Saddam executed - what now for Iraq?

[Spider AL]

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

I read that on New Years a boy in America watched the execution of Saddam and then imitated him, hanging and killing himself when it went wrong. Surely this would have to be the greatest tragedy of the former Iraqi leader being put to death.

The fact that a man has been effectively executed by a lynch-mob is a tragedy in itself, whether the man was guilty is not relevant to the question.

 

The fact that unrest among Sunnis in Iraq increased following Saddam's execution is a tragedy, as will be any extra violence perpetrated during this increased unrest.

 

The boy hanging himself in the US is also a tragedy.

 

But frankly, I find the idea of handing out points and keeping score, and otherwise deciding which of these tragedies is "the greatest"... to be in extremely poor taste. I also find the fact that you automatically consider the only one of these tragedies to occur on US soil to be "the greatest"... to be very telling.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

With Iran, the threat had been made, and with Palestine the threat is real and currently exists, not to destroy Israel as Ahmadinejad wants, but to attack Israel, to kill innocent men women and children with no concern for whether or not people from other countries are involved,

Here you tacitly admit that neither Iran nor Palestine has the capacity to destroy Israel. That's good, we can move on.

 

As for your stereotyped analysis of the violences committed by Palestinian individuals, it's one-sided. I personally don't agree with the targetting of civilians under ANY circumstances. And so as a moral man I must automatically acknowledge that while some Palestinian militants have killed Israeli civilians, Israel as a state, through their vast military might, has killed MASSES of Palestinian civilians. And intentionally so. Israel has as a state committed many more awful atrocities than Palestinians have as individuals. And that's to be expected, since they're essentially a brutal occupying force on non-Israeli lands.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

in Palestine's case with no concern that it is brother killing brother, Jew killing Jew. Do we ignore it?

I'm not sure what you mean by "jew killing jew". Palestinians are mostly muslims, with some christians... and a few of the jewish faith that Israel doesn't recognise, as a rule.

 

As for whether we "ignore it" or not... Well, by perennially (and exclusively) supporting Israel's atrocities, we are actively contributing to the horrible situation in the middle east. Which is worse than ignoring it.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

So you say, however people have written to me complaining about the arrogance and condescending tone of your posts. If I can just bring up Atheism for a moment Atheism may be something a lot of people want, even need, and they would benefit greatly from it, yet they are scarred off because of the way some present Atheism.

Well since you haven't sent me that PM containing the constructive specific criticisms that I asked for, I have no choice but to dismiss your assertions of "arrogance" as merely self-serving and malicious.

 

As for this comment on atheism, it's the same weighted nonsense that you dragged out in the atheism threads, and it was comprehensively picked apart in those threads. If I were you, I would have left such a bedraggled old off-topic assertions in those threads. They certainly won't be addressed by me in this one.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

Truth be told only the very best of us can see faults in ourselves.

Ahhh, how true. How true.

[Nancy Allen``]

Natalie Portman is Israeli by the way, and a staunch supporter of it.

 

With whatever Iran and Palestine plan to do to Israel, or the Middle East or America, even if they do not have the capacity to destroy any of them they have the capacity, now, to destabalise countries and any political or peace movement. If they can somehow put together a nuclear weapons program such as Iran, or Ahmadinejad, would like to, they can desabalise them that much more. I really don't know where you get the idea that Israel is perpetrating atrocities against Palestine, I really don't. Maybe you feel that they should not retalliate against suicide bombings or kidnappings. Maybe you're upset that Israel's alligence with America is evidence that it works, or that it's with America. Or maybe you simply feel that Israel has no right to exist, full stop.

 

As for your request to give a blow by blow account of every arrogant and condescending comment you've made I recall no such request, and even if I did I wouldn't waste my time satisfying your ego doing so. People see it plainly, enough so for the mods to be on your back about it, which is good enough for me.

[Spider AL]

Well, Nancy's post contained nothing on-topic, so while I will address her points, I will begin by sharing this interesting on-topic editorial by Jerry West, a Canadian dissident:

 

Justice: not served but denied, By Jerry West

 

It gives a most informative timeline for Saddam's career, and US/UK involvement in his reign of terror, the first Gulf war, the illegal invasion of Iraq and Saddam's subsequent illegal trial and execution.

