PDA

View Full Version : American Double Standard?


Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 09:06 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/24/sprj.irq.sons/index.html

Looks like we're gonna publish dead Usay and Qusay photos. Maybe next they'll use them on the playing cards. :rolleyes:

Isn't this a violation of the Geneva convention rules we cried about when the Iraqis showed pics of dead american soldiers?

But I guess that doesn't apply to the Iraqis....they all are terrorists anyway, who need American Might to keep them under thumb.

God. This country is SERIOUSLY going downhill. I hope there's a regime change in America soon... and someone ousts Bush from politcal power. He's an abuser and needs to be stopped. Him and his whole bunch of cronies.

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 09:15 AM
I'm glad they're going to show this. Think about it, Iraq needs to see that we're not playing around AND they need to know that they're key people in this resistance are being taken down. The remnants of Saddam's regime still insists on saying that the people should continue to fight & die for the cause, but what if there's nothing left? They don't care if their people die or not, they're barbaric. :rolleyes:

I say show it on every tv station, front page it on all the newspapers, post it all over the internet. Do u think Al Jazeera would consider NOT showing this if the tables were turned?

jelloshotsrule
Jul 24, 2003, 09:16 AM
you know i generally agree with you on this stuff... and i'm not going to say i "disagree" with you on this..

but i do see the point that the iraqis may not believe that these guys are dead without proof..

which i don't know if that's enough to justify it, and surely it's gruesome and tasteless...

but, i don't think it's 100% clear cut... if only because we're being fed the info from pro US reporters and such...

posted by eye
I say show it on every tv station, front page it on all the newspapers, post it all over the internet. Do u think Al Jazeera would consider NOT showing this if the tables were turned?

i couldn't go that far... also, 2 wrongs don't make a right

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
.The remnants of Saddam's regime still insists on saying that the people should continue to fight & die for the cause, but what if there's nothing left? They don't care if their people die or not, they're barbaric. :rolleyes:

And by enetering into a pre-emptive war with no real basis, we should that we're a barbaric country who doesn't care if it impacts the people stateside (via ecomnic strains of a billion dollar a week occupation of iraq or less money for education, which we sorely lack) or the soliders in Iraq who are out there getting killed for a war with no real focus.

So yea, Iraq may not be right, but don't be stupid and think America is completely absolved of any wrongness in this situation.

Look at the Jessica Lynch Lies....Maybe the fiorce-fed mass media of American has fabricated more than just that in Iraq, eh?

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 09:35 AM
I'm personally sick & tired of the opposition in this country who says we have no business doing anything we've done up to this point. No offense to anyone feeling this way, but u would complain if we didn't do something and were victimized.

The bottom line, is that the people in Iraq will never believe it until they see it. By doing this, it brings the potential of a backoff from fighting us while there. And don't give me the "well, we shouldn't be there in the first place" speech. This entire thing was unavoidable in the first place.

jelloshotsrule
Jul 24, 2003, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
This entire thing was unavoidable in the first place.

how so?

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 09:46 AM
I mean taking a stand with this Saddam & weapons of mass destruction mess.

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
I'm personally sick & tired of the opposition in this country who says we have no business doing anything we've done up to this point. No offense to anyone feeling this way, but u would complain if we didn't do something and were victimized.

The bottom line, is that the people in Iraq will never believe it until they see it. By doing this, it brings the potential of a backoff from fighting us while there. And don't give me the "well, we shouldn't be there in the first place" speech. This entire thing was unavoidable in the first place.

The thing is, we shouldn't have gone there. No way. We're not policemen for the world, and we had no immediate threat from Iraq and thusly, the only reason we went there was pre-emptive. That's not a reason to go to war.

And no, I wouldn't complain if we were victimized. the thing is, if we practiced better international relations and didn't try to cram americanism down the world's throat, perhaps 9-11 wouldn't have happened, nor this stupid war.

Remember that America created Bin Laden, it helped to create a lot of the power dynamics in Iraq during the 80's and now we're trying to fix up our **** ups and in the process doing more damage.

