<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Dec 15 2003, 03:58 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Dec 15 2003, 03:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Good! Where's the problem here? It should have been done a long time ago. The US and europe have been making bad decisions in the mideast for a century, it's time we undid some of the damage. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> the best way we could help those 'poor old middle easterners' would probably be to leave them alone, and not impose our morals, views or ways of government upon them. it comes down to our(westerners) view of the orient as inferior to the occident (yes ive been reading Said, does it show?)
I'm withdrawing because I'm really not interested in wasting my time. I have nothing more to say. I have neither defended nor condemned Saddam like you have. I have talked about improving Iraq, without any consequence to the US. I am trying to be impartial, and yet I am the one who has something to lose if things go sour in Iraq.
I have only spoken badly of Chalabi, who is guilty of stealing large sums of money in Jordan. Leader of the Iraqi council. He isn't fit to lead filth.
If I have not convinced you that, "You are on our side, or you're with the terrorists" mentality is outright wrong by now, then I will never be able to. The reality of the situation is, it's a lot more complicated than that.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> the best way we could help those 'poor old middle easterners' would probably be to leave them alone, and not impose our morals, views or ways of government upon them. it comes down to our(westerners) view of the orient as inferior to the occident (yes ive been reading Said, does it show?)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the Nazi's had not invaded Poland, and instead simply liquidated every jew, homosexual, gypsy, slav, and communist inside the borders of their own country to the tune of 10 million people, should we have simply left them alone? Should we just let murderous dictators stay in power and crush their people under their boots?
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have only spoken badly of Chalabi, who is guilty of stealing large sums of money in Jordan. Leader of the Iraqi council. He isn't fit to lead filth. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well said. If you had simply stated this succinctly then we'd probably have asked you to go on more with your thoughts. In fact, you mainly just clouded these issues with extraneous rhetoric.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If I have not convinced you that, "You are on our side, or you're with the terrorists" mentality is outright wrong by now, then I will never be able to. The reality of the situation is, it's a lot more complicated than that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And I do not believe that idea of 'with us or against us'. You seem to think that if you're against Saddam, you're against the muslim people. Your statement that it is more complicated is the first one you've said so far that made any sense to me. I don't want you to stop posting if you're going to be objective and calm like this, but in your previous posts, you have not been. This is a welcome change in your tone though.
<!--QuoteBegin--Jamil+Dec 15 2003, 01:51 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jamil @ Dec 15 2003, 01:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Give him the benefit of the doubt. Being biased is one thing, but shutting your eyes and ears is another. He has much to answer for, but why let him talk if we're going to cast judgement already? Saddam can speak for himself, so don't trust anything Chalabi says. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> "Shutting my eyes and ears"? You do know that there are both survivors and video film to support the fact that he used poison gas on Kurds, right? [<a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1107290,00.html' target='_blank'>link</a>]
I honestly don't know much about Chalabi. Sure, he might not be a nice guy himself. But I sincerely doubt he's worse than Saddam. Just look at Saddam's <a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1106958,00.html' target='_blank'>life</a>. But that's not the point; I'm judging Saddam on what evidence seems to point to what he's done, not on someone's say-so.
Yeah? My family is Kurdish on my mom's side. I'm quite well aware that someone bombed Halabja, though Saddam claims it was the Iranians. I am not blind and I am not deaf, so I will listen and maybe I'll find out who did it for certain. He might be lying. I do not know.
It's like putting someone to the electric chair who claims innocence and finding out 20 years later that he was innocent. What do you do then? Shrug your shoulders and say oops?
Nope, not really. Hundreds of countries, the UN, international aid organizations, and other impartial groups have extablished beyond a doubt that it was Iraq and Saddam Hussein. There are thousands of witnesses that saw the iraqi aircraft that delivered it, and the Iraqi troops that came in to examine the results. There are millions of pages of evidence that it was Iraq, and nothing against it. Your analogy makes no sense to me. And it wasn't 'bombed' it was mustard and nerve gassed. Hell, they've even found traces of the gas in the soil to this very day, poisoning the water supply. The Iranians don't even have any chemical weapons that anyone knows of.
