Preserved Topic: Saddam Captured? (Page 1 of 2)

It seems as if Saddam might be caught:
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.html

And to think I've never imagined Saddam as a fun-loving, festive type.
Now I stand corrected, since he apparently was arrested wearing a false beard, all in christmas spirit.
"Ho Ho Ho! Here's Saddam Clause!"



[This message has been edited by Nimraw (edited 12-14-2003).]

Now all we have to find is Osama and the WMDs, and it'll all be good.

Good news for the people of Iraq - they do need some good news at the moment.

Hopefully it means they'll be able to grow a more stable country.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

I wonder how they figured out his hiding place though...after all this time and they didn't figure out Osama's place.

--
Regards,
Elias

But the war wont stop, at least, some soldiers may go back to America after this in my opinion.

This is very welcome news!!! I share Emps sentiment that this will mean we are one step closer to a better tomorrow for Iraqis. I think we can all agree to that. Now I have to go and get the details as I have just gotten up from less than 4 hours of sleep.

. . : slicePuzzle

lallous: I guess, it's because Saddam was hated by his people ( add to that the reward of US$ 25.000.000 ) which is not really the case for Osama. I hope the people of Iraq will be safe now.

Oh, and with the capture of Saddam, Georges W. will probably be able to finally show us the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction for which he engaged the war.

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

Good news.

They should hypnotise him. Or drug him. Get all the answers. Then flay him.

__________________
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength.

[This message has been edited by counterfeitbacon (edited 12-14-2003).]

From the other thread about this (in P&S):

Rayquazza:

quote:

---

Anyone have any opinions on what should be done now with him?

---

Rauthrin:

quote:

---

I wouldn't be against putting him alone with a few firemen from NYC for an hour...

---

That`s what the FOX News can do to a person...

Rauthrin:

quote:

---

I wouldn't be against putting him alone with a few firemen from NYC for an hour...

---

What !? Do you really believe Saddam Hussein was involved in the WTC attack ? You must have been brainswashed or something like that.

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

quote:

---

That`s what the FOX News can do to a person...

---

heh *shakes his head and walks away*

Hey guys! Can you believe that Saddam was captured on my birthday?!WOW!! Happy birthday to me huh?

Thats the best B-day present I ever had!

Remember, Ruski, a military dictator isn't just for Christmas -- it's for life. Are you ready for such a big responsibility? You have to remember to feed him every day, and play with him, and change the water in his tank.

Cell 1250 :: alanmacdougall.com :: Illustrator tips

Ruski: They also seem to make a terrible mess terrible mess of their backyard and they will start fights with the other kid's dictators.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

Now if someone will only capture the dictator that has taken over the USA, we'll be in good hands.

It still amazes me that people can get excited about this kind of thing. I keep thinking that maybe American's aren't falling for the blatant propaganda like they would like, but that's usually not the case. Oh well, any student of history will tell you that we're in for a major fall; no empire lasts forever.


It's only after we've lost everything...
That we're free to do anything...

.... ^ what?

before I blew the candles out today, I wished to get a piece of Saddam's beard!

quote:

---

.... ^ what?

---

The short version, just to recap if you've missed the last couple years of ... uhm.. everything.
America has been taken over by a militant dictatorship bent on power at the expense of it's constituancy and the rest of the world. The entirety of the Iraq war is a sabre-rattling propaganda B.S. They won't be any better off either, as they've been sold to Halliburton and their ilk to be raped as the American populace has been.

The point about empires is that most dictatorships fall. If you compare any militant dictatorship in history to the current one, you will see obvious parallels. Since history unerringly repeats itself, America is in for a comeupance due to it's own bloated ego. Look what happened to the Roman empire, the British empire, the Nazi regime, etc. All things come around... if we're alive as a species that long.


It's only after we've lost everything...
That we're free to do anything...

Try to contain your disappointment that this particular dictator will finally see some justice. If you have a problem with Bush, then exercise your right to vote come November, a right that the Iraqis can scarce remember I'm sure.

ah, I see.