 

-

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

Natalie Portman is Israeli by the way, and a staunch supporter of it.

Ah well, if some actress who appeared in some Star Wars films says Israel's in the right, it MUST be so. Especially considering how great her performance was.

 

Honestly, this comment of yours has to be the single most hilariously irrelevant comment I've ever read or heard on the topic of Israel's conduct. I mean, I like one or two of Portman's performances on film... but I don't look to entertainers to inform my political views, and I encourage you to avoid doing so as well.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

With whatever Iran and Palestine plan to do to Israel, or the Middle East or America, even if they do not have the capacity to destroy any of them they have the capacity, now, to destabalise countries and any political or peace movement.

Ah, then you DEFINITIVELY admit that neither Iran nor Palestine has the power to destroy Israel, or even rival Israel in terms of military strength. Directly contradicting your earliest statements in this thread.

 

That's good.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

I really don't know where you get the idea that Israel is perpetrating atrocities against Palestine, I really don't.

But you WOULD know, if you ever obtained your news from any sources other than rabid neoconservative sources.

 

For instance: An Israeli human rights group (not a Palestinian one) B'Tselem, released a report just last month, (entirely based on their own field work) stating that in the year 2006:

 

• Israeli forces had killed at least 660 Palestinians, at least 322 of whom were verifiably non-combatants, 141 of whom were children.
   
  
• By contrast, in 2006, Palestinian militants (despite their most dedicated efforts) had killed only twenty-six Israelis. 17 of whom were civilians, 6 of whom were military personnel.
  

In case your calculator isn't working, that's a ratio of over 25 to 1. That's not a "conflict". It's a one-sided massacre. Which we are indirectly responsible for.

 

Source: Reuters.

 

-

 

That's a recent death toll. Let's look at some other Israeli crimes.

 

How about hundreds of Palestinian children being held without trial in Israeli prisons in the same population as Israeli adult criminals, being abused, being used for forced labour and being harshly interrogated by Israeli security services, all in violation of international law and common decency?

 

Check. (Defence for Children International)

 

How about Israeli destruction of the homes of tens of thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians?

 

Check. (The UN)

 

I mean, I could go on all night. I wish it weren't, but the list of Israeli war crimes and atrocities is almost endless. That's just a few for you to mull over.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

As for your request to give a blow by blow account of every arrogant and condescending comment you've made I recall no such request,

Oh really? Then you can't have been reading very carefully. In post #24, only four posts up, paragraph three, I stated:

 

"However, never let it be said that I'm closed-minded. If you want to go to my first post in this thread, and edit it so that it is no longer what you would call "arrogant", and then PM me the edited version, I will surely look at it carefully and dispassionately evaluate the changes you make."

 

You not only failed to meet this simple, constructive request, you ignored it completely. That's answer enough. Weak arguments + malice = non-specific and generalised unfounded accusations.

 

Unless you decide to make your criticisms constructive, I'm not going to pay any further attention to them.

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

People see it plainly, enough so for the mods to be on your back about it

What? I don't think I've even received a PM from a mod since I joined the forum in 2002. What in the world gives you the idea that "the mods" are "on my back"? Strange.

[Nancy Allen``]

Wow, just wow.

 

I wonder if you would have gone on your little tirade if Natalie Portman wasn't Israeli. With that you have really proven every thing I said, and seeing as the mods having to deal with this BS (yes mine as well) is a weekly and sometimes even daily occurence, I have placed you on my ignore list, and encourage others who you upset with your statements to do the same.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Wow, just wow.

So far, it seems you don't have an argument. You've stated your opinion, then started to attack Spider's e-credibility. From what I've seen, he is the only one in this little back-and-forth of yours that isn't simply calling the other names.

 

Also, nearly every one of Spider's posts is a wall of text, I'm sure he would have typed just as much had the actor been Ewan McGregor or Samuel L. Jackson.

[ET Warrior]

I wonder if you would have gone on your little tirade if Natalie Portman wasn't Israeli.

It seems on my reading that a very small portion of his post was even addressing the Natalie Portman issue, and it seemed that his section on that had VERY little to do with her nationality, as opposed to the idea that we should base our own moralities off of celebrities, just because they happen to be famous.