If America we're perfect-- had a great rate of literacy, had low unemployment, a healthy economy and scored high on education, didn't have its corporations riddled with inside trading problems, didn't have such high death rates due to guns, didn't see an epidemic of high school shootings, then, and ONLY THEN would we have the right to call another society barbaric and attack them and occupy them for no apparent reason.

But we're not perfect. and what did we do? We attacked a country for a myriad of
"main reasons." From WMDs that don't exist to Saddam being a tyrant.

And we're "helping" the iraqis? BS! Is everyone in America so thin that they didn't see the photo of the statue of Saddam being toppled? There was NO ONE there. No crowds of Iraqis. It was all fabricatedjust Jessica Lynch being abused in the Iraqi hospital.

And what's the result? A billion dollar a week occupation of a country who will probably need 50 years to rebuild.

That billion a week... think if we spent that on subsidized healthcare? On grants to automakers to make clean vehicles? On education? Scholarships, et.al.

We'd be in a much better position. But the United States of Texas took a different approach.

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 09:56 AM
After reading that, I'm really starting to feel u have a conspiracy theory problem. Why so paranoid?

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
After reading that, I'm really starting to feel u have a conspiracy theory problem. Why so paranoid?

All factual bro. I have nice little round-tables with a sociology professor friend of mine. We talk about this ****. We research. We read the news that you probably don't dig enough to see.

If you wanna be spoonfed your news from FOX or CNN and get the "American" perspective, then you shouldn't comment on international affairs.

I'm asking questions. You're just going wiht the flow. Where are the WMDs? Did you read the articles about Lynch's treatment in the Iraqi hospital? That made CNN, ya know? Did you hear about the Iran/Iraq war? Did you know we trained Bin Laden in the 80s? Did you know we trail most countries (the developing ones notwithstanding) in literacy rates? Did you see the nice wide angle photo of the Saddam statue being toppled?

:rolleyes:

(edit spelling)

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 10:06 AM
Wow, eye, nice to see you in here. Moxie, what is a real threat? Look, even Clinton is running around sayting the President did the right thing. Like I have said in the past, sometimes, we do have to go in. They have found mass graves, centrifuge parts to enrich uranium. And Saddam did have ties to terrorism.

Remember the President said if you harbor them, you are guilty. Saddam had defied the world for nearly 12 years. Hitler did the same. There is a difference between being the worlds police, and going after a guy that has shot you the bird for 12 years!

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Wow, eye, nice to see you in here.

Remember the President said if you harbor them, you are guilty. Saddam had defied the world for nearly 12 years. Hitler did the same.

heh...thanks...it's not everyday I decide to get my hands dirty in here... ;)

But, that's exactly my point. It's not like our actions weren't justified.

I don't agree with this conspiracy stuff though...sorry.

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Wow, eye, nice to see you in here. Moxie, what is a real threat? Look, even Clinton is running around sayting the President did the right thing. Like I have said in the past, sometimes, we do have to go in. They have found mass graves, centrifuge parts to enrich uranium. And Saddam did have ties to terrorism.

Remember the President said if you harbor them, you are guilty. Saddam had defied the world for nearly 12 years. Hitler did the same. There is a difference between being the worlds police, and going after a guy that has shot you the bird for 12 years!

But I highly doubt we would have went in if we had a different presidential situation. And the difference is bush's shoot from the hip style of poli-spin.

Parts to enrich uranium ? nuclear bombs

What ties did Saddam have to terrorism? I'm sure he did. It's probably hard to be in the middle east and NOT have ties to terrorism I suppose. But, does it make it right? Was iraq really a threat as of March 2003? Was it worth concentrating miliary efforts while Bin laden is out on the loose?

and really, have any steps been made towards world peace with this war? I still read of bus bombings, etc. in the middle east. Seems nothing has changed. And if you martyr Saddam, someone else will eventually take his place. It's not like hitler....it's much worse. There's fanatics who are religiously dedicated to the cause.

the germans all kinda realized the hitler problem, but by the time they did.... too late. I think iraq, unless we occupy them indefinitely, will become a problem again. But a big enough problem to start a war? Nah.