I thought you were comparing America to Iraq, and you were.

carry on!

[This message has been edited by eyezaer (edited 12-15-2003).]

Well, I for one, am glad he has been found and captured!! As Emps said, and Bugs supported, I also hope that this may help things in Iraq to become better for the Iraqi's...they have suffered enough, especially at the hands of Saddam. At least this part is now finally over. Time to put this remenant of the past to rest, and get on to the future of Iraq.

quote:

---

If you have a problem with Bush, then exercise your right to vote come November, a right that the Iraqis can scarce remember I'm sure.

---

Nor Americans unfortunately...

quote:

---

I also hope that this may help things in Iraq to become better for the Iraqi's...they have suffered enough

---

I sincerely hope so. I don't expect it, but I hope so. Always makes me think of a quote (author unknown) "If you add a drop of wine to sewage, you have sewage. If you add a drop of sewage to wine, you have sewage." Only takes a few to ruin life for many. ... I think we've all suffered enough.


It's only after we've lost everything...
That we're free to do anything...

quote:

---

I think we've all suffered enough.

---

Yes, from comments like these.

quote:

---

America is in for a comeupance due to it's own bloated ego.

---

Again

quote:

---

That`s what the FOX News can do to a person...

---

And again.

quote:

---

Nor Americans unfortunately...

---

Yet again....hmm, just full of one-liners aren't we.

Regardless of why we went to Iraq, I do think it was long overdue. I guess the right thing would be to just let Saddam stay in power and continue to murder his people. This is good for the people of Iraq, and regardless of motivation, was a good move by Bush.

That's what CNN and the liberal media can do to a person. If this mentality had been around in WWII we'd all be hailing the Furher today.

Ramasax: It's obvious that the definitive fall of Saddam is a good thing, but I can't help thinking it was not the role of a single ( ok, two ) country but of the United Nations. In the UN, like in every democracy, many voices expresses their opinion and this time the USA, UK and co. let the canons speak louder than internationnal laws and Saddam's dictatorship ( I'm not stupid enough to not recognize the good aspect of the thing ). I hope, that the next time the USA would like to kick a dictator they'll act with the UN and their approval.

During WWII, there was no UN and all the necessary rules going with it, the nations behaved only in their own name. But that was 60years ago, the time have changed.

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

So we did the right thing then, just bypassed a few more months of useless diplomacy. Might have even saved a few lives. What's the problem? War was inevitable here, diplomacy has no use in dealing with the mentally ill.

If I were you, I'd be glad the US/UK took care of this, because now it's our tax money and blood, and you get to keep yours. Again, what's the problem? Our soldiers are giving their lives to make the world a better place for everyone, yet we're the bad guys now? Times have changed indeed.

And you knew he had to have a view on this:
www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2003-12-14

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

Let me first make clear that I, too am happy to hear Saddam has been captured. I`d really like to see him brought to justice, preferrably before an Iraqi court.


Ramasax:

MY one liner referred to the fact that Rauthrin seemed to assume Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attacks - Which I see as a result of misleading propaganda.


[edit]Just read Micheal Moore's comment - not surprisingly, I agree with it, which could be because he's just summing up some well-known facts. I especiall liked the Photo of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam.[/edit]

[This message has been edited by MW (edited 12-15-2003).]

1.

quote:

---

That`s what the FOX News can do to a person...

---

2.

quote:

---

MY one liner referred to the fact that Rauthrin seemed to assume Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attacks - Which I see as a result of misleading propaganda.

---

3.

quote:

---

What !? Do you really believe Saddam Hussein was involved in the WTC attack ? You must have been brainswashed or something like that.

---

1.No, I don't watch FOX news, nor do I visit the website.

2.No, i just think that it would be funny to see him get the crap beat out of him by those who are brainwashed.

3.See above answer.

PS: Micheal Moore is right

[This message has been edited by Rauthrin (edited 12-15-2003).]

I must say that this has got be about the most ridiculous thread I've seen here so far.

I'd enjoy discussin gthe issue, but I'm afraid there are too many issues in thsi thread to pick from.

I will say that, regardless of any of the other issues surrounding the circumstances, Saddam being removed form power is the best thing to happen for the Iraqi people in many decades.

And while the US government has it's problems, comparing it with the brutal dicatatorships taht have existed is just plain ignorant.

To compare the condition of the American people to that of the Iraqi people is both ignorant and distastful, and it belittles the suffering that has happened in Iraq for decades.

Of course, making any connection between Saddam and firefigthers is so absurd I'm speechless on that one...

[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 12-15-2003).]

[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 12-15-2003).]

Rauthrin:

Oh, I see
I would prefer to have the Iraqis themselves beat the crap out of Saddam, though.

Michael Moore... bless his heart. He can rattle on endlessly about what happened decades leading up to the capture of Hussein and some of what he says is accurate but much of it is probably overstated or certainly mischaracterized. But nothing that he is saying addresses the problem as it stands right now. Even if one agreed that Hussein was completely created by the US, that would still mean it was a good thing that this "Frankenstein" is now subdued. Even if the US is the biggest worst most terrible dictatorship on the planet, Hussein being toppled is still a positive step. But good old Mike has not one word of good will to speak to the Iraqis who are celebrating this monster's capture. I honestly wonder whether good old Mike wants a better day for Iraq. I honestly wonder if he would like to see it all go to hell so he could say he was right. For his sake, I hope even he is not that hateful deep inside.

. . : slicePuzzle

quote:

---

I honestly wonder if he would like to see it all go to hell so he could say he was right

---

That seems to be the way people like him go.

I was glad to hear that they had captured Saddam... the information I got from the telly says that they narrowed his hiding place down using info extracted from some detainees... It's all propaganda - so who's to say exactly what tipped them off to his hidey-hole. (I dunno - that beard looked real enough to me!)

I was even happier to hear that they got him alive, and (so they say) no shots fired.

I'm a little disappointed that Dubya is likely gonna take the credit for the whole shebang... it will make a nice feather in his presidential cap (And I do plan on exercising my right to vote next November... for whoever is running against him).

Here's hoping the remaining belligerent Iraqis will find this cause enough to settle down to the business of getting on with their lives, as opposed to giving them up for a dead cause. It doesn't guarantee an end to hostilities, but it is a step in the right direction. Anything positive in this conflict is a blessing.

And as someone said above, if they could just get hold of Osama and those elusive WMDs, we'd be set!


Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 12-15-2003).]

For most of you, me telling you what I think of this situation is redundant.
For the sake of others, I'll do this quickly.

Saddam Hussein is, was, and probably will be forever a brutal monster, a feckless thug, a creature not worthy of the flesh in which he exists. That Hussein is no longer free is perhaps the best news, for Iraqis and all citizens of the world, in a long time.
The United States, through its elected and appointed representatives, have been and still are, in a large part, responsible for the creation and maintenance of many of the world's most dangerous thugs and dictators. Saddam Hussein is most definately a part of that list.

Now, I have a question for Mr. Bugimus (Hi there, bugs. Long time no talk. We should email more often.)

It is common practice among conservatives to label anybody who brings up US responsibility for the creation or maintenance of thuggish creatures as, at best, non-patriotic, and, at worst, apologists for those thugs. (Liberals, too, are often guilty of their own brand of name-calling...)
You (and others) routinely blast Michael Moore (and others) for expressing the view that the US carries some (often a lot) of the responsibility for the actions of such beasts.
I think when Moore wrote

quote:

---

Maybe we never would have been in the situation we're in if Rumsfeld, Bush, Sr., and company hadn't been so excited back in the 80s about their friendly monster in the desert.

---

he wasn't far from the mark. That is a legitimate statement. Perhaps we (that includes the Iraqis) wouldn't have been in such a predicament.
Is it not OK to bring up the past in order to learn from it? to show coorelations to situations today? to try to avoid such problems in the future?

What is the appropriate way to show distaste for US support of such dictators?
How can Michael Moore, or I, express our desire for the US to get out of the ruthless thug business, without being labeled an apologist?