[Nancy Allen``]

Of course. Oliver Stone may well be one of the great directors but in my mind he's a ****wit to say that terrorism is a problem we can live with, with all sympathy to his feelings towards Bush. Famous person or not when they are wrong I'll say so, and when they are right I'll support them. The same goes for Israel, when they are wrong such as when they fought Hezbollah or their current plans to nuke Iran, I'll say so. So here goes: Israel will really win people over by planning a nuclear attack on Iran...yeah right of course they won't. Such actions will only make them the target of international scorn. That doesn't mean I don't support Israel, just some of their actions.

[Windu Chi]

 

 

It gives a most informative timeline for Saddam's career, and US/UK involvement in his reign of terror, the first Gulf war, the illegal invasion of Iraq and Saddam's subsequent illegal trial and execution.

 

I'm more for revenge, I say the people deaths he was responsible for, the families should've had the pleasure of watching him boil in a acid bath.

Why they laugh at his suffering, as he dissolves to his skeleton, but I think I have collected a enough darkside points for today.

 

I wonder if that was the demon Hitler being killed, would Spider consider his trial and execution illegal?

Man, how I wish it was Adolf Hitler, being put to death, for I can watch that thing's death over and over again as I eat nachos and sip a pepsi, oh wait, I have collected more darkside points.

[TK-8252]

I'm more for revenge, I say the people deaths he was responsible for, the families should've had the pleasure of watching him boil in a acid bath.

Why they laugh at his suffering, as he dissolves to his skeleton, but I think I have collected a enough darkside points for today.

 

I wonder if that was the demon Hitler being killed, would Spider consider his trial and execution illegal?

Man, how I wish it was Adolf Hitler, being put to death, for I can watch that thing's death over and over again as I eat nachos and sip a pepsi, oh wait I have collected more darkside points.

 

What shameful things to say.

 

To suggest that we resort to the very same kinds of torture used by Hitler and Hussein for some kind of sick, twisted, and repulsive pleasure - just as they did - is simply reprehensible.

[Windu Chi]

What shameful things to say.

 

To suggest that we resort to the very same kinds of torture used by Hitler and Hussein for some kind of sick, twisted, and repulsive pleasure - just as they did - is simply reprehensible.

I was saying the families should've been given that choice.

But you don't understand, so forget about it.

[TK-8252]

I was saying the families should've been given that choice.

 

Why? Shouldn't we live in a civilized society instead?

[Windu Chi]

Why? Shouldn't we live in a civilized society instead?

Look, man I said forget about it.

I like to have revenge on my enemies, you seem not to.

The families should've had their choice of revenge punishment.

So, forget about what I said.

[MasterRoss08]

Why? Shouldn't we live in a civilized society instead?

 

Yes we should but what should we do with these people that ordered

and support these terrorist acts on people that are living life like

anyone else?

[Nancy Allen``]

Great question. I think you can guess what my answer is but surely others have diffirent ideas.

[Spider AL]

Originally posted by MasterRoss08:

Yes we should but what should we do with these people that ordered and support these terrorist acts on people that are living life like anyone else?

We should do something civilised to them, if we really are civilised people.

 

Take Saddam as an example:

 

We should have tried him in a legal court, a court that was set up under international law. That would have been civilised.

 

We should have charged him with ALL his crimes, not merely the few crimes that he carried out without our direct assistance. That would have been very civilised.

 

And of course, if we really were civilised we wouldn't have invaded Iraq in the first place. Killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians just for financial and political profit is DISTINCTLY uncivilised.

 

-

 

Originally posted by Nancy Allen``:

Wow, just wow.

 

I wonder if you would have gone on your little tirade if Natalie Portman wasn't Israeli. With that you have really proven every thing I said, and seeing as the mods having to deal with this BS (yes mine as well) is a weekly and sometimes even daily occurence, I have placed you on my ignore list, and encourage others who you upset with your statements to do the same.

1. Jmac and ET were quite correct, my earlier post had nothing to do with Natalie Portman, except for one paragraph expressing my mirth that you would even mention Natalie Portman in a debate on Middle-Eastern atrocities.