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
heh...thanks...it's not everyday I decide to get my hands dirty in here... ;)

But, that's exactly my point. It's not like our actions weren't justified.

I don't agree with this conspiracy stuff though...sorry.

Is it conspiracy stuff or is there SOMETHING ELSE influencing you here?

I think it might be the latter.....

jelloshotsrule
Jul 24, 2003, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Remember the President said if you harbor them, you are guilty.

BUT

the president is not infallible

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 10:24 AM
regarding publishing the photos....

i think it would be easy to interpret doing so as a violation of the geneva convention. i doubt that will cause the WH to hesitate. showing photos/video of the prisoners at guantanamo bay was also a violation.

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 10:25 AM
well...they're up...

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
well...they're up...

Let's hope someone decides that America is a problem, with its tyrannical leader, tons of weapons of mass destruction and resources, and occupies us now!

Come on China! Come on North Korea!

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 10:33 AM
that's intelligent...

this could easily turn into an "if u don't like it here then leave" discussion...

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
that's intelligent...

this could easily turn into an "if u don't like it here then leave" discussion...

You're big on that these days...

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Let's hope someone [...] occupies us now!

Come on China! Come on North Korea!

huh?

eyelikeart
Jul 24, 2003, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
You're big on that these days...

Actually, I was referring to your complaining & trashing the way this country is run.

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
You're big on that these days...

it's pretty easy to get banned these days, especially by throwing insults at a mod in the political forums.

i recommend deep breaths.

jelloshotsrule
Jul 24, 2003, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
Actually, I was referring to your complaining & trashing the way this country is run.

if you close your eyes to the problems with the country, how can it improve?

surely you don't think it's perfect...

zim- moxie and eye are friends, which would make it even funnier if moxie were banned. ;)

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule

zim- moxie and eye are friends

ah. then i recommend shallow breaths.

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Let's hope someone decides that America is a problem, with its tyrannical leader, tons of weapons of mass destruction and resources, and occupies us now!

Come on China! Come on North Korea!


WHAT! Are you for real? Last time I checked you got to vote in this country. Travel from State to State. Make your own decisions. I don't see our people being slaughtered by the 10's of thousands because they want freedom.

:rolleyes:

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 12:26 PM
Moxie, going back and looking at it, the stabs that you took at the US are not warranted. It is like you have a grudge against the country that gives you the opportunities to better yourself.

:rolleyes:

Pinto
Jul 24, 2003, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
I'm glad they're going to show this. Think about it, Iraq needs to see that we're not playing around AND they need to know that they're key people in this resistance are being taken down.

Spoken like a true invader.

Pinto
Jul 24, 2003, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
WHAT! Are you for real? Last time I checked you got to vote in this country. Travel from State to State. Make your own decisions. I don't see our people being slaughtered by the 10's of thousands because they want freedom.

:rolleyes:

I'm sure everything is just dandy in your country.

The only people getting slaughtered are the those of other countries whose resources you covet.

Moxiemike
Jul 24, 2003, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Moxie, going back and looking at it, the stabs that you took at the US are not warranted. It is like you have a grudge against the country that gives you the opportunities to better yourself.

:rolleyes:

Gives opportunities to the small percentage with all the power is more like it.

macfan
Jul 24, 2003, 04:54 PM
Moxiemike,

The Iraqi people need to see those photos because they need to know that those two guys aren't coming back to rape their daughters and kill their sons. It would have been nice if there could have been a trial, but that's the way it goes.

Not only should we have gone into Iraq, we should have gone in sooner.

Your cheerleading for a North Korean or Chinese takeover of the United States says a great deal, and none of it is good, IMO.

And if you martyr Saddam, someone else will eventually take his place. It's not like hitler....it's much worse. There's fanatics who are religiously dedicated to the cause.

Saddam is not a religious figure. Also, did you know that there were Germans who were religiously dedicated to the Nazi cause and continued nusiance attacks on allied forces for a good while after the fall of Berlin?

and really, have any steps been made towards world peace with this war? I still read of bus bombings, etc. in the middle east. Seems nothing has changed.

