PDA

View Full Version : Why do people hate Saddam?


Oblisk
12-30-2006, 04:36 AM
I heard many reasons, such as erradicating a village of Islams, the village that Saddam's assassinators came from. I also found this list;

1. The killing of Sunni religious leaders such as Abdul Aziz Al Badri the Imam of Dragh district mosque in Baghdad in 1969, Al Shaikh Nadhum Al Asi from Ubaid tribe in Northern Iraq, Al Shiakh Al Shahrazori, Al Shaikh Umar Shaqlawa, Al Shiakh Rami Al Kirkukly, Al Shiakh Mohamad Shafeeq Al Badri, Abdul Ghani Shindala.
2. The arrest of hundreds of Iraqi Islamic activists and the execution of five religious leaders in 1974.
3. The arrest of thousand of religious people who rose up against the regime and the killing of hundreds of them in the popular uprising of 1977 in which Ayatollah Mohamad Baqir Al Hakim the leader of SCIRI was sentenced to life imprisonment.
4. The arrest, torture and executions of tens of religious scholars and Islamic activists in such as Qasim Shubbar, Qasim Al Mubarqaa in 1979.
5. The arrest, torture and execution of Ayatollah Mohamad baqir Al Sadr and his sistre Amina Al Sadr (Bint Al Huda) in 1980.
6. The war against Iran in 1980 in which hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed, and many doubles of that number were handicapped or missed.
7. The arrest of 90 members of Al Hakim family and the execution of 16 members of that family in 1983 to put pressure on Ayatollah Mohamad Baqir Al Hakim to stop his struggle against Saddam's regime.
8. Using chemical weapons in the North and the South the details of which are below.
9. The occupation of Kuwait which resulted in killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and injuring many doubles of that number in addition to the destruction of Iraq.
10. The assassination of many opposition figures outside Iraq such Haj Sahal Al Salman in UAE in 1981, Sami Mahdi and Ni'ma Mohamad in Pakistan in 1987, Sayed Mahdi Al Hakim in Sudan in 1988, and Shaikh Talib Al Suhail in Lebanon in 1994.
11. The execution of 21 Bath Party leaders in 1979 in Iraq , the assassination of Hardan Al Tikriti former defence Minister in Kuwait in 1973, and the former Prime- Minister Abdul Razzaq Al naef in London 1978.


Discuss Saddam's achievements and why he has a high notority.

I would like to hear stories from both sides, from his supporters to his enemies.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-30-2006, 04:41 AM
I'll start with a few things.

First of all, the kurds were rising up against him and supporting his opposition. Its not like he gassed them just for being kurds. He put down a revolt.

Saddam Hussein was secularlizing a very stubborn and fundamentalist middle east. When you rule over those types of people, you can't be a soft nice guy. That's just nieve. You have to be strong, and Saddam was strong. A lot of people compare him to Bin Laden. That's a horrible analogy, as Bin Laden is a religious extremist, whereas Saddam was a secular leader.

Forza Azzurri
12-30-2006, 04:42 AM
ROFL, it's funny how Saddam did a good job in executing religious nuts, and yet America condemns him for executing these people among others when they themselves are against "fundamentalists" like iran etc..:popcorn:

Mentious
12-30-2006, 04:43 AM
As for Americans, those who "hate Saddam" do so because the media controllers want them to feel that way.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-30-2006, 04:46 AM
As for Americans, those who "hate Saddam" do so because the media controllers want them to feel that way.
I don't think this is the case, as the "jews" who allegedly "control" the media are mainly northern, but the support for the war is mainly southern.

Mentious
12-30-2006, 04:52 AM
"Northern" and "southern" Jews? :confused: The Federalies want us to hate Saddam as well, out of scores of international "bad daddies" who we have no business with.

Jake Featherston
12-30-2006, 06:31 AM
American support for the War in Iraq probably doesn't even reach majority levels in the Old South, yet hatred of Saddam Hussein almost certainly reaches majority levels across America, even in places like New England, where opposition to the war in Iraq is nearly universal. So why do (did) Americans hate Saddam so much? Or, why is Jewish propaganda about Saddam Hussein so successful?