 

2. I think, in fact, that I have logically dis-proven everything you have said, rather than "proving" it as you claim. And the fact that you have offered no counter-arguments in the last three posts would seem to bolster my assertion. Take Israel's atrocities for instance. You denied there were any, I showed there were many, you had no response except to ignore me. People can draw their own conclusions.

 

3. I consider it the most immature form of cop-out to ignore things just because they "upset you". You will never find out the truth by ignoring people who disagree with you, and to do so reveals a lack of interest in the truth.

 

4. Having said that, I doubt that your inability to see what I type will affect your ability to absorb what I type, as you never seemed to absorb a single thing I posted in the past even when you could read it.

 

So in my estimation, our respective situations are not worsened by your action. C'est la vie.

[Windu Chi]

 

3. I consider it the most immature form of cop-out to ignore things just because they "upset you". You will never find out the truth by ignoring people who disagree with you, and to do so reveals a lack of interest in the truth.

Ah come on, that is straight [Expletive(s) Were Deleted], you are ignoring me because of my comments, isn't that, the "Pot calling the kettle black".

I think I can consider that immature.

But as I will say again, I don't care you ignore me, man

 

[i [i]will[/i] eventually just delete posts with profanity]

[Spider AL]

Originally posted by windu6:

Ah come on, that is straight [Expletive(s) Were Deleted], you are ignoring me because of my comments, isn't that the, "Pot calling the kettle black".

I think I can consider that immature.

But as I will say again, I don't care you ignore me.

I'm not ignoring you, Windu. I read everything you post. In fact, my ignore list is literally empty. I read EVERYONE'S posts.

 

However, I choose not to respond to your posts, as a rule. My reasons for not doing so are well-documented, but I have just PMed you my reasons in a detailed form, in case you require further explanation.

[TK-8252]

Yes we should but what should we do with these people that ordered

and support these terrorist acts on people that are living life like

anyone else?

 

It's true that some people killed by Saddam's regime were truely innocent people, intent on living their life. However, we must remember that a LOT of the people imprisoned and killed were not the nicest people either. Saddam's main enemies in Iraq were not those pushing for a secular, democratic government. They wanted an Iranian-style Islamic government, pretty much what we have right now. Saddam's repression of his political opponents was actually a GOOD thing for our interests in the Middle East. As brutal as he was, his opponents were willing to carry out numerous assassination attempts in order to bring about their Islamic revolution in Iraq.

[Nancy Allen``]

The fact most Star Wars actors (Ian McDiamond and James Earl Jones are noteable exceptions) are not known for their acting prowes makes your tirade on Natalie Portman serve no point I could see except an oppotunity to attack Jews, and with you taking the bait so easily and, as I've pointed out, to do Skin a favor I considered it the wisest option. What, you'd prefer I start flame wars over attacks on Israel?

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

The fact most Star Wars actors (Ian McDiamond and James Earl Jones are noteable exceptions) are not known for their acting prowes makes your tirade on Natalie Portman serve no point I could see except an oppotunity to attack Jews, and with you taking the bait so easily and, as I've pointed out, to do Skin a favor I considered it the wisest option. What, you'd prefer I start flame wars over attacks on Israel?

http://imdb.com/name/nm0000204/

 

If she isn't known for her acting, what is she known for?

 

Ah well, if some actress who appeared in some Star Wars films says Israel's in the right, it MUST be so. Especially considering how great her performance was.

 

Honestly, this comment of yours has to be the single most hilariously irrelevant comment I've ever read or heard on the topic of Israel's conduct. I mean, I like one or two of Portman's performances on film... but I don't look to entertainers to inform my political views, and I encourage you to avoid doing so as well.

I don't see the word "Jew" in there. I see her referred to as a so-so actress who you apparently look up to for some reason that escapes me.

[Nancy Allen``]

I like Natalie Portman, I like the roles she's played in Star Wars, The Professional, V for Vendetta, ect, and I think she is good. Hayden Christia...what's his name, Anakin as well. To be fair part of the problem is the script but most Star Wars actors are not considered on the level of such illustrious people as Marlon Brando, Robert De Niro, ect. But I like Portman, Christis...ahhh him, Ford and Jackson better.

