've been beholden to for so long, along with nearly the entire civilized world body, we should find the reasons we did so no?

If you punish your child for being disobedient today, and afterwards you find out that your child had actually not done anything wrong, wouldn't you owe your child an apology? Or would you say that the beating was justified because of a transgression from last month which went unpunished?

Should we apologize to Saddam? Hell no. He deserved what he's getting. Should we apologize to the UN and the countries we insulted in the process if we find no WMD? Definitely.

So you are upset about HOW Bush went to war (does this sum it up?).

Have you thought that maybe the USA was tired of the UN? Maybe behind the scenes the government needed to send a message. Last I read (someone got a link) about 50% of the people are considering that the USA should pull out of the UN.

How much you want to bet that the liberals around the world are going to bitch up a storm about Saddam's treatment in captivity?

 

[Grall]

a lot of European people have long held anti-us views. And those that still do: FU.

Have you ever considered MAYBE it's because of that very same self-righteous attitude YOU display, that people dislike or even hate your country? You know, cause and effect?

Maybe its the fact that we have always had free speech

*ahem* Slavery up until end of 1800s...

*ahem* Civil rights movement in the 60s...

Free speech, as long as you're white, preferably of middle income or better, and christian.

How easy you people seem to forget your own history. And that even despite there's not one F of a lot of it to begin with! I guess a nation of bigmacs-for-brains simply can't be bothered with such petty details such as consistency in their claims about their own nation in a discussion thread on a message board on the internet...

Maybe its because we are the only superpower left.

A superpower in debt up over its ears.

*ahem*
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

You're being a superpower by spending borrowed money! Current debt near seven trillion dollars, or some suitably rediculous/astronomical figure like that. Bush is happily racking up even more by greatly increasing "defense" spending, just so guys like you can feel smug about yourselves.

content in the fact that at least my Government is trying to take out the bad guys and not relying on a pansied ass UN to do its job.

Yeah, god forbid we'd let the pansy-asses at the UN finish the weapons inspections first before attacking illegaly...

We have devout Muslims, Jews, Catholics all living side by side not causing a single issue.

Maybe you should tell that to the Arabs who got beat up after sept. 11th?

Hate crimes are very prevalent in the US, but maybe you didn't know, just like you didn't know about slavery and the civil rights movement?


*G*

 

[Natoma]

So you are upset about HOW Bush went to war (does this sum it up?).

Ding Ding Ding!

I've been saying this over and over. Process and Diplomacy matter. We are not an island unto ourselves. Even with our vast economic and military might, we still cannot handle this situation on our own. And that doesn't even get back to our corporate-economic needs wrt the rest of the world. Alliances do matter, and we needlessly hurt many of them in the past year.

In all these actions I have agreed with the direction Colin Powell tried to steer us in. Unfortunately the president did not agree with Powell in the end (Yes he went to the UN, but he didn't reign in the simultaneous "Old Europe" taunts, among others, from Cheney and Rumsfeld, presenting a unified front to the world as we should have done) and went with the Hawk Division of his administration.

Have you thought that maybe the USA was tired of the UN? Maybe behind the scenes the government needed to send a message. Last I read (someone got a link) about 50% of the people are considering that the USA should pull out of the UN.

The unfortunate part is that this isn't the first time this administration has flouted world agreements. They pulled out of Kyoto without offering up an alternative, as they promised. They pulled out of the 1972 Anti-ICBM Treaty with the Russians. They ignored the Geneva Conventions wrt war criminals by labeling everyone at Gitmo "enemy combatants" even though we declared war on Afghanistan with Congressional Approval as well as UN approval. They pulled out of world trade agreements with the trade sanctions on the Steel Industry, which were finally rescinded once the WTO threatened sanctions of its own against us.

These are merely a few examples of the many unilateral actions this administration has taken in ignoring our allies and our interests around the world. The UN action was merely the latest in a long line of such actions.

How much you want to bet that the liberals around the world are going to bitch up a storm about Saddam's treatment in captivity?

If we truly want to set an example for the Iraqis, we should not torture Saddam Hussein. Why? Because we have to send the message that torture and other despicable means of eliciting information that are used expediently in the middle east are not pillars of democracy. If we torture him as I'm sure many wish we would, and he definitely deserves, it will simply set a bad precedent. It'd be like a parent telling a child not to smoke, and then lighting up a Marlboro a minute later.