Rauthrin: Sorry, your statement was picked out of its context thus my reaction.

Ramasax: The fact that this war is your money, blood, soldiers ... does not make me happier than if it were those of the whole United Nations. The USA and UK are the "bad guys" in that that they are apart of the UN and don't accept its rules that would have undoubtly led to an intervention of the whole UN. Of course it would have taken few months but in the end Saddam would have still tried to fool the UN inspectors, a military intervention would have been granted and the soldiers of all the countries of UN ( and probably those of the NATO too ) would have been involved. That way the democracy would have defeated a dictatorship. And I think that an intervention of the UN would have been understood by many people around the world and would have brought less terrorist acts against the troops.

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

mobrul, good to hear from you!

The name calling game is done on both sides, I agree. I usually don't like it because it skirts the actual issue being raised. I do try to focus on the subject and only do the name calling for my own amusement and I usually reserve it for people who ask for it. One of these people is Michael Moore. In my mind, he is the left wing equivalent to Robert Dornan or conservative talk show host Mike Gallagher.

Have you ever noticed that I don't blast you when you express similar opinions? I believe, to the core of my being, that you value truth and attempt to come to sound political conclusions based on the most facts you can find. I like to think that is the way work my way through this life as well. But I also strongly suspect that Michael Moore is much less concerned with truth because he is driven by his intense idealogical political agenda. People with strong agendas will always be tempted, even if they never give in, to bend facts to fit their end goals.

Another reason I dislike Moore is because he doesn't back up his own information. He doesn't visit the talk shows that will ask him the hard questions. I have posted this in other threads but Larry Elder has an open invitation for Michael Moore to come on his show and have it out. I would love to see him on Bill O'Reilley's show too. Not because Bill is some right wing savior (he's actually a populist from my estimation) but because Bill tears into people with hard questions. I want to see him take that kind of abuse and see how his positions stack up against it.

If he wants people to take him seriously then he needs to earn some credibility and respect for his opinions. Again notice how I don't say anything like this about you. You have always been more than willing to lay out your positions honestly and backed up with sources. You defend your positions with clear logical arguments and to date (at least that I've seen) have listened to opposing opinions without resorting to name calling and other useless tangents.

So let's say Moore were to come on this board right now and want to seriously talk the issues. I would give him a listen and a fair shake as I try to do with all. Sometimes I poke and try to push people's buttons in order to goad them into some real dialogue. I suppose since I see him as such a worm not willing to stand behind his positions that this more than justifies be blasting him at every chance I get. It has much less to do with his opinions and much more about how I percieve his character and integrity... or in this case the lack thereof.


I will be honest with you that I do not speak for "conservatives" and how they regard others. I don't think there is anything you can do to stop many from labelling you a "self-hating American" or other related names. I wouldn't worry about it, frankly. I take a lot of grief for believing in Christ but I know that just comes with the territory. I would continue to focus on the facts and do your best to come to sound logical conclusions and let the chips fall where they may.

Some may wonder how people like you and I can both believe we are operating from facts and using decent logic yet come to such different conclusions. It is because we both have different world views. Our assumptions about life, human nature, morality, ethics, differ in significant ways. Once that is recognized, it's really quite absurd to think we would end up in the same place. I would like to believe that it is our love of the search for truth is where we can claim a common bond.

So about getting out of the thug business. I say when that is the best choice out of several choices that all lead to the suffering, you shouldn't be out of the thug business. Here are the options I see:

1) sit back and do nothing and let suffering abound
2) help out your own interests by backing a thug
3) hurt your own interests by allowing the other thugs to be supported by someone else
4) invade and force everyone to idolize Jefferson or die (ok it's overstated but this option requires imposing your culture on others)

I would prefer the 5th choice but that would require that every American live according to a higher standard. This is something I've dedicated my life to but it is not something I can force on anyone. So I left to support one of the 4 above, all of which aren't too pleasant. I think we as a country have done just about all of these at one time or another.

That was kind of long. I didn't intend it to be but I won't be able to get back to this thread for a while so I needed to get that out.