 

I'm not sure if Natalie Portman is actually Jewish but I know she is Israeli, and spoke of her support for Israel in Empire IIRC. Do I look up to her? I look at the roles she plays and the reason she plays the roles, with Evey being an absolute perfect example, and think 'good on her' for playing these roles. If she was in an upcoming movie I'd see it. The same for Hayden, Ford and Jackson, as well as Keither Sutherland, Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith, Jennifer Hale, Jennifer Garner, Dwayne Johnson, ect, ect, ect.

[ET Warrior]

This still has no relevance. Just because any actor has played neat roles in movies does not mean that they are a reasonable source, or perhaps that their support of Israel somehow validates anything is somewhere above and beyond silly.

 

What, you'd prefer I start flame wars over attacks on Israel?

Actually, no. I really would not prefer that. I would prefer that you do what is intended by the forum, and actually engage in serious discussion about the points that have been raised by the people who you disagree with, as opposed to taking everything personally and assuming that every single statement is somehow a direct attack against you.

 

makes your tirade on Natalie Portman serve no point I could see except an oppotunity to attack Jews

Once again, it wasn't even a tirade on Natalie Portman. It was a brief paragraph, followed by a lengthy post that was based on OTHER points of your post that were incorrect. It's what happens in a debate. It is, in fact, the entire purpose of this forum.

Also, you can scan the entirety of Al's posts, and you'll be hard pressed to actually find him attacking Jews. Ever. Just because Israel is composed primarily of Jewish people, doesn't mean that disagreeing with the actions of Israel somehow makes someone a hater of Jews, or some other such nonsense.

[Nancy Allen``]

First of all congrats on becoming a mod.

 

Now, I've covered this a bit before, but to clarify anything that might be confusing, I happen to agree with Natalie Portman's support of Israel. That's not because she said so, but because I look at what's going on and draw my own conclusions. The same as I agree, up to a point, with the portrayal of a future Britain the Wachowski brothers had created in V for Vendetta, and the analogies to present day. Even the parts I don't nessecarily agree with or find uncomfortable (the heroic V talking about the destruction of symbols recalling Osama Bin Laden and the World Trade Centre, James Berendalli's words) I admire the courage of what they have put on celloid. The same goes for politicians, deep thinkers, anyone. I think Bush and America deserve credit for wanting to get rid of Saddam Hussein, but deserve criticism for going to war. I maintain that we won the conflict against the Iraqi military but failed misribly at what followed, from politics to insurgency to controversy (Abu Gharib). As I said I support Israel, and their right to defend itself against terrorism, but not it's attack on Hezbollah or plans on launching a nuclear strike against Iran. Again this is not because of what Bush said or what Natalie Portman said, or really what anyone says. It comes from me looking at these things and getting information on these things and making judgements on what I consider right and wrong. Are some of these judgements instinctive and spontanious? Of course, the torture that occured at Abu Gharib and the beheading of Nick Berg and Margarett Hassan, I don't need to spend a week studying university texts to know these are wrong. The same for America to launch an attack in the face of heavy disapproval and rejection from the UN. Maybe my views are very diffirent to the views of some others, and they would even be upsetting to some.

[Mike Windu]

I lol at this thread.

 

Nothing much more to say unless someone wants to bring up a credible argument.

 

As for the situation in Iraq: won't be improved for a long time, with or without Saddam.

[Mace MacLeod]

Regardless of the illegality and inherent flaws of his trial, one can at least rest assured that he was certainly deserving of his fate. The real danger now is that the leaked footage of him being mocked and bayed at makes him into a dead martyr and fans the flames of Sunni discontent. Still, the "what's next" part is pretty obvious; it's just the same as it was before Saddam was hung. Iraq is still teetering on the brink of all-out civil war and a magnet for Muslim terrorists and paramilitaries of all descriptions. Saddam Hussein has been a largely irrelevant sideshow since his capture.

 

And any actor's or actress's political views or nationalities are totally irrelevant to this discussion or the actions of world governments. Toby Keith (probably) wants to nuke Iran. So what?

 

And windu6, if you really didn't care about Spider AL not responding to you, you wouldn't feel the need to tell him that.