Right now, there is something of a ceasefire, so, yes, some things have changed. The Palestinians have a new prime minister who is less tainted by terrorism than was Arafat, and more willing to talk peace. Iran is now mentioning that well, we do have some senior Al Qeada in custody after all!

Gives opportunities to the small percentage with all the power is more like it.

Do you have an external locus of control? That is, do you feel that your life is directed mostly by luck and there's not much you can do about it one way or another?

bond003
Jul 24, 2003, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Let's hope someone decides that America is a problem, with its tyrannical leader, tons of weapons of mass destruction and resources, and occupies us now!

Come on China! Come on North Korea!

Do you know of anyone one else that thinks this way? Other than a few in this forum. If you do, who would they vote for in the next election?

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Gives opportunities to the small percentage with all the power is more like it.

Yea, like dirt poor half white, half indian kids that decide to make something out of themselves, become the first person in their family to ever go to college, and become something.

:rolleyes:

That is what I did. I have no simpathy for people in this country that do not succeed. If you want it bad enough you can achieve it. So, no, it isn't opportunities to the small percentage with power. Everyone in this country can make something of their life if they choose too.

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Yea, like dirt poor half white, half indian kids that decide to make something out of themselves, become the first person in their family to ever go to college, and become something.


dirt poor, single parent household, working since the age of 11 (at less than minimum wage) to put himself through college. that's what i did.

I have no simpathy for people in this country that do not succeed. If you want it bad enough you can achieve it.

in general i agree, but i do have some sympathy for those who have it tougher than i did. and i think not everyone is as stubborn as you and me :-)

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
dirt poor, single parent household, working since the age of 11 (at less than minimum wage) to put himself through college. that's what i did.



in general i agree, but i do have some sympathy for those who have it tougher than i did. and i think not everyone is as stubborn as you and me :-)


I agree. It took me 13 years to get my degree, but I got it. No one can ever take that away from me. As for being stubborn. That comes from determination. That comes from having a desire to do better. Not everyone has that. I don't feel sorry for people that do not reach their potential. My brother is on death row, because he chose the easy way in life instead of actually doing what was required by society to be successful.

Still, I don't understand why Moxie has so much resentment towards the US.

pseudobrit
Jul 24, 2003, 05:50 PM
Regarding the topic of this thread, I think it was a acceptable use to show the photos.

These men were not soldiers and their deaths must be proved to mean anything to the sceptical Iraqi people.

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
Regarding the topic of this thread, I think it was a acceptable use to show the photos.

These men were not soldiers and their deaths must be proved to mean anything to the sceptical Iraqi people.


Kudos to pseudobrit!

My favorite common sense liberal ;)

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
It took me 13 years to get my degree, but I got it.

wow, that is determined. congrats.

jelloshotsrule
Jul 24, 2003, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Kudos to pseudobrit!

My favorite common sense liberal ;)

ouch man... ouch... ;)

pseudobrit
Jul 24, 2003, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Kudos to pseudobrit!

My favorite common sense liberal ;)

I prefer progressive. It sounds less like I'm being slandered.

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
I prefer progressive. It sounds less like I'm being slandered.

Actually, if you look at the meaning of the word liberal in the dictionary, it is a wonderful compliment. Personally, I am really starting to like Liberman.

3rdpath
Jul 24, 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
ouch man... ouch... ;)

it's all you man...except that common sense part.;)

zimv20
Jul 24, 2003, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Personally, I am really starting to like Liberman.

a lot of people i know think he's in the wrong party :-)

SPG
Jul 24, 2003, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
They have found mass graves, centrifuge parts to enrich uranium. And Saddam did have ties to terrorism.

Just a few corrections:
Many of the mass graves are from the uprising spurred by bush#1 at the end of the first gulf war.
The centrifuge parts were not in use, not recalled during the 98-03 period, and not part of an active nuclear program. A spare part under a rose bush, a nuclear program does not make.
The 9/11 report that just came out says that iraq has no connection to Al Queda.