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Dec 15 2003, 07:44 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Dec 15 2003, 07:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If the Nazi's had not invaded Poland, and instead simply liquidated every jew, homosexual, gypsy, slav, and communist inside the borders of their own country to the tune of 10 million people, should we have simply left them alone? Should we just let murderous dictators stay in power and crush their people under their boots?
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I dont think its fair to compare keep comparing Saddam and Iraq to Hitler and the Nazis. lets not forget that Saddam was only attacking his own people (dont misinterpret, im not justifying this) and it took till Hitler invaded a good few countries till the rest of the world stepped up to him. *(warning my grasp of history is shakey at best). also, there are other dictators in this world, why saddam? or are we working our way round to them, and just coincidence saddam was first on the list.
I will however conceed that you are correct, there is a difference between Orientalism and the saddam thing, he was a reason to attack i guess. (though orientalism undoubtedly affects the subject somewhat).
im more annoyed at the whole combination of events that took place though. its not just that we sorted out a bad man, its the combination of everything thats **** me off. the lies to start the war, the changing of reasons to invade (which are still obviously false i might add), the warping of 9/11 to whip up a war in Iraq, its all so blatantly wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin--Jamil+Dec 15 2003, 05:35 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jamil @ Dec 15 2003, 05:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Saddam might provide some evidence that debunks all previous claims. If you have no interest in finding out the truth, so be it.
I cannot clarify it any further. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So you're saying that you're going to rely on possible evidence that you have never seen that comes from a known mass murdering dictator hated by his own people, and ignore 15 years of evidence from impartial scientists, health workers, survivors, and captured iraqi military? Amazing...
<!--QuoteBegin--Melatonin+Dec 15 2003, 05:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Melatonin @ Dec 15 2003, 05:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Dec 15 2003, 07:44 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Dec 15 2003, 07:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If the Nazi's had not invaded Poland, and instead simply liquidated every jew, homosexual, gypsy, slav, and communist inside the borders of their own country to the tune of 10 million people, should we have simply left them alone? Should we just let murderous dictators stay in power and crush their people under their boots?
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I dont think its fair to compare keep comparing Saddam and Iraq to Hitler and the Nazis. lets not forget that Saddam was only attacking his own people (dont misinterpret, im not justifying this) and it took till Hitler invaded a good few countries till the rest of the world stepped up to him. *(warning my grasp of history is shakey at best). also, there are other dictators in this world, why saddam? or are we working our way round to them, and just coincidence saddam was first on the list. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm kind of not following you here, but I'll ask again as I think it's a very clear question: if Hitler had never invaded the surrounding countries, and "only" murdered 10,000,000 jews, gypsies, homosexuals, slavs and communists, <i>are you saying we never should have attacked Germany?</i> It's (unusually for me) a yes or no question, and then add your thoughts. I'm not asking you to compare Hitler gassing 6 million people and Saddam putting a bullet in the back of the head of 500,000 - they are each horrible in their own way, but it's still mass-murder by anyone's definition.
