Reply
Sat 30 Dec, 2006 05:27 pm
Rather than hanging Saddam,
maybe we shud have given him to the King of Kuwait
for a Christmas present.
I bet he 'd have liked it.
Maybe he cud have had Saddam
as a body servant, or work in the kitchen,
take out the garbage, or work in his camel stables;
maybe teach him to sing n dance
n tell what its like to be king of Iraq.
I 'll bet he cud find suitable work for Saddam
and not let his talents be wasted.
David
I voted they should have let everyone kick his rump first, but after that, I think he should have had to work in the camel stables.
I feel kind of guilty saying that though. Did you see the picture of him at rest (dead) first, with the noose around his neck, and then without it? In the later picture he looked like a sleeping child. I found it very surprising and strange. People are such enigmas and paradoxes, arent they?
What judgment do you think he's facing right now?
*I was also wondering where/how he got all those scrapes on his face. What do you think?
I voted to have allowed his victims kick his rump first....course there wouldn't have been much left for the emir.
I wouldn't want to venture a guess as to what punishment he is facing now.
What!? Kuwait is a monarchy? Perhaps, the U.S. will generously use its military forces to liberate and bring forth democracy and freedom to that silly backward country.
That would be a better gift that Saddam could have ever have been.
Of course, it would go over smoother with the "American" people, if a link between the King of Kuwait and the attacks on 9/11 can be established. However, I have my doubts that the intelligent people of this country can be duped into believing that some Middle Eastern head of state had a role in that attack. But who knows- who knows?
It is not our job to spread democracy.
Yea, I guess you're right. It's too bad that idiot, Bush, doesn't understand that; he still has troops there!
The rationale for waging war against Saddam
was purely DEFENSIVE.
Well, that was the stated rationale; however, to date no proof or evidence has been brought forth indicating that Iraq attacked or helped anyone attack the U.S., or that Saddam planed or was even making a plan about planning to attack the U.S. Therefore, seriously making a claim that the U.S. actions in Iraq were "purely" in defense of its safety is incredibly idiotic, to say the least.
However, at New Year 's celebration, I felt safer than I did when Saddam was still in power.
I don't doubt that you felt safer. I'd say your experience is much like the gullible "Americans" who, at the sound of air-raid alarms during the 1950s thru the 1970s, would scurry under tables and desks for cover and protection from the supposed impending attack of Soviet nuclear ICBMs. They too felt safer as a result of their actions (hiding under a desk). However, it was indicative of a peoples' ignorance that they were convinced that a desk could have offered any protection form a nuclear missile attack. The sad thing is, people aren't proving to be any more enlightened in 2007. Your feeling of greater security as result of Saddam being removed from power is governed by irrational fear cultivated by calculating government and a complaisant "liberal" media; sadly, you are not alone.
That the government was able to persuade a semi-lucid people into believing that a desk could offer at least some protection was proof how they can whip up public irrational fear into epic proportions; and obviously, they can and still do it.
As if Americans were in more danger before the U.S. invaded Iraq from foreign attacks? That is a baseless belief and truly imbecilic one too. Of course, Americans in general do seem easily frightened.
Emir Sabah IV Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah isn't - as well as all the other Kuweitian amirs before him - not actually a king but the title of emir/amir translates to 'prince' (in this context).
Walter Hinteler wrote:Emir Sabah IV Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah isn't - as well as all the other Kuweitian amirs before him - not actually a king but the title of emir/amir translates to 'prince' (in this context).
Well, that changes everything.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace