the great hero saddam

[Cavalier22]

"It exterminates thousands and forces them not to eat or drink, and they will have to evacuate their homes without taking anything with them, until we can finally purge them."  -Saddam, on a tape recorded in the 1980's on his plans to murder Kurds with chemical weapons.

Yet, American leaders on on par with this mass murderor. 

[Mr. Intenseone]

Yet, American leaders on on par with this mass murderor. 

WTF is that suppose to mean??

[BRUCE]

I think he's referring to the left's uncanny ability to portray our free world leaders as despots far worse and more evil than even Saddam.  He is, of course, correct to criticise this.

[OzmO]

There is no doubt in my mind that saddam was one evil prick.

But i question whether it was worth the 3000 US lives and the 20,000 US wounded aling with the 400 billion we are in debt to dislodge this bastard from the hole he was cornered in that thousands of miles from our soil.  A hole and a situation where he didn;t have any offensive capabilty both physically and logically to seriously attack the US with.

Buta parade of Alarmists and Aggression Justifiers will undoubtedly beat the fear based terror drum.

[BRUCE]

There is no doubt in my mind that saddam was one evil prick.

But i question whether it was worth the 3000 US lives and the 20,000 US wounded aling with the 400 billion we are in debt to dislodge this bastard from the hole he was cornered in that thousands of miles from our soil.  A hole and a situation where he didn;t have any offensive capabilty both physically and logically to seriously attack the US with.

Buta parade of Alarmists and Aggression Justifiers will undoubtedly beat the fear based terror drum.

At very worst, we have removed a despot who murdered brutally hundreds and thousands of innocents.  The first and only leader of a nation to commit genocide upon his own citizens.  Your trivialisation of this is worrying.  On top of this, I'm surprised you are so sure that if Saddam was able to aqcuire a weapon able to kill westerners (whether he had one or not is now irrelevant) he might not use it.  Keep in mind it's not that far from Baghdad to Jerusalem, we have a strong need to defend our allies from state-sponsored terror - and consider too the American lives in Israel.  Don't trivialise the efforts of those that have given their lives so that you and I may live ours free of brutal dictators.

[OzmO]

At very worst, we have removed a despot who murdered brutally hundreds and thousands of innocents.  The first and only leader of a nation to commit genocide upon his own citizens.  Your trivialisation of this is worrying.  On top of this, I'm surprised you are so sure that if Saddam was able to aqcuire a weapon able to kill westerners (whether he had one or not is now irrelevant) he might not use it.  Keep in mind it's not that far from Baghdad to Jerusalem, we have a strong need to defend our allies from state-sponsored terror - and consider too the American lives in Israel.  Don't trivialise the efforts of those that have given their lives so that you and I may live ours free of brutal dictators.

Well on the genocide thing:  Hitler killed germens jews, and there was bosnia and the killing fields in Cambodia.  So i don't htink he's the first.


But as far as Saddam goes, you must remember, "power" is like an animal:  It will make choices that ensures it's survival.  Saddam was no idiot.  Any aggression after the gulf war in 1991 would spell instand death to his power which something he would never give up.

[BRUCE]

Well on the genocide thing:  Hitler killed germens jews, and there was bosnia and the killing fields in Cambodia.  So i don't htink he's the first.


But as far as Saddam goes, you must remember, "power" is like an animal:  It will make choices that ensures it's survival.  Saddam was no idiot.  Any aggression after the gulf war in 1991 would spell instand death to his power which something he would never give up.

You assume Saddam was as rational as you or I.  He wasn't.  Also, you are correct to point out Hitler etc. in your example, I meant to clarify what I said as being 'Saddam was the first and only leader of a nation to use a chemical weapon on his own citizens'.

[Camel Jockey]

You assume Saddam was as rational as you or I.  He wasn't.  Also, you are correct to point out Hitler etc. in your example, I meant to clarify what I said as being 'Saddam was the first and only leader of a nation to use a chemical weapon on his own citizens'.

Chemical weapons that the United States sold to him. We as a nation stood and by and shook the bastard's hand in '84 as he gased his own people, but when he threatened the western oil interests he suddenly turned into an enemy of America.

Do everyone a favor and stop acting like you give a flying fuck up about the Iraqi people. That way you don't use that liberation garbage to justify our presence there. 

[BRUCE]

Chemical weapons that the United States sold to him. We as a nation stood and by and shook the bastard's hand in '84 as he gased his own people, but when he threatened the western oil interests he suddenly turned into an enemy of America.

Do everyone a favor and stop acting like you give a flying f**k up about the Iraqi people. That way you don't use that liberation garbage to justify our presence there. 

We sold him poison gas, did we? You'll provide me with some information confirming this 'Camel Jockey' and I'll go right ahead and forward it to the UN so that the US may be persecuted accordingly 

As I have pointed out previously, Saddam was happily selling Iraq's oil to nations before we visited him once again and got involved in an expensive war.  Why didn't we just buy it off him if we are so evil?

By the way, I'll keep giving a f**k about the Iraqi people (as you so thoughtfully put it), and you can sit back and care less.  You sure seem like the right person to make moral decisions on liberating nations.

[Dos Equis]

"It exterminates thousands and forces them not to eat or drink, and they will have to evacuate their homes without taking anything with them, until we can finally purge them."  -Saddam, on a tape recorded in the 1980's on his plans to murder Kurds with chemical weapons.

Yet, American leaders on on par with this mass murderor. 

Glad he's dead. 

[BRUCE]

Glad he's dead. 

Me too - the world is a better place.

