Saddam Trial Flawed: HRW

[AvarAllahNoor]

So you are suggesting that without an invasion Saddam wouldn't be on trial? Quite perceptive.

Who was going to try him? the kurds? the shia? Please enlighten me! Because had saddam not turned against US, he'd still be sitting in his gold palaces.

 

[Keltoi]

I wish people would apply that logic when judging Muslims who allegedly do nothing to stop certain violent minorities committing atrocities.

I'm not saying you're like that. I agree with the logic. Blame the blameworthy.

These are two different problems. Those who commit atrocities and those who silently ignore them. Both are a problem. On the subject you raised, I do not blame Islam as a religion for terrorism and suicide murder, I blame people. On the issue of Saddam and Iraq, many in the West knew of his intentions and the danger he posed to groups within Iraq and did nothing until it was politically beneficial to do so. That is another problem in itself, but a far different one than being the homicidal maniac himself(Saddam).

 

[Woodrow]

Because had saddam not turned against US, he'd still be sitting in his gold palaces.

Very true.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

The "West" is no more responsible for what Saddam Hussein did as they were for what Hitler did. Yes, people were aware of the danger and the intentions, but it wasn't the U.S. who pulled the trigger or made the decision. Blaming the West seems to be in fashion around here, but let us put the blame where it belongs, on the guy in charge who ordered the mass killing of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.

For a Christian you only seem to see things black and white. Saddam didn't kill 6 million (although numbers are not relevant)

If Hussein is executed for his crimes, then Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Pinnochet, Kissinger, Reagan, Thatcher, and endless amounts of other leaders should be too. (those that still live) His crimes, although extremely horrendous, are no worse than hundreds of others who due to propaganda are heroes. Hussein used chemical weapons, but so did the USA in Vietnam and Desert Storm, as did Thatcher in the Falklands.

All as bad as each other!

Btw - We're in Iraq now, have we made it safer??

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Very true.

Of course it's true! - I just get frustrated when people jump on the bandwagon without checking the whole facts!

 

[Keltoi]

Who was going to try him? the kurds? the shia? Please enlighten me! Because had saddam not turned against US, he'd still be sitting in his gold palaces.

Actually, the U.S. turned against Saddam Hussein. During the 70's and 80's, the U.S. supported Iraq because of what was percieved as the greatest threat to stability in the region, which was Iran. Throw the Cold War in the mix and it starts to make sense. That doesn't mean the U.S. wasn't supporting a guy they knew was going to be a problem, but the policy makers in D.C. weighed the pros and cons and decided supporting Saddam Hussein during this time period was best for U.S. interests. This "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality has been used since the dawn of time. After the Iraq-Iran War, and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. changed its tune, especially after Saddam invaded Kuwait.

As for the trial, I fail to see your point really. Of course the Kurds and Shia couldn't put Saddam on trial, he dominated them. The U.S. invaded and suddenly those who were once dominated found themselves on equal footing with the old regime. Are you angry that the Sunni aren't dominating the Kurds and Shia anymore? What exactly would you have preferred?

 

[Kidman]

The "West" is no more responsible for what Saddam Hussein did as they were for what Hitler did. Yes, people were aware of the danger and the intentions, but it wasn't the U.S. who pulled the trigger or made the decision. Blaming the West seems to be in fashion around here, but let us put the blame where it belongs, on the guy in charge who ordered the mass killing of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.

True... but they did "help" Saddam in the same ways they are helping Israel kill off innocent Palestinians today!

 

[Keltoi]

True... but they did "help" Saddam in the same ways they are helping Israel kill off innocent Palestinians today!

The propoganda aside, I suppose you are referring to economic and military aid? The truth is that Israel has little need of U.S. military aid at this point. In fact, Israel is actually fairly important to the United States because of their new Thor anti-IED explosive technology.

 

[Hisbul_Aziz]

So i wonder what the U.S is gonna pick this is defiantly a tough situation :exhausted

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Actually, the U.S. turned against Saddam Hussein. During the 70's and 80's, the U.S. supported Iraq because of what was percieved as the greatest threat to stability in the region, which was Iran. Throw the Cold War in the mix and it starts to make sense. That doesn't mean the U.S. wasn't supporting a guy they knew was going to be a problem, but the policy makers in D.C. weighed the pros and cons and decided supporting Saddam Hussein during this time period was best for U.S. interests. This "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality has been used since the dawn of time. After the Iraq-Iran War, and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. changed its tune, especially after Saddam invaded Kuwait.

As for the trial, I fail to see your point really. Of course the Kurds and Shia couldn't put Saddam on trial, he dominated them. The U.S. invaded and suddenly those who were once dominated found themselves on equal footing with the old regime. Are you angry that the Sunni aren't dominating the Kurds and Shia anymore? What exactly would you have preferred?

Saddam had an extended favorable history with the US up until the invasion of Kuwait. So why did they not stop him killing those kurds for whom you seem to express SO much love for all of a sudden?

Let's 'liberate' Darfur, is that a wothy cause? Oh yes, let the African Union deal with that....:rollseyes

Read the above posts, i said he should be held acccountable but stop making out we're ridding the world of the Anti Christ!

 

[Keltoi]

For a Christian you only seem to see things black and white. Saddam didn't kill 6 million (although numbers are not relevant)

If Hussein is executed for his crimes, then Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Pinnochet, Kissinger, Reagan, Thatcher, and endless amounts of other leaders should be too. (those that still live) His crimes, although extremely horrendous, are no worse than hundreds of others who due to propaganda are heroes. Hussein used chemical weapons, but so did the USA in Vietnam and Desert Storm, as did Thatcher in the Falklands.

All as bad as each other!

Btw - We're in Iraq now, have we made it safer??

For a Christian huh? Okay, for a Sikh you seem pick and choose what things you wish to believe. There is no evidence of any chemical weapons use by the U.S. in Iraq, unless you are referring to white phosphorous, which is used with many tank shells because they do major damage to the structure of enemy tanks. As for Vietnam, yes they were used, primarily to clear jungle undergrowth. Completely off topic of course.

Saddam Hussein purposely and maliciously slaughtered Kurdish men, women, and children, not to mention the thousands of others he killed in torture chambers, rape rooms, and the old fashioned beheading in front of wives and children. You can believe other world leaders deserve to be punished too, that is obviously your right, but does that really equate to Saddam being abused because he is answering for his crimes?

 

[Keltoi]

Saddam had an extended favorable history with the US up until the invasion of Kuwait. So why did they not stop him killing those kurds for whom you seem to express SO much love for all of a sudden?

Let's 'liberate' Darfur, is that a wothy cause? Oh yes, let the African Union deal with that....:rollseyes

Read the above posts, i said he should be held acccountable but stop making out we're ridding the world of the Anti Christ!

I don't believe I ever mentioned the anti-Christ. As for stopping Saddam from killing the Kurds, I'm sure we all wish that had happened. Just as we all wish the world had stopped the genocide in Germany, Rwanda, and yes, Darfur.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

As for stopping Saddam from killing the Kurds, I'm sure we all wish that had happened. Just as we all wish the world had stopped the genocide in Germany, Rwanda, and yes, Darfur.

Well, at least we agree on something.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

You can believe other world leaders deserve to be punished too, that is obviously your right, but does that really equate to Saddam being abused because he is answering for his crimes?

No! He should be tried, but your failure to recognise the rest who are responsible baffles me!

Like i said, is Iraq any safer now it's under our control?

 

[Woodrow]

No! He should be tried, but your failure to recognise the rest who are responsible baffles me!

Like i said, is Iraq any safer now it's under our control?

No Iraq is even less safe at the moment. However I think a big question needs to be answered. What is going to happen when the US and other forces pull out?

We are responsible for a big mess in Irag and have pushed Iraq into chaos. We have a responsibility to repair the damage.

What is the best way to repair what we have done? Or is it best to just get out and let the country become whatever it becomes?

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

No Iraq is even less safe at the moment. However I think a big question needs to be answered. What is going to happen when the US and other forces pull out?

We are responsible for a big mess in Irag and have pushed Iraq into chaos. We have a responsibility to repair the damage.

What is the best way to repair what we have done? Or is it best to just get out and let the country become whatever it becomes?

It's Chaos now. It can't get any worse really. - And to be honest, i have no idea what the solution is!

 

[glo]

I doubt if there is any way that the trial could have been conducted without it being flawed. I think the only questions are "Was it a fair trial and was Justice served?"

What do you think, Woodrow?
Is justice done by Saddam getting the death penalty?

Peace

 

[Snowflake]

What do you think, Woodrow?
Is justice done by Saddam getting the death penalty?

Peace

I believe no crime goes unpunished If it isn't punished in this world then we know it will be in the next. I think people are finding the death penalty a little harsh because saddam's fate is in the spotlight and his victims are just a statistic, which kind of makes their tragedy surreal.

No harm can come to anyone if Allah doesn't will it. If that's the death penalty then so be it. He Alone is the Decider of fates.

 

[ManchesterFolk]

If Saddam was not to be put to death every member would say it was a "western conspiracy" and how the USA did this trial unfairly. There is no winnign here. This thread has nothing to do with the trial or case, or if it was fair for that matter, it has to do with bashing the west because if you don't go over a week not doing it, I have a feeling some people here would implode.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

If Saddam was not to be put to death every member would say it was a "western conspiracy" and how the USA did this trial unfairly. There is no winnign here. This thread has nothing to do with the trial or case, or if it was fair for that matter, it has to do with bashing the west because if you don't go over a week not doing it, I have a feeling some people here would implode.

lol - Not on my part. I agree with most things. But saying we should all just agree with what has happened without questioning is foolish.

I don't hate the west. Sikhs have intergrated very well into society.