SPG
Jul 24, 2003, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
WHAT! Are you for real? Last time I checked you got to vote in this country.
Tell that to the people in Florida. Wait until the electronic voting machines that can be hacked by just about anyone come into play.

Backtothemac
Jul 24, 2003, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by SPG
Tell that to the people in Florida. Wait until the electronic voting machines that can be hacked by just about anyone come into play.

Agreed that electronic voting machines are a bad idea. People should have to correctly fill out a ballot after showing proper ID.

As for Florida, my whole family lives there. My uncle watched people walk out of lines in Pensacola after the State had been called for Gore. There were massive mistakes by both parties there.

Sayhey
Jul 25, 2003, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Agreed that electronic voting machines are a bad idea. People should have to correctly fill out a ballot after showing proper ID.

As for Florida, my whole family lives there. My uncle watched people walk out of lines in Pensacola after the State had been called for Gore. There were massive mistakes by both parties there.

Don't know if the having any electronic voting machines is a problem or just these systems. After all you can stuff paper ballot boxes too.

As to people in Florida leaving the polling places without voting because of a networks "call" of the state, that's just their own stupidity. Even if you think the Presidential election is over there are surely state and local races to vote on. Its happened many times to California voters and we get no sympathy from the Congress or the Courts in attempts to stop these forecasts. I would like the networks to not call a state until all the polls are closed, but you can't stop the press from speculation. Anyway that's hardly the fault of one of the political parties.

IJ Reilly
Jul 25, 2003, 12:52 AM
I thought the West Coast had it bad in elections until I spent one national election "night" (2000) in Hawaii. It was strange seeing virtually the entire country "decided" (except for the obvious exception) before dinnertime. The Hawaiians have to feel pretty irrelevant in national elections. Fortunately, they seem to have some pretty lively local campaigns.

macfan
Jul 25, 2003, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Sayhey
Don't know if the having any electronic voting machines is a problem or just these systems. After all you can stuff paper ballot boxes too.

As to people in Florida leaving the polling places without voting because of a networks "call" of the state, that's just their own stupidity. Even if you think the Presidential election is over there are surely state and local races to vote on. Its happened many times to California voters and we get no sympathy from the Congress or the Courts in attempts to stop these forecasts. I would like the networks to not call a state until all the polls are closed, but you can't stop the press from speculation. Anyway that's hardly the fault of one of the political parties.

Few observations things:
1. Electronic voting is a Rube Goldberg type of thing. Not needed.
2. Yes, you sure can stuff paper ballot boxes, just ask "Landslide Lyndon."
3. Calling an election nationally before California closes it polling places is one thing. Calling a state before its own polling places are closed is quite another. The former has no impact on the national race, the latter can.

Rower_CPU
Jul 25, 2003, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by IJ Reilly
I thought the West Coast had it bad in elections until I spent one national election "night" (2000) in Hawaii. It was strange seeing virtually the entire country "decided" (except for the obvious exception) before dinnertime. The Hawaiians have to feel pretty irrelevant in national elections. Fortunately, they seem to have some pretty lively local campaigns.

Yeah, Hawai'i's electoral votes don't usually play into the final decision and the 2-3 hour difference is tough to get over.

You're right that local politics is always, interesting, though. Especially with sovereignty issues. ;)

I lived in Hilo for 7 years. :)

[edit: Just to save this OT post, here's a question for those in favor of showing the photos: Why also show them here (in the US) if they are being shown to convince the Iraqi people that they are dead?]

Sayhey
Jul 25, 2003, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by macfan
Few observations things:
1. Electronic voting is a Rube Goldberg type of thing. Not needed.
2. Yes, you sure can stuff paper ballot boxes, just ask "Landslide Lyndon."
3. Calling an election nationally before California closes it polling places is one thing. Calling a state before its own polling places are closed is quite another. The former has no impact on the national race, the latter can.

1. you maybe right, I just know the reports on the Diebold systems sound seriously flawed and ripe for trouble.
2. Or Mayor Daly or many absentee ballot efforts by political parties or ...
3. It all falls under freedom of the press. I think pressure should be put on the networks by people other than the government to not to call states early, but I'd rather those early calls than the government mandating what the press can say.

