A lot. There is plenty of blame to go around.
No, he’s laughing at us. We can’t simply blame the mess in Iraq on Bush, at least not after the 2004 elections.
I would like to register that while I’m glad the bastard is found guilty, I am still against the death penalty, even in this case. Killing is never justified, especially when it claims to be justified. Go ahead and hang the guy, but don’t lie to yourselves claiming that it’s “right.” Accept what you are in fact doing (killing another human, much like he did but with smaller numbers).
That is all. Too bad this means no closure for Iraq, really, in light of everything that’s still happening. It’s entered a new phase and he has little to do with what’s now transpiring.
“From hell’s heart I stab at thee,” might have gone over better.
My normal objections to the death penalty do not apply in this case. I’m still not for it, but I’m not against it, either. I don’t think it’s necessary or wise. I don’t think it’s stupid or evil.
I sure as hell wouldn’t watch it on TV, though.
No, this isn’t a November surprise :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I wonder if the co-defendants will be hanged with him…old West style. In the town square. With execution groupies hovering about.
Saddam:
400,000 Iraqis + 500,000 Iranians = 900,000 people
32 years = 384 months
900,000 / 384 = 2,344 deaths per month
US:
200,000 Iraqis = 200,000 people
3.5 years = 42 months
200,000/ 42 = 4,762 deaths per month.
I’d say we’re getting there.
I think the sentence is barbaric, backwards and self-defeating.
When is Bush’s trial?
That’s what I want to know. Saddam was a piece of shit and I have no sympathy for him but in the long run Bush is worse for America, worse for Iraq, and worse for the world. Saddam was only convicted because he was the ‘loser’ and no matter how this mess ends, America will declare itself the ‘winner’.
Please add my voice to the chorus of those suspicious of an announcement so close to Election Day. I never had any doubt the guy would hang, but about that timing. . . yeah, hrm.
Tripler
Thank you.
It would be if it were an actual surprise. So, no, no November surprise here.
And I really do think the timing will mean problems for the Republicans rather than the Democrats. This brings Iraq back into the spotlight two days before the election, and it really doesn’t say anything that wasn’t already known (did anyone actually think Hussein was going to go free?). The Republicans do not WANT Iraq in the spotlight again this close. Iraq isn’t playing as well as it used to. The Repubs have been harping on what will happen to taxes if a Democratic Congress is voted in, and they’ve been staying away from Iraq for a reason.
But back in june/july, when the Saddam verdict was set for october 16, Republicans embraced Iraq as part of their election strategy on the urging of Bush and Rove.
Events on the ground, and the Iraqi decision to delay the Saddam verdict til today have conspired to disrupt what might have been a brilliant strategery.
Too bad for Saddam that Johnny Cochran is dead. Inasmuch as his sentence requires an automatic appeal, there’s still opportunity for him to escape a date with the gallows. In this case, the fat lady hasn’t even started her warmup scales.
What annoys me in this thread are the certain comments made, for example ‘Saddam killed 400,000 in 23 years in power, we did it in 3’ Whilst not even considering the extenuating circumstance of why this has come about, such as removing the regime from Baghdad, and having to deal with his support base, which I might add, were a ruiling class over the other Shia majority and minority Kurds, for hundreds of years, and who are fighting against the Iraqi Government and the majority of the country.
Europe had Nuremburg, Iraq has it’s own version, both are victors justice.
Exactly, Saddam got put on trial for his crimes, and now will receive death. Good.
“We wouldn’t have killed so many, but they resisted our conquest”?
I don’t see how that extenuates anything.
Because the US is pretty much stamping it’s boot on Baghdad right? Forbidding elections of people Iraqis want? Forbidding free press and implementation of rule of law?
Bollocks. To equate the political and social repression by Saddam to the coalition fighting an insurgency against the very power base Saddam relied on (and Shia extremists trying to exact revenge) is fucking ridiculous.
“Removing the regime” was a conscious decision on Bush’s part, not an “extenuating circumstance.”
But Saddams executions and repressions weren’t an extenuating circumstance, they were a natural part of his regime, as where the removal of that regime was an extenuating circumstance, because we didn’t understand fully how it was going to end up. Which was part of the problem.