And yes, we should be attacking dictators where ever they may be. Not just the US, but the entire world community. The earth would be a better place for it in the end if a dictator knew 5 minutes after his coup that a few smart bombs would be landing on his head. Whether they were launched from an American B2, a German Tornado, or a French Rafaele. If dictators knew there was no hope of gaining power, we'd never have any more dictators.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->the best way we could help those 'poor old middle easterners' would probably be to leave them alone, and not impose our morals, views or ways of government upon them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey hey, now, they started it! Those freakin' Persians, trying to invade Greece, it's all <i>their</i> fault! Thank <i>God</i> we had two brave Macedonian kings to fight back and kick their butts! Long live the Argead line!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And yes, we should be attacking dictators where ever they may be. Not just the US, but the entire world community. The earth would be a better place for it in the end if a dictator knew 5 minutes after his coup that a few smart bombs would be landing on his head. Whether they were launched from an American B2, a German Tornado, or a French Rafaele. If dictators knew there was no hope of gaining power, we'd never have any more dictators. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The concepts of dictator and tyranny are really rather abused in the modern sense... A dictator or tyrant is not neccessarily bad. The fact that most are evil, bloodthirsty mass-murderers is beside the point... We should be going after men who commit massive crimes against human rights, or, worse yet, human life. The mere fact that they have absolute power means little, very little, and if we try and force our beliefs of democracy onto nations merely because they are ruled by a dictator (who could be a nice dictator), then we cross the line from liberator to conqueror.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Hey hey, now, they started it! Those freakin' Persians, trying to invade Greece, it's all their fault! Thank God we had two brave Macedonian kings to fight back and kick their butts! Long live the Argead line!<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> ROFL <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The mere fact that they have absolute power means little, very little, and if we try and force our beliefs of democracy onto nations merely because they are ruled by a dictator (who could be a nice dictator), then we cross the line from liberator to conqueror. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Even if we do not permanently occupy the country? Should be not have involved ourselves in Rwanda? Kosovo? Macedonia? Serbia? Panama? None of these countries technically invaded anyone, it was all bloody internal strife, dictators, mass-murder, horrible mutilation, and worse. So we not have a duty to stop this behavior? I guess you're right that I don't advocate overthrowing all dictators, but only if I ever find one that isn't a murdering slime. I still haven't found a nice one lately...
Lol, this thread has really moved from where it started. Just a few contributions I'll throw in:
For once, I'm proud of the US Government not disclosing information immediately upon achieving a goal. I have a buddy stationed in Iraq whose only comments on another forum were "Yea, we knew about it yesterday, but I couldn't say anything. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->"
Why is there a problem with comparing Saddam to Hitler pray tell? They both killed thousands of their own citizens while despotically running a nation that went to war with multiple neighbors. They both "annexed" territory for resources that borderd their own. They both committed human rights violations and caused the suffering of millions under their rule (as long as you didn't work for them). They both held dear to a belief that members of another religion/ethnicity/sect were inferior and used that belief to order the deaths of thousands. They were both responsible for the arrest, detainment and execution of "politically unreliable" factions of their own country.
Is it simply the number of people killed? 6 million versus half a million means that the first was 12x worse? please tell me that's not the premise of your argument.
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Dec 15 2003, 05:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Dec 15 2003, 05:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Panama? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Sorry Monse, but the ultimate justification of Panama seems to have been drug charges and time in a federal prison for Noriega. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Bah. Ok, he's iffy. But there's certainly democracy now in Panama, and there sure as hell wasn't any under him. He got busted for drug running, money laundering, and racketeering. And the Panamanian government still wants him extradited to face <a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/313360.stm' target='_blank'>murder and torture charges</a>. But you're right, he was no Saddam.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Even if we do not permanently occupy the country? Should be not have involved ourselves in Rwanda? Kosovo? Macedonia? Serbia? Panama? None of these countries technically invaded anyone, it was all bloody internal strife, dictators, mass-murder, horrible mutilation, and worse. So we not have a duty to stop this behavior? I guess you're right that I don't advocate overthrowing all dictators, but only if I ever find one that isn't a murdering slime. I still haven't found a nice one lately... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, sure, <i>lately</i>... But, c'mon, should we have overthrown, say, the early Greek tyrants? Sure, the 30, but they were BAD people. Not all tyrants are bad (and, before anyone says anything stupid, no, tyrant does not mean bad person). And the office of dictator comes from Rome, and I don't think anyone thought Fabius was <i>evil</i>. Slow, maybe, ineffective, maybe, but, hey, not <i>evil</i>.
I will, however, put my mind to the subject of living, non-evil dictators, just as soon as I get these finals out of the way. You'll see, absolute power doesn't <i>always</i> corrupt absolutely! Long live the... em... nice dictator!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Maybe not Fabius, but a lot of those dictators were complete buggers. Caligula, anyone? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Caligula was not a dictator. Julius Caesar was the last Roman dictator. An emperor and a dictator are somewhat different, though the line is shady.