Flowbee
Jul 25, 2003, 01:26 AM
On Rower's on-topic question:

Once the photos were released in Iraq, there would have been no way to prevent the US media from getting and showing them. Besides, I think Bush wanted them shown in the US to help illustrate another victory, which he needed. And he knew the greusome photos would take center stage on the news channels for a few days, diverting focus from the intelligence questions.

Backtothemac
Jul 25, 2003, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Flowbee
On Rower's on-topic question:

Once the photos were released in Iraq, there would have been no way to prevent the US media from getting and showing them. Besides, I think Bush wanted them shown in the US to help illustrate another victory, which he needed. And he knew the greusome photos would take center stage on the news channels for a few days, diverting focus from the intelligence questions.

Possible? Yes, likely, no. The photos were released to show the Iraqi people that the bastards would not be coming back. Saddam will be next.

Moxiemike
Jul 25, 2003, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Possible? Yes, likely, no. The photos were released to show the Iraqi people that the bastards would not be coming back. Saddam will be next.

Just like on those playing cards! ;)

zimv20
Jul 25, 2003, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Saddam will be next.

if possible, do you think he should be captured alive? and do you think the administration even wants him alive?

Moxiemike
Jul 25, 2003, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by zimv20
if possible, do you think he should be captured alive? and do you think the administration even wants him alive?

Man, it would be great if he were caught alive, and we could get the truth out of him. I'd love to see bushie the moron, tony "bland" blair and saddam do a little roundtable, moderated by like, connie chung or something. Precious.

mactastic
Jul 25, 2003, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Flowbee
On Rower's on-topic question:

Once the photos were released in Iraq, there would have been no way to prevent the US media from getting and showing them. Besides, I think Bush wanted them shown in the US to help illustrate another victory, which he needed. And he knew the greusome photos would take center stage on the news channels for a few days, diverting focus from the intelligence questions.

It's possible to have them shown in Iraq and not here, just look and the way the administration leaned on the news agencies here to not broadcast UBL statements and videos during the Afghanistan war-type thing. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with showing them, and I would have rather the US gov't let us hear the bin Laden tapes as well. Americans get spared the graphic images of our escapades far to often, people should have to see these kinds of images of death and carnage. It reminds us of the price we all pay for armed conflict. The US government was in a no-win pickle, release the photos and get hounded by the human-rights groups; don't release them and let the conspiracy theory mill begin. They did what they had to to keep credible. Besides, this is how the game is played in that part of the world, they see graphic imagery on TV all the time, far worse stuff than is allowed here. At least these two thugs will no longer be terrorizing innocent people.

By the way, did anyone catch The Daily Show the other night, when the reporter from "Baghdad" was reporting the difficulties people were having in finding nice things to say about the two brothers during their upcoming eulogy? "Well Qusay, he's fairly neat; and Uday seldom rapes the disabled." It's soooo wrong, but damn it made me laugh.

Backtothemac
Jul 25, 2003, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
if possible, do you think he should be captured alive? and do you think the administration even wants him alive?

If possible, yes, make him stand trial as a war criminal. If not, no tears will be shead here.

Backtothemac
Jul 25, 2003, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by Moxiemike
Man, it would be great if he were caught alive, and we could get the truth out of him. I'd love to see bushie the moron, tony "bland" blair and saddam do a little roundtable, moderated by like, connie chung or something. Precious.

Moxie, for real, can you stop with the flamebait.

You know there are people here that are going to come after a comment like this. What exactly are you trying to accomplish?

Moron, and bland. Man, that is rich. They both have accomplished more than you or I have.

zimv20
Jul 25, 2003, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
If possible, yes, make him stand trial as a war criminal. If not, no tears will be shead here.

any thoughts on what you think the administration's policy is?

Backtothemac
Jul 25, 2003, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
any thoughts on what you think the administration's policy is?

I personally think that capture would be great. Then they can interrogate him about WMD's and other dealings. Sleep deprivation is a very powerful thing.

