saddam

[gregimotis]

Just what does what you think about what I think about hussein's habit of mailing pieces of his political prisoners to their families have to do with anything?

Whatever the Iraqis think of G. Bush changes not one whit the fact that Saddam Hussien was a butcher and had a hanging coming. Whether he got a 'fair' trial doesn't change it either. Whatever you or Emptyness (sorry, I mean D.H. ) have to say about Bush is immaterial to this statement:
The world is brighter without Saddam Hussein.

I think people get so caught up blaming Bush for everything from the Middle East to moldy bread that they won't even allow for such obviously good news as Saddam Hussein's death on his own gallows because it might look like Bush did at least one thing right in his entire life.

[DickHardman]

Iran invaded the US when they stormed our embassy there. Regardless of whether or not Iraq and Saddam started the Iran Iraq war, Iran started the Iran US war in 1979. Saddam was a tool of opportunity for us to try and do something about Iran without committing our own troops. And while you're right about Saddam's atrocities, that was not a true statement in the early 80's. Once again, we had to choose between allowing a group that had deliberately attacked us, and one who was already in a war with them. It was a case of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." That's a bogus philosophy in my opinion, but if you look at things in context, it is easy to see why we put our support where we did. Further, I would submit to you that if you were dealing with the same conditions in the same time frame with the same information, you'd have probably sold Saddam those weapons as well.

even if helping saddam was in our best interest, why didnt we just give him regular munitions? did we really need to ship him tons and tons of chemical agents known to be used to make internationally illegal wmds?? why not just give sadaam some tanks and jets and better small arms weapons??

even our own ally israel realized that saddam was way more brutal than the islamic fundamentalists in iran and smuggled tons of weapons to iran.

[Troll Virus]

I don't know why we chose to sell him the munitions we sold him, and frankly, neither does anyone else here. It is certain though, that he would have had chemical weapons anyway, and was mass producing them even without our help using Iraq's extensive chemical processing capabilities.

Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to all.

It doesn't ultimately come down to one man.
We can pile hatred on an individual, while the organisation that made them a figurehead continues on its merry way.

even if helping saddam was in our best interest, why didnt we just give him regular munitions? did we really need to ship him tons and tons of chemical agents known to be used to make internationally illegal wmds??

Why be involved at all?
Money?

Whatever the Iraqis think of G. Bush changes not one whit the fact that Saddam Hussien was a butcher and had a hanging coming. Whether he got a 'fair' trial doesn't change it either. Whatever you or Emptyness (sorry, I mean D.H. ) have to say about Bush is immaterial to this statement:
The world is brighter without Saddam Hussein.

According to who?
What right does a nation, or even a man have, to decide the fate of another?

I think people get so caught up blaming Bush for everything from the Middle East to moldy bread that they won't even allow for such obviously good news as Saddam Hussein's death on his own gallows because it might look like Bush did at least one thing right in his entire life.

You should run for senate Greg.
That's precisely the kind of shit that gains votes, permeates conflict and does no fecker any good whatsoever.
What exactly is so good about Saddams death?
How do you reason that Bush is responsible?

[DickHardman]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8jze0DFQ_k[/YOUTUBE]


theres a scene in this video that shows one of saddams chemical attacks on iranian soldiers.