I believe its because after two wars fought against Iraq, the American people have a psychological need to believe Saddam Hussein is a monster. After all, if he's not, then our leaders must be...and that certainly couldn't be the case...could it?

I remember back in the 90s, simple-minded Americans thought they were engaged in wit when they referred to him as "So Damn Insane," yet if you asked them for evidence of his insanity, they just gave you a blank look. Like it never occurred to them that someone who was unpopular might not be so for any good reason....

Jimbo Gomez
12-30-2006, 12:43 PM
Personally, I can say I don't have any deep philosophical reasons. I just hate islam and am glad whenever any westerner kills any important moslem for any reason.

Sulla the Dictator
12-30-2006, 04:44 PM
I remember back in the 90s, simple-minded Americans thought they were engaged in wit when they referred to him as "So Damn Insane," yet if you asked them for evidence of his insanity, they just gave you a blank look.


Maybe because it doesn't occur to them that someone would be so obtuse. After all, why would someone support a third world despot who had a plan to tie American POWs to the front of his tanks, or to detain foreigners in his country and distribute them to target areas.

Maybe they thought it was unbelievable that someone would ask such a question in light of the fact that the man had gassed civilian populations, or that he comitted murder (And allowed his sons to do the same thing, for the slightest of reasons)?

Nah, he fought against American troops. That HAS to make him a stand up guy where you come from.

il ragno
12-30-2006, 05:03 PM
Maybe because it doesn't occur to them that someone would be so obtuse. After all, why would someone support a third world despot who had a plan to tie American POWs to the front of his tanks, or to detain foreigners in his country and distribute them to target areas.

Maybe they thought it was unbelievable that someone would ask such a question in light of the fact that the man had gassed civilian populations, or that he comitted murder (And allowed his sons to do the same thing, for the slightest of reasons)?

Nah, he fought against American troops. That HAS to make him a stand up guy where you come from.

Your post is so full of lies and deliberate distortions that even your use of "and", "the" and "but" is suspect.


why would someone support a third world despot

Yeah, good question. You should ask every President from Teddy Roosevelt on, all of whom were happy to lend despots and murderers the only "support" that counts - money, arms, troops, CIA 'advisors', and official recognition.


....who had a plan to tie American POWs to the front of his tanks...

Dastardly! I wonder where he'd get American POWs from in the first place, though. Oh that's right - from the enemy troops of the nuclear superpower then invading his little shithole country!

...or to detain foreigners in his country and distribute them to target areas...

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's when some tiny bug I'm determined to step on with my thousand times bigger than it shoe struggles any way it can to avoid being crushed to death. It simply ain't morally....you know - kosher.


Maybe they thought it was unbelievable that someone would ask such a question in light of the fact that the man had gassed civilian populations

Oh I dunno - we've dropped A-bombs on civilians - twice! - and we're the very goodest of Good Guys, so I suppose anything's possible.


....or that he comitted murder (And allowed his sons to do the same thing, for the slightest of reasons)?

I assure you, if he did not possess such harsh qualities, he would never have had Al Quaeda scared to death to fuck around in his backyard. Shit, if murder fazed him in the least, we'd never have installed him there in the first place!


Nah, he fought against American troops. That HAS to make him a stand up guy where you come from.

Is that beautiful or what? "Fought against". As in "defended himself from". Gotta throw that against in there, to avoid reminding people we invaded a sovereign nation that had committed no act of aggression against us twice in a dozen years. And remember to yell loud enough to drown out anyone who brings up "April Glaspie", too.

All right, Mr Ailes...I'm ready for my closeup now!

Aryan Imperium
12-30-2006, 05:04 PM
I heard many reasons, such as erradicating a village of Islams, the village that Saddam's assassinators came from. I also found this list;



Discuss Saddam's achievements and why he has a high notority.

I would like to hear stories from both sides, from his supporters to his enemies.

Personally speaking, I loved the guy. `You can`t make an omlette without cracking a few eggs.`

Keystone
12-30-2006, 05:14 PM
Yeah, good question. You should ask every President from Teddy Roosevelt on, all of whom were happy to lend despots and murderers the only "support" that counts - money, arms, troops, CIA 'advisors', and official recognition.
Is that beautiful or what? "Fought against". As in "defended himself from". Gotta throw that against in there, to avoid reminding people we invaded a sovereign nation that had committed no act of aggression against us twice in a dozen years.
Oh how right you are.