 

[ByteMe]

How much you want to bet that the liberals around the world are going to bitch up a storm about Saddam's treatment in captivity?

If we truly want to set an example for the Iraqis, we should not torture Saddam Hussein. Why? Because we have to send the message that torture and other despicable means of eliciting information that are used expediently in the middle east are not pillars of democracy. If we torture him as I'm sure many wish we would, and he definitely deserves, it will simply set a bad precedent. It'd be like a parent telling a child not to smoke, and then lighting up a Marlboro a minute later.

What? I think he should be publicly stoned/beat/cut/whipped/kicked/spit-on/speared/crushed/dipped in acid/burnt/beat some more/shot. Isn't this the culture that has public stonings? If Saddam does not deserve torture than who does?

 

[Natoma]

Maybe its the fact that we have always had free speech

*ahem* Slavery up until end of 1800s...

*ahem* Civil rights movement in the 60s...

Free speech, as long as you're white, preferably of middle income or better, and christian.

How easy you people seem to forget your own history. And that even despite there's not one F of a lot of it to begin with! I guess a nation of bigmacs-for-brains simply can't be bothered with such petty details such as consistency in their claims about their own nation in a discussion thread on a message board on the internet...

You forgot the womens rights movement that took over 100 years to complete (though you could argue that it's still being fought) and the burgeoning gay rights movement that began basically almost 35 years ago in 1969.

This country is not as "free" as many people would like to believe. But it is "better" overall than every other country in the world. That's why I voice my opinion, dissent, and vote in every election I can. I do not take my freedoms for granted, and I realize that as good as this country is, it needs to get better.

 

[Natoma]

What? I think he should be publicly stoned/beat/cut/whipped/kicked/spit-on/speared/crushed/dipped in acid/burnt/beat some more/shot. Isn't this the culture that has public stonings? If Saddam does not deserve torture than who does?

Precisely why I said:

If we truly want to set an example for the Iraqis, we should not torture Saddam Hussein. Why? Because we have to send the message that torture and other despicable means of eliciting information that are used expediently in the middle east are not pillars of democracy. If we torture him as I'm sure many wish we would, and he definitely deserves, it will simply set a bad precedent.

If we are truly interested in setting up a stable and free democracy, we have to start with some of the things that we do not consider part of our democracy, i.e. torture. We cannot be hypocritical at this *very* critical juncture in Iraqi history. We *must* set the ideal as much as possible.

 

[Natoma]

Btw I just want to make sure this is seen. I wrote this in response to ByteMe, but it applies to something you wrote Russ regarding the intelligence failures. I wrote this in the other "Iraq" thread.

Unilateralist Pre-Emption does not work unless the Intelligence *and* the methods used to decipher that Intelligence are sound. And in the case of the Iraq war, it seems that both prerequisites had monumental failures.

My question is, why hasn't there been an agency wide and administration wide inquiry into this matter? This is of the utmost importance. Someone or some group of people failed along the way, either in gathering the intelligence or in using it. Frankly it was more than likely a little of both. I want to know what went wrong and who did it. There was a massive failure during 9/11, and yet not a single official lost his/her position and not a single reason for the failure was ever released to the public. We have those same people in charge in both the CIA/FBI and the Administration. Again, there was a failure of Intelligence in Iraq and yet not a single official lost his/her position and not a single reason for the failure to find WMD has ever been released to the public.

This is an enormous problem in this age of Unilateralist Pre-Emptive Wars don't you think?

 

[ByteMe]

I still think Saddam should be tortured. If nothing else to make an example of him. It seems people understand this type of example better than the "ideal" type.

 

[Sxotty]

Grall what country are you from? If you are afraid to share then you need to quit whining.

edit:
Byteme you are wrong we should not torture him. That is all there is to it.

 

[dksuiko]

Have you ever considered MAYBE it's because of that very same self-righteous attitude YOU display, that people dislike or even hate your country? You know, cause and effect?

Well, what the hell kind of attitude do you expect in light of your aggressive bashing? "Oh, we are sorry that we are so evil and, here, accept our apology." Sorry, but those with self-righteous attitudes are no more productive to solving anything than you are by simply bashing and hating everything we stand for. From your posts, it seems almost as if you are more pissed off and bitter simply because the U.S. got something they want, Saddam, and you just want to see them fail. In other words, it doesn't matter what the issue is, if the U.S. gets what it wants - you'll be piss in your panties over it.