Anyways, my point was that, yes, by assumption, most dictators and tyrants, especially in modern times, are mass-murders and what not. But not all, and thus we should be careful to tie those connotations to those terms... Many Greek poleis were very happy under tyrants, and the Romans had an office of dictator for a reason. Half the world's population can't separate the two words' meanings from their new fangled connotations.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->you dont need to conjure up images of hitler every time you want to demonise a man, in this case his own actions would suffice. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who needs Hitler anyways? If you really want to demonize someone, call on Satan. Or Cthulhu. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
It's funny how these men (saddam) who tortue and kill inocent people act so tuff, when it comes down to being caught he just gives up like the little **** he is. If he had any bit of manhood left in himself, he would have put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well, he was a dictator in the sense that he was an absolute ruler. No-one told that guy what to do if they knew what was good for them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but an emperor is much closer to a monarch than a dictator... Though, like I said, shady line.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->and ignore 15 years of evidence from impartial scientists, health workers, survivors, and captured iraqi military?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey, the US ignored that when they said Iraq had WMD... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Everyone says how Saddam killed his people.... true yes, but it was never with his own hands rather most often his henchmen. Still very evil, but since we engagaed Iraq we have killed over 3,000 Iraqi civilians and over 300 American soldiers. Not people fighting against us in Iraq, but civilians and all those lives can be blamed on one person for forcing the war. Its all an issue of morals. Which slayings were right by which leader? I am going to have to go with none of them.
Nope. It's been documented that he personally killed plenty of people. Hell, he was in jail for murder in 1958, when he took part in a failed coup.
As to Ryo - bah I say! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
I had mixed feelings about this news item. On the one hand - like most of you - I was really pleased that he was captured. He's done alot that needs answering for.
But this whole exercise is tainted my friends. I think we need to take an honest look at what exactly transpired that allowed this evil man to seize power - and to keep it for as long as he did.
It saddens me to say that probably alot of countries are guilty to various degrees of aiding Saddam. Here's a look at his life, with some other details added that perhaps not everyone would like to see. <a href='http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=4685' target='_blank'>Saddam and the US</a>
If we are talking about crimes before Saddam became leader....then it should be said how the US supported that coup and many others like it to get the then leader out of power and the US is the main reason Saddam even came to power.
Yes, good idea you two. Let's talk about that alot, and let's not fix the mess we made. Because talking about our past mistakes and doing nothing helps everyone, right?! Let's not fix it, let's point fingers to 1970, before any of us were born!!!
Bleh. Stop yammering about things from 30 years ago we can't change and offer some solutions.
Comments
the best way we could help those 'poor old middle easterners' would probably be to leave them alone, and not impose our morals, views or ways of government upon them.
it comes down to our(westerners) view of the orient as inferior to the occident (yes ive been reading Said, does it show?)
I have only spoken badly of Chalabi, who is guilty of stealing large sums of money in Jordan. Leader of the Iraqi council. He isn't fit to lead filth.
If I have not convinced you that, "You are on our side, or you're with the terrorists" mentality is outright wrong by now, then I will never be able to. The reality of the situation is, it's a lot more complicated than that.
the best way we could help those 'poor old middle easterners' would probably be to leave them alone, and not impose our morals, views or ways of government upon them.
it comes down to our(westerners) view of the orient as inferior to the occident (yes ive been reading Said, does it show?)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the Nazi's had not invaded Poland, and instead simply liquidated every jew, homosexual, gypsy, slav, and communist inside the borders of their own country to the tune of 10 million people, should we have simply left them alone? Should we just let murderous dictators stay in power and crush their people under their boots?
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have only spoken badly of Chalabi, who is guilty of stealing large sums of money in Jordan. Leader of the Iraqi council. He isn't fit to lead filth. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well said. If you had simply stated this succinctly then we'd probably have asked you to go on more with your thoughts. In fact, you mainly just clouded these issues with extraneous rhetoric.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
If I have not convinced you that, "You are on our side, or you're with the terrorists" mentality is outright wrong by now, then I will never be able to. The reality of the situation is, it's a lot more complicated than that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And I do not believe that idea of 'with us or against us'. You seem to think that if you're against Saddam, you're against the muslim people. Your statement that it is more complicated is the first one you've said so far that made any sense to me. I don't want you to stop posting if you're going to be objective and calm like this, but in your previous posts, you have not been. This is a welcome change in your tone though.
"Shutting my eyes and ears"? You do know that there are both survivors and video film to support the fact that he used poison gas on Kurds, right? [<a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1107290,00.html' target='_blank'>link</a>]
I honestly don't know much about Chalabi. Sure, he might not be a nice guy himself. But I sincerely doubt he's worse than Saddam. Just look at Saddam's <a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1106958,00.html' target='_blank'>life</a>. But that's not the point; I'm judging Saddam on what evidence seems to point to what he's done, not on someone's say-so.
It's like putting someone to the electric chair who claims innocence and finding out 20 years later that he was innocent. What do you do then? Shrug your shoulders and say oops?
Do you understand now what I am saying?
I cannot clarify it any further.
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think its fair to compare keep comparing Saddam and Iraq to Hitler and the Nazis.
lets not forget that Saddam was only attacking his own people (dont misinterpret, im not justifying this) and it took till Hitler invaded a good few countries till the rest of the world stepped up to him.
*(warning my grasp of history is shakey at best).
also, there are other dictators in this world, why saddam? or are we working our way round to them, and just coincidence saddam was first on the list.
I will however conceed that you are correct, there is a difference between Orientalism and the saddam thing, he was a reason to attack i guess. (though orientalism undoubtedly affects the subject somewhat).
im more annoyed at the whole combination of events that took place though.
its not just that we sorted out a bad man, its the combination of everything thats **** me off.
the lies to start the war, the changing of reasons to invade (which are still obviously false i might add), the warping of 9/11 to whip up a war in Iraq, its all so blatantly wrong.
I cannot clarify it any further. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you're saying that you're going to rely on possible evidence that you have never seen that comes from a known mass murdering dictator hated by his own people, and ignore 15 years of evidence from impartial scientists, health workers, survivors, and captured iraqi military? Amazing...
Believe it or not, I'm not trying to steer the thread, I honestly want your opinion on this. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think its fair to compare keep comparing Saddam and Iraq to Hitler and the Nazis.
lets not forget that Saddam was only attacking his own people (dont misinterpret, im not justifying this) and it took till Hitler invaded a good few countries till the rest of the world stepped up to him.
*(warning my grasp of history is shakey at best).
also, there are other dictators in this world, why saddam? or are we working our way round to them, and just coincidence saddam was first on the list.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm kind of not following you here, but I'll ask again as I think it's a very clear question: if Hitler had never invaded the surrounding countries, and "only" murdered 10,000,000 jews, gypsies, homosexuals, slavs and communists, <i>are you saying we never should have attacked Germany?</i> It's (unusually for me) a yes or no question, and then add your thoughts. I'm not asking you to compare Hitler gassing 6 million people and Saddam putting a bullet in the back of the head of 500,000 - they are each horrible in their own way, but it's still mass-murder by anyone's definition.
And yes, we should be attacking dictators where ever they may be. Not just the US, but the entire world community. The earth would be a better place for it in the end if a dictator knew 5 minutes after his coup that a few smart bombs would be landing on his head. Whether they were launched from an American B2, a German Tornado, or a French Rafaele. If dictators knew there was no hope of gaining power, we'd never have any more dictators.
Hey hey, now, they started it! Those freakin' Persians, trying to invade Greece, it's all <i>their</i> fault! Thank <i>God</i> we had two brave Macedonian kings to fight back and kick their butts! Long live the Argead line!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And yes, we should be attacking dictators where ever they may be. Not just the US, but the entire world community. The earth would be a better place for it in the end if a dictator knew 5 minutes after his coup that a few smart bombs would be landing on his head. Whether they were launched from an American B2, a German Tornado, or a French Rafaele. If dictators knew there was no hope of gaining power, we'd never have any more dictators. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The concepts of dictator and tyranny are really rather abused in the modern sense... A dictator or tyrant is not neccessarily bad. The fact that most are evil, bloodthirsty mass-murderers is beside the point... We should be going after men who commit massive crimes against human rights, or, worse yet, human life. The mere fact that they have absolute power means little, very little, and if we try and force our beliefs of democracy onto nations merely because they are ruled by a dictator (who could be a nice dictator), then we cross the line from liberator to conqueror.