WHY CAN"T WE JUST MIND OUR OWN BUSINESS?

Why? Eh? We could have avoided so much trouble in the last 100 years.

Is there a decent Isolationist Party set up somewhere, or do I have to start one?

JohnAFlynn
12-30-2006, 07:34 PM
ROFL, it's funny how Saddam did a good job in executing religious nuts, and yet America condemns him for executing these people among others when they themselves are against "fundamentalists" like iran etc..:popcorn:

It only seems hypocritical if you actually buy the gov't/jewsmedia rationale for ZOG behavior and policies. Saddam wasn't executed because he put down a revolt/killed some kurds 30 years ago. Saddam was executed because he was aware of the jew menace and was opposed to US/Israeli ZOG. We didn't invade Iraq to liberate the Iraqis/shut down non-existent WMD programs, we invaded Iraq at the behest of the jews, and as part of an overall strategy to make the Middle East safe for jews. We aren't sabre-rattling against Iran because anyone actually believes they might have nukes anytime soon, we are doing this because Iran is, like Iraq, jew-aware, and another obstacle to making the ME safe for jews. When you understand the jewish problem you can interpret world events properly and recognize why things occur the way they do, and that everything is going according to plan for these kikes. No hypocrisy here!

JohnAFlynn
12-30-2006, 07:37 PM
I don't think this is the case, as the "jews" who allegedly "control" the media are mainly northern, but the support for the war is mainly southern.

Yes, but the media is not geographically restricted to the North. While it is true that the jew who writes the script for the cable news anchors may be from New York City, the lemming patriotards who are most influenced/persuaded by the kike script, are from the South. In the age of television, physical proximity to jews is not necessary to be subject to their mindwashing.

JohnAFlynn
12-30-2006, 07:42 PM
Your post is so full of lies and deliberate distortions that even your use of "and", "the" and "but" is suspect.


why would someone support a third world despot

Yeah, good question. You should ask every President from Teddy Roosevelt on, all of whom were happy to lend despots and murderers the only "support" that counts - money, arms, troops, CIA 'advisors', and official recognition.


....who had a plan to tie American POWs to the front of his tanks...

Dastardly! I wonder where he'd get American POWs from in the first place, though. Oh that's right - from the enemy troops of the nuclear superpower then invading his little shithole country!

...or to detain foreigners in his country and distribute them to target areas...

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's when some tiny bug I'm determined to step on with my thousand times bigger than it shoe struggles any way it can to avoid being crushed to death. It simply ain't morally....you know - kosher.


Maybe they thought it was unbelievable that someone would ask such a question in light of the fact that the man had gassed civilian populations

Oh I dunno - we've dropped A-bombs on civilians - twice! - and we're the very goodest of Good Guys, so I suppose anything's possible.


....or that he comitted murder (And allowed his sons to do the same thing, for the slightest of reasons)?

I assure you, if he did not possess such harsh qualities, he would never have had Al Quaeda scared to death to fuck around in his backyard. Shit, if murder fazed him in the least, we'd never have installed him there in the first place!


Nah, he fought against American troops. That HAS to make him a stand up guy where you come from.

Is that beautiful or what? "Fought against". As in "defended himself from". Gotta throw that against in there, to avoid reminding people we invaded a sovereign nation that had committed no act of aggression against us twice in a dozen years. And remember to yell loud enough to drown out anyone who brings up "April Glaspie", too.

All right, Mr Ailes...I'm ready for my closeup now!


:thanks:


"You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later."

<flame deleted>
12-30-2006, 07:54 PM
Saddam was a secularist Nationalist and Socialistic leader. He didn`t fit in the stereotype of crazy muslimfundamentalist oil-mongering sheik. That`s why he had to die and are the islamfundamentalist Kuwait and Saudi Arabia still the biggest friends of Bush and his goons

Sulla the Dictator
12-30-2006, 11:21 PM
Your post is so full of lies and deliberate distortions that even your use of "and", "the" and "but" is suspect.