Granted, many of the points you bring up are valid. But again, when you bring up those points and drag along a bunch of aggressive shit, you still expect a response without a 'smug tone'? Have you ever considered that just MAYBE we're just responding to hate your obvious hate for our country? You know, cause and effect?

Maybe you should tell that to the Arabs who got beat up after sept. 11th?

And this is the type of shit that I mean. As embarassing as it is to have pathetic fucks who beat people on racial grounds in this country, the fact of the matter is is that they are in the minority. You almost make it sound as if every god damn American punched an Arab after Sept. 11th. And about us easily forgetting our own history? So - simply because we are not apologizing every single day for our past mistakes, that means we forgot our history? That's almost as rediculous as telling all Germans today that they forgot their history simply beacuse they don't start every sentence with "I'm sorry for the havoc Hitler raised. See, I remember my history."

In any case, this country has enough of it's own critics to keep happily in debate. We don't need you to bring your ass in here with you're self-righteous attitude, you know - being that your country (whatever it is) hasn't done a single thing wrong and solves every problem it's presented with. And as much as we disagree with them on issues, we've got other folks who at least give a shit about this country when they criticize it.

 

[RussSchultz]

You almost make it sound as if every god damn American punched an Arab after Sept. 11th.

What!? You didn't? My wife gave me her ticket so I could hit two.


/big fat sarcasm, if you didn't notice

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Geez, cut the self-martyr posturing crap will ya, you big whiny baby.

Lol....

I'm the whiner? It's quite amusing now watching people just try and completely avoid givingthe U.S. (or the Bush administration) any credit for this.

Now tell me, have you found Usama and the WMD yet?

One at a time Grall...one at a time.

Of course, when/if we do catch Usama or find what happened to the WMD...we'll be asked either why it's taken so long, or..."well....have you ended all terrorism for good? No? What good was it?"

Good grief....

 

[Willmeister]

We don't need you to bring your ass in here with you're self-righteous attitude, you know - being that your country (whatever it is) hasn't done a single thing wrong and solves every problem it's presented with.

Of course we have a right to criticize. The USA, UK, Australia, Poland, Palau and the Marshal Islands, to name but a few, invaded a nation under false pretenses and were madly scrambling to justify invasion after-the-fact. That's why these nations ended up going at it alone.

But that's not what's bugging me. The West has always acted like this so no one should be surprised. My problem is that Iraq will end up yet another failed nation; even the Ottomans who ruled directly did not rule 'Iraq' as one nation. They ruled over in three parts and generally had peace domestically (constant fighting with Persians over borders and territory excluded). Anytime the West went to war and became victorious they leave a string of failed nations:

Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Congo, Zimbabwe, Vietnam, Algeria, Phillipines, Indonesia, Israel/Palestine and now Iraq and Afghanistan to name but a few.

All these nations were created by bureaucrats thousands of miles away, with an absolute paternalistic approach to their subjects. The showed near disregard for those actually on the ground and imposed what they deem as appropriate, largely by force, directly or by pliant proxies.

 

[Natoma]

I don't think it's fair to say that Iraq will become a failed nation state. Frankly I'm hoping that it succeeds, and succeeds brilliantly. Our security in large part depends on it.

I just have strong disagreements with the way this administration took us to war, not over the ideals of the results of the war itself, i.e. democracy in the middle east in a nation other than Israel.

 

[Willmeister]

I'm hoping Iraq won't be either, but if Afghanistan is any indication, we're in for some more trouble.

Iraq has to be broken into three. I'm not sure I see any way around that. Kurdistan, Shi'ite Iraq and Sunni Iraq. A loose Federation might be possible but unless it's demanded by the populace at large, I wouldn't count on it.

 

[jandar]

Have you ever considered MAYBE it's because of that very same self-righteous attitude YOU display, that people dislike or even hate your country? You know, cause and effect?

This has been going on since well before WWI when Many MANY MANY countries around the world wanted the USA to end it's Isolationalism and help the "right" cause.

*ahem* Slavery up until end of 1800s...

*ahem* Civil rights movement in the 60s...

Free speech, as long as you're white, preferably of middle income or better, and christian.

