Sign in to follow this  
tdiplc

Innocent Or Guilty?

Recommended Posts

Is Saddam Hussein as bad as we have been LED to believe?

The UK and US intelligence clearly got it wrong (or lied) over certain issues, and no doubt Bush and Blair will be severely punished at the next elections because of it.

So do we believe those that it got it wrong (or lied), that he also commited other attrocities and crimes against humanity?

Why wasn't he allowed a lawyer in court?

I'm not taking sides yet, but I would like to know the answers.

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard an Iraqi govener-type person giving an interview on the radio last week.. who basically said that the court case was a 'kangaroo court' to reflect how saddams court-rooms were ran, and that he would be executed as a form of 'poetic justice'...

Its worth mentioning, the person was not impressed with this, as he said it made the new iraq goverment no better than the old one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

i will second that, spent a while trying to come up with a reply to this topic but think besty sums it up nicley.apart from the cat bit ,why should it have to eat s :tsktsk: t .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

i will second that, spent a while trying to come up with a reply to this topic but think besty sums it up nicley.apart from the cat bit ,why should it have to eat s :tsktsk: t .

yeh sorry poor cat,i meant his wife. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

erm...

not wanting to argue, but the UN weapons inspectors were in Iraq, and were allowed to look around... they didnt find anything, and had to leave in a hurry when George W Bush delcared war...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

erm...

not wanting to argue, but the UN weapons inspectors were in Iraq, and were allowed to look around... they didnt find anything, and had to leave in a hurry when George W Bush delcared war...

:lol: now how did i know you would say that ian.i thought the inspectors wernt allowed to look around every part ,thats why the war was declared.its a discussion mate,we dont want to argue. :winky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was plenty of time to hide/move/get rid of any evidence before the inspectors eventually got in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure the war could ever be called legal but we are better off without Saddam in power - if we are to belive the atrocities reported on TV that is - think he should not be executed though as it is too quick - sure the war had something to do with natural resources and US access utlimately mind ... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prosecution are very keen for Sadam to be awarded the death penalty.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The defence are equally as keen that David Beckham should take it :whistling:

:oops::offtopic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sure the war had something to do with natural resources and US access utlimately mind ... :ph34r:

The one and only reason behind the whole war. As said many times before Bush is a :tsktsk: and blair is his B :tsktsk: h (or poodle :hehe: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

are you saddam in disguise ????

doesnt matter how bad someone is allegeded to be they should still recieve a fair trial.... Can't see how saddam will get one of those in iraq !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
didnt the war start because he wouldnt let the inspectors in to check for weapons.all he had to do was let them in and we wouldnt be in this situation.he must have been hiding something,he was warned even till the last min,but would not back down,he is a nutter and should be hanged by the neck until deed,after his hands and feet have been chopped off and his tongue sliced out and fed to his cat. :)

Hmmm, so your neighbour comes round to your house and starts banging repeatedly on your door all day and all night and shouting at you to let him in because he thinks you might possibly want to kill his cat (he once overheard you say to your wife that you're not all that keen on cats).

You phone the police and they just say you should let him in otherwise they will arrest you. So eventually you let him in and he searches the whole house looking for anything that could possibly kill a cat. At first your wife objects but your neighbour just asks her why she wants to be married to a cat killer - maybe she is a cat killer too.

You eventually get sick of your neighbour messing around so you throw him out. next thing the police arrest you and your neighbour moves into your house. You are convicted of killing cats, and your neighbour demolishes your house so he can build a nice conservatory on the back of his.

(one too many coffees this morning)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not wanting to argue, but the UN weapons inspectors were in Iraq, and were allowed to look around... they didnt find anything, and had to leave in a hurry when George W Bush delcared war...

About 6months before the War is way near Iraq, doing some work in Kuwait, most nations that are in that area of the world are scared of iraq, not because of the people but because of Saddam, other countries around there keep themselves to theirselves.

Theres loads of rumours, I think the most likely is that Saddam was going to either raise prices (Stuppid%) or cut his oil supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can only know things from what we hear from the media, but given that I have not heard anyone say that the genocide commited by him was untrue, I think we can take it as fact. If this is the case, then this alone justifies the Iraq war and the arrest and trial of Saddam. What annoys me is how I government had to lie to us about the WoMD. Genocide is justification enough. If somebody had done this in Germany in 1936/37, maybe a lot more lives could have been saved.

I do agree though that there should be a proper trial for Saddam......as long as he is found guilty :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but given that I have not heard anyone say that the genocide commited by him was untrue, I think we can take it as fact. If this is the case, then this alone justifies the Iraq war and the arrest and trial of Saddam.

So when are America and Britain going to invade Russia and arrest Putin over what has been happening in Chechnya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and Zimbabwe too. However, you fight the battles that you can win. Just because you cannot do all of them does not mean that you do not do any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you fight the battles that you can win

So is that the justification for starting a war?

Has America won the war in Iraq? People are still dying (only now it's not just Iraqi's). Today's downtrodden is tomorrow's suicide bomber.

Have America the right to start a war in the first place? I thought that's what the United Nations were for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres a thought...

The americans wanted to go to Iraq, and free the people from the iron fist and tyrrany that Saddam ruled with...

Now they are finding out why it was ruled that way... after all, the bombs and terrorists wernt that active when he was in power...

Oh, and before anyone pipes up about Al Queda... it is a accepted political fact that Saddam and Bin Laden hate each other with a passion.. and that the suggestted links are BS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the war justified? IMO yes

Should the aftermath have been better planned? Absolutely, yes

There is always a transition period with any war. Saddam kept the lid on things by fear. There are more killings now because he is not there to do them so his supporters do them. You cannot defend against suicide bombers. I am still covinced that in the long term, Iraq is a better place without Saddam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are more killings now because he is not there to do them so his supporters do them.

...and also those groups who wish to de-stabilise the country no matter who is in power (these are the same factions that were kept in check by the Ba'ath party before America stepped in).

Wasn't this similar to what happened (and is probably still happening) in Afghanistan - destroy the ruling party and suddenly all the other "political" groups start crawling out of the woodwork wanting their share of the pie.

I am still covinced that in the long term, Iraq is a better place without Saddam.

Only time will tell, and I really hope you are right. I just feel now that the real losers in the war will be those countries that started all this (namely America and now Britain).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this