Except that you don't dispute a single thing I said. You just whine and simper about how Papa Saddam just has to do these repulsive things because he can't match US power.

Thus, he HAS to occupy Kuwait, or gas Kurds, or shoot hundreds of thousands of people, or use little British boys as human sheilds. Poor Saddam just HAS to do that.

Whose lap are you going to curl up in next? Our little commies have a fetish for Kim Jong Il. Maybe you should ask them for the brochure.

WFHermans
12-30-2006, 11:22 PM
People hate Saddam because the kikes that control the media ordered them to do that.

Keystone
12-30-2006, 11:41 PM
People hate Saddam because the kikes that control the media ordered them to do that.
Hermans, this isn't VNN. Why bother?

Petyr Baelish
12-30-2006, 11:49 PM
Except that you don't dispute a single thing I said.

il ragno does an excellent job demonstrating why American hatred for Saddam is irrational, idiotic and completely unjusitifed given the long neo-liberal tradition the US government has of supporting sadistic despots from Ngo Dinh Diem to Noriega to Pinochet. Incidentally, that infamous sack of neo-liberal shit, Pinochet, recently hit the bucket himself, yet nearly no public celebration and gloating is seen, despite the fact that he was much in the same league as Saddam.

Keystone
12-30-2006, 11:53 PM
il ragno does an excellent job demonstrating why American hatred for Saddam is irrational, idiotic and completely unjusitifed given the long neo-liberal tradition the US government has of supporting vile despots from Ngo Dinh Diem to Noriega to Pinochet.
I hate Hussein because he was a murderous dictator, not because my government told me to. It's because of my own values.

There are many like me. Stop treating whole societies like they're a paper you're writing for school. It's just not so.

Petyr Baelish
12-30-2006, 11:56 PM
I hate Hussein because he was a murderous dictator, not because my government told me to. It's because of my own values.

Did you pop open a beer to celebrate when Pinochet bit the dust? Do you know any Joe Sixpack who did? You are far more susceptible to government brainwashing than you care to admit, or perhaps realize.

Der Sozialist
12-31-2006, 12:08 AM
Except that you don't dispute a single thing I said. You just whine and simper about how Papa Saddam just has to do these repulsive things because he can't match US power.

Thus, he HAS to occupy Kuwait, or gas Kurds, or shoot hundreds of thousands of people, or use little British boys as human sheilds. Poor Saddam just HAS to do that.

Whose lap are you going to curl up in next? Our little commies have a fetish for Kim Jong Il. Maybe you should ask them for the brochure.

How do you feel about the USA’s involvement in securing Saddam Hussein’s regime? Or the USA’s sale of chemical weapons to Iraq? Or USA support of Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran?

Keystone
12-31-2006, 12:10 AM
Did you pop open a beer to celebrate when Pinochet bit the dust?
No.
You are far more susceptible to government brainwashing than you care to admit, or perhaps realize.
Because I don't agree with you? Why should I shed any tears over the execution of Hussein, other than my govt is involved in it, contrary to our Constitution?

Petyr Baelish
12-31-2006, 12:14 AM
No.

Alright. Both were big mean dictators, but only one of them has been consistently villified by the media so as to draw a fruadulent link in the American psyche between him and 9/11 (and Islamic terrorism in general). I'll give you a hint - it wasn't Pinochet.

Because I don't agree with you? Why should I shed any tears over the execution of Hussein, other than my govt is involved in it, contrary to our Constitution?

Did I say that you should 'shed tears' over Hussein's execution? I merely find it extremely amusing to see gullibility and naivete masquerading as moral outrage. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that your hatred of Saddam is not at least partly due to what you've absorbed from the Western media, given that you don't seem particularly incensed over the deeds of other sadistic despots propped up by the US.

Der Sozialist
12-31-2006, 12:23 AM
I was 10 days old during the gassing of Halabja—does anyone, who was obviously much older, remember if it was a media scandal or ignored? I believe that it was ignored and only made an issue during Gulf War 1 probably because Kurdish separatists wanted to aide Iran.