Many countries didnt even have free votes till well after the USA. The US is not free from a dark past. Neither is UK, Germany, France, Prussia, Russia, and on and on and on.... I could slam a list a mile long of how our rights have stacked up to the rest of the world. Not to mention it was European countries who brought slavery to North America. Pretty much every country abolished slavery in the 1800's, US, UK, France, etc...

http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/suffrage.htm

How easy you people seem to forget your own history. And that even despite there's not one F of a lot of it to begin with! I guess a nation of bigmacs-for-brains simply can't be bothered with such petty details such as consistency in their claims about their own nation in a discussion thread on a message board on the internet...

All you can do is Bash. tsk tsk tsk.... Bring a better argument next time. a 5th grader has better argumentative skills than you it seems.

A superpower in debt up over its ears.

*ahem*
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

You're being a superpower by spending borrowed money! Current debt near seven trillion dollars, or some suitably rediculous/astronomical figure like that. Bush is happily racking up even more by greatly increasing "defense" spending, just so guys like you can feel smug about yourselves.

http://www.natural-law-party.org.uk/UKmanifesto/economy5.htm (380Billion for such a small country ) Yes we have a high debt. So do other countries. (albeit, nowhere near ours)

Yeah, god forbid we'd let the pansy-asses at the UN finish the weapons inspections first before attacking illegaly...

Iraq broke every damn accord the UN threw against them, what else was left besides another injunction that they would do the same too? Timeout tatics barely work in children.

Maybe you should tell that to the Arabs who got beat up after sept. 11th?

Hate crimes are very prevalent in the US, but maybe you didn't know, just like you didn't know about slavery and the civil rights movement?

Maybe I do know considering I was in a place with 1800+ black people, 200 white, 200 hispanic. Guess which races suffered?
I also lived in a ghetto. Drug dealers all around me and I was the only person whose skin didn't match colors with others, so dont ever try to tell me I know nothing of discrimination. Im 3/4 Irish and Scottish descent with 1/4 Cherokee (Native Americans have suffered the most).

See how ignorant you now look? I also have numerous gay friends. I know the looks they got, I know how people talk considering they thought I would go along with the bashing. (nope)

I vote with my heart and mind, and not along any political lines. Something that most people WORLDWIDE cannot comprehend.[/quote]

 

[dksuiko]

Of course we have a right to criticize. The USA, UK, Australia, Poland, Palau and the Marshal Islands, to name but a few, invaded a nation under false pretenses and were madly scrambling to justify invasion after-the-fact. That's why these nations ended up going at it alone.

And I never said you had no right to criticize. My post was more specifically directed at Grall than it was at general criticism over the war. I haven't read any of your posts, so I don't know your views too well, but for all I know - I could be criticizing the U.S. and the west right next with you. But there's a big difference between honest criticism of a certain issue and simply digging for reasons to deliver an endless supply of bashing, and the latter is not what we need.

 

[jvd]

If you punish your child for being disobedient today, and afterwards you find out that your child had actually not done anything wrong, wouldn't you owe your child an apology? Or would you say that the beating was justified because of a transgression from last month which went unpunished

Well I dunno . If what he did last month was kill thousands of people and make a mass grave in his room then yea. I would

 

[ByteMe]

But that's not what's bugging me. The West has always acted like this so no one should be surprised. My problem is that Iraq will end up yet another failed nation; even the Ottomans who ruled directly did not rule 'Iraq' as one nation. They ruled over in three parts and generally had peace domestically (constant fighting with Persians over borders and territory excluded). Anytime the West went to war and became victorious they leave a string of failed nations:

Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Congo, Zimbabwe, Vietnam, Algeria, Phillipines, Indonesia, Israel/Palestine and now Iraq and Afghanistan to name but a few.

All these nations were created by bureaucrats thousands of miles away, with an absolute paternalistic approach to their subjects. The showed near disregard for those actually on the ground and imposed what they deem as appropriate, largely by force, directly or by pliant proxies.

I think the USA has had more successes than failures. Iraq was a failure, there is no-way the USA made it any worse. What was there to lose? The USA puts our lives on the line with much of europe just bitching from the sidelines. And you wonder why we think of europe as shit.

Once again, why are the most powerful countries in the world directly related with the USA? Cound it be because our crap works? You are also just like the many that used to say that the USA could not get a man on the moon.