. . : slicePuzzle

Poi: I totally disagree with you when you say that waiting for the UN would have cut down on terrorist attacks against troops. Considering their "religious" motivations, and that all non-believers are considered the enemy, it would only have postponed the attacks, and if anything given the terrorist organizations more time to prepare.

So we're the bad guys? That is fine with me. To me, it is better to act against the general concensus, than to wait and let the inhumane acts continue, which would you choose? I guess you've already made that clear.

The whole position of the UN on the matter was to "Let the inspections work." We tried that, it didn't work. Somebody had to have to balls to take the next step, a step that was undoubtedly unavoidable. If that means ruffling a few feathers to save lives and bring the world one step closer to "peace," fine with me once more.

Well, most of the points that I would have made were made, in general.

Bugimus - Moore and many in his vein of philosophy have been willing and have gone on to talk to people like O'Reily. So saying that they are afraid is just silly. O'Reily is a world class nutcase, right up there with Ann Coulter for first on the list for the straight jacket. You should read Al Franken's book talking about his experiences with them, entertaining at the very least if you follow their works.

Ramasax said:

quote:

---

The whole position of the UN on the matter was to "Let the inspections work." We tried that, it didn't work. Somebody had to have to balls to take the next step, a step that was undoubtedly unavoidable. If that means ruffling a few feathers to save lives and bring the world one step closer to "peace," fine with me once more.

---

Yup. We had the "balls" to go do it. And boy did we show the UN. We found all those WMD... well.. no we didn't do that. But we found the culprits for the 9/11 attack! no... we didn't do that either... in fact we couldn't even find any evidence linking the two. Well... we freed some Bush owned oil property and helped that poor dying company Haliburton so Dick Cheney wouldn't go hungry. That at least is something to feel proud of. Take that world! As for WWII. Hitler was actively invading europe.. but it took the Japanese attacking the US to really spur us into action. If you really want to draw some similarities, look at what is happening now. We are sanctioning the attacks of the Israelies against the Palastinians just as we sanctioned the attacks of Iraq against Iran and just as we sanctioned the attacks of Bin Laden against the USSR. Deposing a viscious dictator is not something I have a problem with. But fueling a fight and bouncing around sides for the ruling class to financially and politicallly position themselves I do. My original point was also that we are eating up the news that they feed us. They throw little bones of patriotism out to the masses to steer them away from issues of importance that don't meet their agenda. "We captured Sadam...*whisper*oh yeah and we're taking your rights and blowing the economy to a record low*whisper*". If you read anything about the tactics and politicaly governing of the nazi's, that was one of their ideas. I'm sure it went further back than that, but it's a very easy corilary since they actually wrote about it in their masifesto.


It's only after we've lost everything...
That we're free to do anything...

I don't really have much to add to all these discussions. As I've said before I try to stay out of most of this. I do have opinions but Bugimus and Ramasax have between them pretty much said what I would have tried to. I'll be voting for Bush this time around, but I hope Lieberman runs in five years because I really like him. He's honest and is truly interested in what he feels will be best for the country. I just don't want Bush and his people to be out of power before the job gets done.


It's pronounced "Spikes!"

Ramasax: You clearly understood the position of the UN. The inspections were supposed to find the so called WMD, and that's the reason why the USA and UK started the war, not to remove a dictator. The inspection found no WMD. Now, ~10 months after the beginning of that war, how many WMD have been found ? The removal of Saddam is a f..ing great side effect of the war, but it was not its purpose.

When I said that I think an intervention of the UN would have lowered the number of terrorist acts against the troops, I think to the fact that the UN is made of 191 countries including some muslim ones. Ok, Osama's and Saddam's fellows don't mind to strike anybody but they'll never be able to fight all the UN. And a vote for a military intervention of the UN to remove Saddam and free the Iraqi people would have certainly had an impact on the mentality of the muslim community who sometimes support the terrorist acts.

[edit] I agree with most of the points exposed by MindBender [/edit]

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

[This message has been edited by poi (edited 12-16-2003).]