Reply
Sun 5 Nov, 2006 08:07 am
Reminds me of Nuremburg where Nazi war criminals were rightly charged with crimes against humanity but their partners in America and the UK and other "Allied" countries walked away without being charged. A huge mistake that left these corporate fascists free to continue their evil practice of finding a Hitler, funding his rise to power, arming him, then getting rich off the blowback. Saddam is a great example of that as is bin Laden.
Blue,
This has to be the absolute worst analogy to make from someone coming from the left.
First, we spend all this time trying to show that Iraq is not WWII. You are playing right into the rhetoric of the conservatives.
Second, comparisons between Hitler and US troops are not only unjustified, they are simply stupid. I understand real questions about the firebombing tactics and others used by US forces, but do you think for a moment they compare to the horrors of the Nazi regime that were punished at Nuremburg?
There are many thoughtful, rational progressives. We want to question US policy when it is wrong while supporting and lauding the good in the US.
This is the worst post I have ever seen from someone who doesn't support giving guns to schoolchildren.
ebrown_p, well that's your opinion. I see a progression in history over generations where the same group of corporations and families have found madmen to raise to power, arm and fund and get rich off the blowback. It was wrong for the Reagan/Bush administration to sell lethal substances and to arm and fund Saddam even after he used WMD. Al Gore gave a great speech back in 1992 that touches on a lot of the history. We mostly all remember the famous picture of Rummy shaking Saddam's hand as Reagan's envoy after Saddam had been accused of using WMD. American complicity in Saddam's crimes are well documented. And now Rummy, Cheney, Wolfie and others from the Reagan/Bush adfministration are back and fighting a war against their old business partner. Follow that money trail.
gore speech
Do you think you could make your argument without comparing American, who were fighing against the Nazis, to Nazi war criminals?
Your line of reasoning is indefensible (and politically inane).
The fact that Saddam deserves the verdict he received should be obvious to any rational person of any political persuasion. The fact that the US erroneously lent support in the past doesn't change his guilt. He rose to power by being vicious and kept power with barbaric acts.
Saddams crimes are documented by many respected organizations including Amnesty International. I don't suppose you took the time to listen to his trial? Did you hear the testimony given by some of his victims?
If you want to make the argument that the US military actions in the Middle East are disasterous (including our past support for Saddam) fine. I may even mostly agree with you.
This grand conspiracy argument stretching back to Hitler and assuming US complicity in war crimes really bothers me.
It makes it much harder for those of us who question US policy in a reasoned respectful way to be heard because your arguments are so easily dismissed. You are the straw man.
BBB
New war criminals are being created day by day in Iraq. Will they, too, be brought to justice?
BBB
ebrown, calling the progression of arming madmen a grand conspiracy argument only serves the purpose of of the real enemy that builds wars and strangles humanity by turning them on each other. Smedley Butler warned us about it in his War is a Racket. A 2 time Medal of Honor winner and Commandant of the Marines. Today's Marines would be wise to listen to him.
http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm Smedley even mentions Standard Oil by name. Their partnership with Hitler and their role in building Aushwitz are well documented. As is Exxon's history with Saddam and Iraq. The same corporations and families including the Bushies are repeating history and walking away richer and entrenched in power. They wont change such a proven formula until we recognize the entirety of their bertrayal generation after generation. It's largely about saving the next generation imo. The significance of our arming Saddam after he used WMD is that he may have used WMD on our troops. Did Reagan/Bush/Cheney/Rummy/Wolfie and American arms merchants think that one day we would have troops on the ground against Saddam? I think they did as proven by their past succeses. Our goverment neglects victims of Gulf War Syndrome as they neglected victims of Agent Orange disease. Our soldiers are every bit victims of betrayal as are the Iraqis and Iranians and Vietnamese etc, who died in wars we were lied into. Betrayal is an American reality and in order to stand any chance of ending the madness we must recognize the betrayal over time and generations. This link takes a good look at the issue of Gulf War Syndrome and America's role in Saddam's WMD program and of the neglect of our soldiers who were/are victims of the whole scheme.
http://home.earthlink.net/~founders/armiraq.cfm
Hang the basard without delay, and move on. Shroud the corpse in pigskin and bury the body annonymously facedown under a pig sty. Hopefully, erasing that monster will bring closure to some of his many victims.