Secondly, if he resists, they will probably put the body in view where his statue used to stand.

zimv20
Jul 25, 2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
I personally think that capture would be great. Then they can interrogate him about WMD's and other dealings.

but would they put him on public trial? i think this is what will happen, most likely to least likely:
1. he'll be killed "during capture"
2. he'll be secretly tried by a military tribunal
3. he'll be publically tried by the ICC
4. he'll be tried in iraq

iow, i don't think there's any way the WH/DoD will let hussein make any public statements.

fwiw, i think only option 3 would satisfy the world.

bond003
Jul 26, 2003, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by zimv20
but would they put him on public trial? i think this is what will happen, most likely to least likely:
1. he'll be killed "during capture"
2. he'll be secretly tried by a military tribunal
3. he'll be publically tried by the ICC
4. he'll be tried in iraq

iow, i don't think there's any way the WH/DoD will let hussein make any public statements.

fwiw, i think only option 3 would satisfy the world.

Option 1. is the most likely like you said. As soon as he is killed the rest will sing like canaries. Therefore, there is not real info lost if he is not interrogated. Apparently most of the high level officials are still not talking, but there are thousands talking at lower levels. I recently read it will take at least a year to translate all the documents captured and put together all the data obtained from those captured who are talking.

You keep worrying about what the rest of the world thinks so you mention option 3. In this case it is what the Iraqi people think that makes the most difference. Most have been so dramatized by his evil rule; they will be content to see him dead. Of course there are plenty that will love to seek revenge by having his own people tear him limb for limb after a tribal trial.

Backtothemac
Jul 26, 2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by zimv20
but would they put him on public trial? i think this is what will happen, most likely to least likely:
1. he'll be killed "during capture"
2. he'll be secretly tried by a military tribunal
3. he'll be publically tried by the ICC
4. he'll be tried in iraq

iow, i don't think there's any way the WH/DoD will let hussein make any public statements.

fwiw, i think only option 3 would satisfy the world.

Realistically, he will be killed, not captured. He will not let himself be taken into custody because he knows what will happen to him if he does.

We will get him and UBL to.

zimv20
Jul 26, 2003, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by bond003

You keep worrying about what the rest of the world thinks so you mention option 3.

you're right -- i do care what the rest of the world thinks. it's when the rest of the world thinks badly of us that we get terrorism, and it's unsafe for americans to travel.

i realize it'll never be the case that ALL the rest of the world is happy w/ the US, but we are moving in the wrong direction in that regard.

Backtothemac
Jul 26, 2003, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
you're right -- i do care what the rest of the world thinks. it's when the rest of the world thinks badly of us that we get terrorism, and it's unsafe for americans to travel.

i realize it'll never be the case that ALL the rest of the world is happy w/ the US, but we are moving in the wrong direction in that regard.

I care what the rest of the world thinks, but up to a point. Up to the point where it begins to make life harder for the average American family, or for the average American tax payer.

zimv20
Jul 26, 2003, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
I care what the rest of the world thinks, but up to a point. Up to the point where it begins to make life harder for the average American family, or for the average American tax payer.

yes. i won't make the argument that we're here for the sole purpose of making the rest of world nicer.

Backtothemac
Jul 26, 2003, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
yes. i won't make the argument that we're here for the sole purpose of making the rest of world nicer.

Well, and I don't think that it is our job to make the world nicer. Would it not be the worlds job to make the world nicer?

:)

zimv20
Jul 26, 2003, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Would it not be the worlds job to make the world nicer?


yes!

the US is often looked to as a leader in this regard. i don't mind saying we should take some responsibility and lead by example. in some ways we do, in others...

Backtothemac
Jul 26, 2003, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
yes!

the US is often looked to as a leader in this regard. i don't mind saying we should take some responsibility and lead by example. in some ways we do, in others...

I can agree with that. But as I have said earlier, every country serves its own interest. Why do you think the French and Russians were against the war in Iraq? Because they fear that a new government might now honor the debt, and oil contracts that they had witht he old regime.

The world needs to quit crying when we don't help, and bitching when we do.