[240 is Back]

We sold him poison gas, did we? You'll provide me with some information confirming this 'Camel Jockey' and I'll go right ahead and forward it to the UN so that the US may be persecuted accordingly 

you don't know history, dude.  you need about a year of reading til you're able to tread water here on the political board.

[Dos Equis]

Me too - the world is a better place.

Absolutely.

[BRUCE]

you don't know history, dude.  you need about a year of reading til you're able to tread water here on the political board.

If I am so absent minded you will surely provide me with evidence accordingly, and prove my point of view incorrect, dude.

[brianX]

you don't know history, dude.  you need about a year of reading til you're able to tread water here on the political board.

This coming from a guy who thinks the moon landings never happened.

[240 is Back]

If I am so absent minded you will surely provide me with evidence accordingly, and prove my point of view incorrect, dude.

You're not absent minded.  You just don't know the facts.
CBS) Newly released documents show that U.S. officials, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, played a leading role in building up Iraq's military in the 1980s when Iraq was using chemical weapons, a newspaper reports.

It was Rumsfeld, now defense secretary and then a special presidential envoy, whose December 1983 meeting with Saddam Hussein led to the normalization of ties between Washington and Baghdad, according to the Washington Post.

The cozy relationship was an effort to build a regional bulwark against America's enemies in Iran.

The newspaper says a review of a large tranche of government documents reveals that the administrations of President Reagan and the first President Bush both authorized providing Iraq with intelligence and logistical support, and okayed the sale of dual use items — those with military and civilian applications — that included chemicals and germs, even anthrax and bubonic plague.

At the same time, there were multiple reports Iraq was using chemical weapons to repulse the Iranian advance; one State Department official told Secretary of State George Shultz that Iraq was engaging in "almost daily use of (chemical weapons)" against Iranian troops.

This policy led to several Rumsfeld visits to Baghdad, as a private citizen working as a presidential envoy.

Congressional investigations after the Gulf War revealed that the Commerce Department had licensed sales of biological agents, including anthrax, and insecticides, which could be used in chemical weapons, to Iraq.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml

[BRUCE]

This coming from a guy who thinks the moon landings never happened.

Haha, two good posts, he also believes 9/11 was an inside job, oh dear    What a great person to give advice on 'history'.

[240 is Back]

This coming from a guy who thinks the moon landings never happened.

the above post details the released document which show we did exactly what I said we did.  Please do your research before making statements.

[BRUCE]

the above post details the released document which show we did exactly what I said we did.  Please do your research before making statements.

Actually, that's a newspaper article, a much debated one also.  Please don't confuse your suspicions as fact, Rob.

[240 is Back]

Actually, that's a newspaper article, a much debated one also.  Please don't confuse your suspicions as fact, Rob.

Bruce,

Please show me documentation which says these US govt documents are incorrect.  The US Commerce Department had licensed sales of biological agents, including anthrax, and insecticides, which could be used in chemical weapons, to Iraq, and it admits it.

Please don't resort to attacking the credibility of CBS and US govt docuements.

[BRUCE]

Bruce,

Please show me documentation which says these US govt documents are incorrect.  The US Commerce Department had licensed sales of biological agents, including anthrax, and insecticides, which could be used in chemical weapons, to Iraq, and it admits it.

Please don't resort to attacking the credibility of CBS and US govt docuements.

I'll attack the credibility of CBS as far as I like, actually.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132602,00.html

Besides, aren't you the one attacking the same US Gov't for 9/11?? Hmm, seems a touch hypocritical.

Please provide me with US Gov't documents proving the above claims.

[Dos Equis]

Bruce,

Please show me documentation which says these US govt documents are incorrect.  The US Commerce Department had licensed sales of biological agents, including anthrax, and insecticides, which could be used in chemical weapons, to Iraq, and it admits it.

Please don't resort to attacking the credibility of CBS and US govt docuements.

Sounds a little inconsistent.  If the CIA is preventing the media from reporting a 911 conspiracy (as you have claimed), seems a little odd they would allow the media to report this damaging link between Saddam's WMD's and the American government. 

[BRUCE]

Sounds a little inconsistent.  If the CIA is preventing the media from reporting a 911 conspiracy (as you have claimed), seems a little odd they would allow the media to report this damaging link between Saddam's WMD's and the American government. 

Precisely, Rob can't have it both ways with the US government.

[240 is Back]

I'll attack the credibility of CBS as far as I like, actually.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132602,00.html

Besides, aren't you the one attacking the same US Gov't for 9/11?? Hmm, seems a touch hypocritical.

Please provide me with US Gov't documents proving the above claims.

1) I believe a very small group of people in teh US helped the terrorists.  big difference from "blaming the govt".

2) I see an article where Oreilly attacks Dan Rather for something else.



You cannot debunk the US Commerce dept statements, nor can you even debunk CBS' report on it.  You insult me, then you throw out an Oreilly opinion piece on something else.

You're losing me, getting bored here.

[BRUCE]

1) I believe a very small group of people in teh US helped the terrorists.  big difference from "blaming the govt".

2) I see an article where Oreilly attacks Dan Rather for something else.



You cannot debunk the US Commerce dept statements, nor can you even debunk CBS' report on it.  You insult me, then you throw out an Oreilly opinion piece on something else.

You're losing me, getting bored here.

You asked me to not attack CBS's credibility (or lack thereof), there's my reason for being a skeptic of theirs.  I notice you cannot provide me with any US government documents confirming your previous posts.  You have also said 9/11 is an 'inside job', please then explain the governments absence from proceedings.