ROFL <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The mere fact that they have absolute power means little, very little, and if we try and force our beliefs of democracy onto nations merely because they are ruled by a dictator (who could be a nice dictator), then we cross the line from liberator to conqueror. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even if we do not permanently occupy the country? Should be not have involved ourselves in Rwanda? Kosovo? Macedonia? Serbia? Panama? None of these countries technically invaded anyone, it was all bloody internal strife, dictators, mass-murder, horrible mutilation, and worse. So we not have a duty to stop this behavior? I guess you're right that I don't advocate overthrowing all dictators, but only if I ever find one that isn't a murdering slime. I still haven't found a nice one lately...
For once, I'm proud of the US Government not disclosing information immediately upon achieving a goal. I have a buddy stationed in Iraq whose only comments on another forum were "Yea, we knew about it yesterday, but I couldn't say anything. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->"
Why is there a problem with comparing Saddam to Hitler pray tell? They both killed thousands of their own citizens while despotically running a nation that went to war with multiple neighbors. They both "annexed" territory for resources that borderd their own. They both committed human rights violations and caused the suffering of millions under their rule (as long as you didn't work for them). They both held dear to a belief that members of another religion/ethnicity/sect were inferior and used that belief to order the deaths of thousands. They were both responsible for the arrest, detainment and execution of "politically unreliable" factions of their own country.
Is it simply the number of people killed? 6 million versus half a million means that the first was 12x worse? please tell me that's not the premise of your argument.
Sorry Monse, but the ultimate justification of Panama seems to have been drug charges and time in a federal prison for Noriega. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Well, sure, <i>lately</i>... But, c'mon, should we have overthrown, say, the early Greek tyrants? Sure, the 30, but they were BAD people. Not all tyrants are bad (and, before anyone says anything stupid, no, tyrant does not mean bad person). And the office of dictator comes from Rome, and I don't think anyone thought Fabius was <i>evil</i>. Slow, maybe, ineffective, maybe, but, hey, not <i>evil</i>.
I will, however, put my mind to the subject of living, non-evil dictators, just as soon as I get these finals out of the way. You'll see, absolute power doesn't <i>always</i> corrupt absolutely! Long live the... em... nice dictator!
no.
im just saying there are differances between saddam and hitler.
you dont need to conjure up images of hitler every time you want to demonise a man, in this case his own actions would suffice.
Caligula was not a dictator. Julius Caesar was the last Roman dictator. An emperor and a dictator are somewhat different, though the line is shady.
Anyways, my point was that, yes, by assumption, most dictators and tyrants, especially in modern times, are mass-murders and what not. But not all, and thus we should be careful to tie those connotations to those terms... Many Greek poleis were very happy under tyrants, and the Romans had an office of dictator for a reason. Half the world's population can't separate the two words' meanings from their new fangled connotations.
Who needs Hitler anyways? If you really want to demonize someone, call on Satan. Or Cthulhu. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Yes, but an emperor is much closer to a monarch than a dictator... Though, like I said, shady line.
Hey, the US ignored that when they said Iraq had WMD... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
As to Ryo - bah I say! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
But this whole exercise is tainted my friends. I think we need to take an honest look at what exactly transpired that allowed this evil man to seize power - and to keep it for as long as he did.
It saddens me to say that probably alot of countries are guilty to various degrees of aiding Saddam. Here's a look at his life, with some other details added that perhaps not everyone would like to see. <a href='http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=4685' target='_blank'>Saddam and the US</a>
Bleh. Stop yammering about things from 30 years ago we can't change and offer some solutions.