Thread: Hussein hanged

Saddam was certainly known to support the Hamas and the terrorist acts in Palestine. Something he didn't hide from anyone. Iraq was one big contributor money-wise to the Palestine cause. That is the extent of what is known on his support on terrorism.

I still think to this day, and my belief is now stronger than before that the attack on Iraq was a big strategic blunder. Iraq served for many years as an effective strategic ally for the western nations exactly because Saddam, the Baath party and most particularly the Sunnis were firm enemies of the Shias, which dominate Iran and other regional countries. That's why Iraq benefited for so long from western friendship. The country was an important agent against the spreading of a fundamentalist Islam. Saddam and the Sunnis he represents are sworn enemies of movements like Al Kaeda strongly supported by Iran. If we want to find supporters to the actions of Osama, look no further than Iran. Not Iraq! It was exactly this country that used to put them at bay. Hence the support it benefited for so many years from western countries.

Today the country is ravaged by what many people already consider, me included, a de facto civil war. Iran influence and strategic role in the region has never been bigger. That is the blunder. The big strategic error. Why do you think the first war against Iraq stopped at the doors of Baghdad? Who rules the region now? Who has the more power? Iran.

Iran, the Shias fundamentalist factions, and any other country or religious group who sees fit, now uses the UN unsanctioned war against Iraq as an excuse for spreading their anti-western creed. It even serves them well the current chaos in Iraq. Al Kaeda and similar groups certainly now also have an hand on some of the bombings on Iraq. The more the country is in chaos, the more the USA and England feel powerless to finish what they started, the more they feel they are right and the easier it is to them to gather new believers against the big "Satan".

Now, I know it's a known fact that Saddam fundamentalist Islam

Whoops, I missed some words in this sentence. It was supposed to read "I Know it's a known fact that Saddam opposes fundamentalist Islam".

Kinda changes the whole meaning, doesn't it.

As for your last comment about jury duty, your analogy seems off, there... Saddam had a motive, he had the resources, and the fact that he had a fundamentalist uproar in his country that he had to deal with, he pretty much had an alibi. All he had to do is slip money under the table or turn his face when weapons were passing through his country. ...and as I said I'm not fully convinced he was never storing them himself. I doubt he'd ever be the one to use them, but I don't think if one of his neighbors said "Here hold this for me", he'd be the guy to say "No way, man! That's wrong!" Saddam might not have been the biggest threat to the world west of him, but he was a threat none the less, and I have no regrets having him crossed of the list of people the Americas, Asia and Western Europe has to worry about.

I just wanted to say :

Truth is not absolute. Everybody have their own version of what is called 'the truth'. Maybe Saddam just believe his own version of 'truth'. Can't blame him for he believe he's done the right thing (according to him). Maybe Bush just believe his own version of 'truth'. Can't blame him for he believe he's done the right thing (according to him). Maybe the Palestinian Bombers just believe their own version of 'truth'. Can't blame them for they believe they've done the right thing (according to them). Maybe the Israeli Aggressors just believe their own version of 'truth'. Can't blame them for they believe they've done the right thing (according to them). All in all, we can't judge someone based on what they believe. After all nobody is perfect.

That kind of thinking is dangerous. The only logical result of it is total anarchy.

"I can't be judged for what I believe" is a fallacy. A catch phrase. It holds no value. It just looks good. It's the type of thing you hear from cereal box intellectuals and low budget script writers.

I can and I shall be judged for what I believe. It's what defines me. And consequently is how I am perceived by others around me. That alone calls for judgment. It happens all the time. Even in places like these when you, I or anyone else expresses an opinion based on what we believe. It's a part of being human and a natural consequence of communication.

Besides Saddam was not condemned for what he believed. He was condemned for what he did. I nurture a particular hate for Greed. I believe it's what is fundamentally wrong with we as a species. However, I don't go around killing greedy people (like the bastards who robbed the villagers their terrains at a low cost after the 2004 tsunami to build new hotels). I should expect and accept to pay the consequences of my acts.

Truth is not absolute.

Yet you state that as an absolute truth.

*World Explody*

No, as Govt said, that's a dangerous thought process. You could be saying murderers and rapists are only doing what they think is right, but of course, it's still very much wrong in the public eye. Which is why a long time ago, we thought of this little thing called "Majority Rule"... which basically says... if more people want it this way than that way, then we do it this way. That's how I like to handle business.

Sorry, a slight misconception. Truth is indeed absolute. But what we perceive about the truth is the one that is relative. We only look at the truth at a particular angle, the angle that we prefer. And often we only want to see our version of the truth. People rarely see through the eyes of other people to see the truth. People rarely put themself to other people's shoes to understand other people's version of truth. And that is what caused the quarrels between humans.

And also you've all misunderstood my statement before. I didn't say that they are all innocent because they believe in their ideals. I just said that they are not entirely guilty Killing is an act of crime, that is the common law among us. So Saddam who killed lots of people was indeed guilty. But so does the US troops, Israeli troops, Palestinian bombers. So does Bush who started the war in Iraq. Heck, even Rambo for that matter is guilty. But what do we think of them? For the US citizens, the US troops will be called heroes. While for the Iraqi people who have their houses bombed because they suspected to house militants, they where thought villains. So you see, you have to look at different perspective. And you'll realize that your way of thinking will be different.

@SlyMaelstrom
>>...we thought of this little thing called "Majority Rule"....

Hahaha... I say, BULL........!!! (pardon the caps). It's more like "The Powerful Rule".

EDIT: Just realized, the "S" word will be cut when I post. Cool!!!

You sure typed a lot to say absolutely nothing at all.

Yes certainly... also you should probably look up the legal definition for murder because much of who you mentioned doesn't fall under that definition. From almost any perspective. ...and how is Majority Rule BS? Yes, indeed the majority tends to be more powerful... that's because they're the MAJORITY. If you're talking about a situation where a more powerful minority gets their way, well that wouldn't be Majority Rule would it? God, I'm so looking for something to EDIOT in this post.

Originally Posted by Kennedy

Amazing. . . you know more than most of the MIs in the ENTIRE US. . . also, I guess you don't get to talk to any troops that have served time there. . . and have had Chem agent scares. . . but you should continue to believe your odd version of reality, otherwise you may realize how rough the real world is.

What is amazing is that you pretend to know more but don't say what. Did you run out of ink? And what does "Chem agent scares" have to do with weapons of mass destruction? There's no single report of chemical weapons having been used during the whole war. What on earth are you talking about? THey were scared of bullets too you know.

Well, it sure didn't take long for this topic to become hostile...