Asherman wrote:Hang the basard without delay, and move on. Shroud the corpse in pigskin and bury the body annonymously facedown under a pig sty. Hopefully, erasing that monster will bring closure to some of his many victims.
But won't change a damned thing about the chaotic mess over there...a mess which incidentally (and it is amazing how people fail to recall this) was aided by the U.S. The United States was instrumental in getting Hussein into the position of power. The United States supplied weaponry. The conviction of Hussein is just a token gesture. It's curious in a way, how we create a menace and then punish said menace. Sort of as if we hand a child a magic marker and point at a wall and then punish the child for drawing on the wall.
As I said in another thread, when the sun sets today the world will be the same as it was when the verdict was handed down.
I am horrified that my country is going to have a hand in a hanging.
What was Saddam's head count in Iraq - did he beat 600,000? And I agree with Lash (didn't think I'd ever say that...).
hingehead wrote:... And I agree with Lash (didn't think I'd ever say that...).
<basic statistics
requires that these things happen at least once...>
Quote:The former Iraqi dictator and six subordinates were convicted and sentenced for the 1982 killings of 148 people in a single Shiite town after an attempt on his life there.
source
Quote:Shaking Hands: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.
source
Quote:"Saddam Hussein's trial is a milestone in the Iraqi people's efforts to replace the rule of a tyrant with the rule of law. It's a major achievement for Iraq's young democracy and its constitutional government," Bush said before boarding Air Force One on his way to campaign events for congressional candidates in Nebraska and Kansas.
source
Two days before US mid term elections, got hand it to the administration, good politicians.
To sanitize the situation I would merely add that it is not the USA that is doing it but W. He cheated his way into the White House with family pull and is about to destroy the democracy at home while proclaiming democracy Bush-style in Iraq and elsewhere.
Lash wrote:I am horrified that my country is going to have a hand in a hanging.
So, you don't believe in the death penalty for murderers? Not even mass murderers? Not even after a trial?
talk72000 wrote:To sanitize the situation I would merely add that it is not the USA that is doing it but W. He cheated his way into the White House with family pull and is about to destroy the democracy at home while proclaiming democracy Bush-style in Iraq and elsewhere.
Funny, I thought he was elected twice. What is it exactly in the 2000 Supreme Court decision that you disagree with? What is the part of the opinion that you consider incorrect?
The Supreme Court under Republicans!
Faux News, Clear Channel Group
Florida under Jeb Bush
Cheney secret meeting with oil executives
Wireless Transmitter/Receiver running down W's back during the 2004 debate
Rules of debates that favor scripted responses.
all leads to Iraq mess.
Brandon, the bomb makers must be paying you handsomely for shilling for W.
Brandon9000 wrote:Lash wrote:I am horrified that my country is going to have a hand in a hanging.
So, you don't believe in the death penalty for murderers? Not even mass murderers? Not even after a trial?
No, dear. I've been against the death penalty for years.
It IS the
logical solution to many cases--but I find it to be inhumane. If it makes you feel any better, I can't support my position logically.
I'm not sure why there is any more legitimacy to this tribunal than the one that found the US guilty of "unlawful use of force" back in 1986.
Quote:The United States argued that the Court did not have jurisdiction, with U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick dismissing the Court as a "semi-legal, semi-juridical, semi-political body which nations sometimes accept and sometimes don't."
Source
Saddam Hussein made a similar statement:
Quote: "I do not respond to this so-called court, with all due respect to its people, and I retain my constitutional right as the president of Iraq, "neither do I recognize the body that has designated and authorized you, nor the aggression because all that has been built on false basis is false."
Source
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace