Saddam to hang tomorrow AM - Page 4 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

GermanStar · #46 12-30-2006, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Of course you do: You and the always dependable Germanstar were already in agreement before the exchange above, and will be ever-after. All of our arguments are the same as they have always been and we all believe we are right. Now all we are doing is finely crafting our arguments to score tedious little points. There is no chance that anything any of us say will convince anybody of anything. Even if Iraq broke-out in a sudden burst of peace and love and tranquility, our positions are so firm we would all argue that the sudden change was because our particular vision was the more accurate.

B

On the contrary, I would gladly concede that my stance was in error in the face of any evidence to that effect. Can you say the same? To me, it has never been about being right, rather it is about doing right. And while I may not have convinced anyone of anything, evidence and events seem to have convinced a great number of people that the Iraq invasion was a colossal mistake. In point of fact, I actually take no solace in that fact -- none whatsoever.

Botnst · #47 12-30-2006, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanStar

... To me, it has never been about being right, rather it is about doing right. And while I may not have convinced anyone of anything, evidence and events seem to have convinced a great number of people that the Iraq invasion was a colossal mistake. In point of fact, I actually take no solace in that fact -- none whatsoever.

Oh yeah, right. Just as you say.

I know you would never take cheap shots and make ill-founded accusations.

B

cmac2012 · #48 12-30-2006, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Oh yeah, right. Just as you say.

I know you would never take cheap shots and make ill-founded accusations.

Holy Bitter Bile, Batman. Try some chamomile tea, good for soothing the nerves.

Could be the insane shia/sunni hatred will not subside for 1,000 years and a govt. like Saddam's is the only sort that can keep a lid on the madness enough to allow semi-civil society to flourish. WTF do I know? I'm just looking at the world through the wrong end of a telescope.

But the notion you were coming close to, that the unrest in Iraq is the fault of Iraqis independent of anything we did is just too convenient.

And Pol Pot didn't get a major helping hand from US bombs in the 70s.

Jorn · #49 12-30-2006, 02:21 PM

For years I have a folder on my desktop with a Saddam H icon for all the invoices I send out that are not paid yet. Guess I have to replace it now, but with who?

Botnst · #50 12-30-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Holy Bitter Bile, Batman. Try some chamomile tea, good for soothing the nerves.

Could be the insane shia/sunni hatred will not subside for 1,000 years and a govt. like Saddam's is the only sort that can keep a lid on the madness enough to allow semi-civil society to flourish. WTF do I know? I'm just looking at the world through the wrong end of a telescope.

But the notion you were coming close to, that the unrest in Iraq is the fault of Iraqis independent of anything we did is just too convenient.

And Pol Pot didn't get a major helping hand from US bombs in the 70s.

Wholly wacky-tobacky, that is among the weirdest Burroughs-esque hallucinatory pronouncements, yet.

I thought I'd add to the general melange by following your lead and assert things that are irrelevant, yet curiously condescending.

Botnst · #51 12-30-2006, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorn

For years I have a folder on my desktop with a Saddam H icon for all the invoices I send out that are not paid yet. Guess I have to replace it now, but with who?

Try a western apologist for the baby-murdering mofo. That kind of slimy character associates well with deadbeats.

B

Dubyagee · #52 12-30-2006, 08:00 PM

Heres the shaky, third world video of it. http://www.anwarweb.net/saddamdown.wmv

cmac2012 · #53 12-31-2006, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Wholly wacky-tobacky, that is among the weirdest Burroughs-esque hallucinatory pronouncements, yet.

I thought I'd add to the general melange by following your lead and assert things that are irrelevant, yet curiously condescending.

Oh well, you thought my original reply was condescending; I thought it was bluntly accurate. Here are your remarks again:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

It looks to me like the Iraqis are making themselves miserable of their own efforts by randomly dynamiting and shooting civilians in areas lived in by other factions.

In contrast, coalition forces intentionally avoid civilian casualties as an article of law.

You apparently believe that just by showing up, we are the good guys and that our high standards absolve us of any blame. To call that over-confidence would be putting it mildly. Such inflated self-opinion inevitably leads to serious blunders.

Our attempts to bomb Saddam's various residences of the moment were bound to incur civilian casualties. Do you actually believe that any Iraqi is going to be moved by our saying that we avoid civilian casualties? The fellows who are on trial for a rampage of random killing after one of their buddies was killed were avoiding civilian casualties? I feel for those guys and I can imagine myself flipping out under similar circumstances. I fault the guys who put them there, naively believing that goodness and glory were the inevitable result.

Your saying that we intentionally avoid civilian casualties as an article of law reminds me of when you said that Lt. Calley was tried and convicted for his crimes. Yeah.... and he served 3 1/2 years of house arrest in his quarters. No one else was even charged for having placed that certifiable moron in a position he was in no way qualified for, nor for the sorts of orders from Westmoreland on down which tacitly approved the killing of innocent civilians. But we're the good guys, why can't I get that through my head?

There is no escaping the fact that our actions upset the apple cart of Iraq such that wholesale sectarian killings have become widespread.

Your dismissal of it as the fault of Iraqis -- cut and dried -- is evasive and arrogant, IMHO. Powell was right -- you break it, you own it.

cmac2012 · #54 12-31-2006, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by engatwork

The best leader that Iraq ever had is about to be hanged

. He is the kind of leader that a country like that needs.
I agree with GS - he was probably responsible for less Iraqi killings than GWB.

The guy kept a lid on things but to call him a great leader in any way is a big stretch. He adored Stalin and did him proud. Did you ever see the video of the meeting when he called out the former associates he accused of plotting against him, and had them taken out and shot?

His attacking Iran and Kuwait out of simple ambition and greed was beyond the pale.

Course, at least part of our motive for invading Iraq (most of it, I'd wager) was a desire to keep Japan, China, and Europe our ***** by making them deal with us to get Iraqi oil, with an eye to mounting a duplicate swift and tidy conquest of Iran, placing Iranian oil under our purview as well.

Of course, we're the good guys, so our ambition and greed is different.

#55 12-31-2006, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanStar

Botnst does not seem to agree that since we are 100% responsible for removing the stable government of Iraq, we assume stewardship for it and all of those governed under it. This despite the fact that civil war was an easily foreseen (some had said unavoidable) outcome of our invasion/occupation.

So it is OK to murder million of people as long as you think the government was stable. Do some reading, there were many internal coup attempts and plans that were thwarted by the regime.

Why do you hate Iraqis so much?

#56 12-31-2006, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by engatwork

The best leader that Iraq ever had is about to be hanged

. He is the kind of leader that a country like that needs.
I agree with GS - he was probably responsible for less Iraqi killings than GWB.

GWB killed millions of civilians?

mgburg · #57 12-31-2006, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

The guy kept a lid on things but to call him a great leader in any way is a big stretch. He adored Stalin and did him proud. Did you ever see the video of the meeting when he called out the former associates he accused of plotting against him, and had them taken out and shot?

His attacking Iran and Kuwait out of simple ambition and greed was beyond the pale.

Course, at least part of our motive for invading Iraq (most of it, I'd wager) was a desire to keep Japan, China, and Europe our ***** by making them deal with us to get Iraqi oil, with an eye to mounting a duplicate swift and tidy conquest of Iran, placing Iranian oil under our purview as well.

Of course, we're the good guys, so our ambition and greed is different.

Of course, CMAC, you've got the hard proof of the US's "...desire to keep Japan, China, and Europe our ***** by making them deal with us to get Iraqi oil, with an eye to mounting a duplicate swift and tidy conquest of Iran, placing Iranian oil under our purview as well."

Your opinion.

My opinion? You're very anti-US.

What was so great about Saddam? The guy was a two-faced ba$tard from the word "GO" and his life was full of examples. The fact that ANYONE did business w/the guy is surprising in itself. Why are we arguing about his freaking life?

He might have "told" us something the world didn't already know?

Saddam was a swarmy little ba$tard that managed to stay in power with death and deception. And if it served his purpose, he'd throw in a few terrorists along the way. Why not stir the pot up a little and keep everyone guessing your next move.

I bet Bush-43 said "To hell w/him," and his little UN-games and went ahead and "offed" his dreams.

I don't like the idea that terrorists are able to be financed by whatever source that has a hair-up-its-@$$ and figures that it has no culpability when the terrorists strike.

Anyone that ignores that aspect of terror is an idiot.

If Saddam has been proven to supply just one cent towards terror, then its a good thing that he's dead...let that be a warning to others that have supported terror w/dollars.

If they're identified - let the blade fall.

And if you're going to argue that we can't follow the dollar and fault the giver - I'll show you the tapes from the Nurnberg trials...

Or did you forget that little episode in history?

Hasn't it been said, "To the victor goes the record of history."

I want to be on the winning side for a loooooong time.

Botnst · #58 12-31-2006, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

...
Your saying that we intentionally avoid civilian casualties as an article of law reminds me of when you said that Lt. Calley was tried and convicted for his crimes. Yeah.... and he served 3 1/2 years of house arrest in his quarters...

Viet Nam.

B

Hatterasguy · #59 12-31-2006, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MedMech

His children went down fighting......

Saddam is going out like a pussy.

Yep as the leader he should of went down fighting or blown his brains out. Leaders don't get caught, if they do they suck.

Good riddence, I am glad he died in a dishonarable way as well. I hope they keep the rope short.

cmac2012 · #60 12-31-2006, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Viet Nam.

Lessee, Botsenhammer, the guy who spares no disgust towards any American he perceives as being an apologist for the baby butcherer Saddam regularly, reflexively, poo-poos any mention that we, the white hat wearing US of A butchered countless babies and families in Vittnam for no Goddam good reason.

Splain this contradiction to me.