Either way, the USA supported Saddam throughout ’88 even with the knowledge of the gassing—some here like Sulla should look closely at their own governments before looking at third-world despots.

Keystone
12-31-2006, 12:26 AM
Did I say that you should 'shed tears' over Hussein's execution? I merely find it extremely amusing when I see gullibility and naivete masquerading as moral outrage. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that your hatred of Saddam is not at least partly due to what you've absorbed from the Western media, given that you don't seem particularly incensed over the deeds of other sadistic despots propped up by the US.
I hate dictators for what they are: megalomaniacs beating down ordinary people for their own personal power.

I'm an Isolationist through and through. I don't approve of the US being involved in any nation building or meddling at all. I'm in the tiny minority in my country.

tempus fugit
12-31-2006, 12:34 AM
I don't see why Hussein is considered wonderful, or a martyr. Sure, he was secular in a non-secular part of the world, but he was quite clearly a mass murderer.

Right?

Der Sozialist
12-31-2006, 12:35 AM
I hate dictators for what they are: megalomaniacs beating down ordinary people for their own personal power.

I'm an Isolationist through and through. I don't approve of the US being involved in any nation building or meddling at all. I'm in the tiny minority in my country.

The USA was not just engaged in 'minor' nation building but supplying chemical weapons to Hussein so he could gas Iranian soldieries and Kurdish separatists—many of which were civilians. If Saddam Hussein is sentenced then so should Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George Bush among others. But they won’t be sentenced.

Der Sozialist
12-31-2006, 12:37 AM
I don't see why Hussein is considered wonderful, or a martyr. Sure, he was secular in a non-secular part of the world, but he was quite clearer a mass murderer.

Right?

He was small-time compared to his "friends" in Washington.

Keystone
12-31-2006, 12:45 AM
The USA was not just engaged in 'minor' nation building but supplying chemical weapons to Hussein so he could gas Iranian soldieries and Kurdish separatists—many of which were civilians. If Saddam Hussein is sentenced then so should Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George Bush among others. But they won’t be sentenced.
Reagan's dead so he missed the boat.

No, the others you mentioned won't be sentenced to hang. I never differentiated between minor nation building or any other kind. The US should cease to be involved in any sort, immediately.

Petyr Baelish
12-31-2006, 01:01 AM
How do you feel about the USA’s involvement in securing Saddam Hussein’s regime? Or the USA’s sale of chemical weapons to Iraq? Or USA support of Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran?

LOL, I distinctly remeber The Ugly American claiming that Saddam was actually an ally of Tehran, and that the invasion or Iraq, and subsequent destruction of the Iraqi government somehow compromised Iranian influence in the region :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: .

The chasmic ignorance which your average American displays vis-a-vis world affairs would be riotously funny if the effects thereof were not outright tragic.

Petyr Baelish
12-31-2006, 01:07 AM
I just hate islam and am glad whenever any westerner kills any important moslem for any reason.

Animal hatred is hardly a sound basis for foreign policy.

Personally, I prefer a pragmatic Muslim who crushes fundmamentalism, gives women the right to vote, allows liquor and forearms to be sold openly, and appoints Christians to high government posts to a suicide-bombing Al-Quaeda fanatic, but that's just me. Whatever the case, Saddam did more to supress Islamic fundamentalism than the entire rabble of effeminate chardonnay-sipping, cock-smoking faggots that comprises the ruling class of Europe, your beloved senile pedophile in the Vatican included.

Starr
12-31-2006, 03:05 AM
The question could be very simply answered by just saying they believe everything they see on tv and everything their elected officials tell them.

Mentious
12-31-2006, 03:17 AM
It seems to that most kings and strongmen go hard against their internal enemies. But Iraq was a safe and orderly society prior to our destructive invasion. This is a people that probably needed the type of leader that they had.

I wonder if there are any African dictators and strongmen who have a worse approach to their constituents than that of Saddam. I wonder if we will even ever hear about the obscene outrages of black heads of state, much less invade their country in righteous indignation to "take them out." (Because we represent sweetness and light and want to spread it everywhere.)

OVERWATCH
12-31-2006, 03:24 AM
As for Americans, those who "hate Saddam" do so because the media controllers want them to feel that way.
This is not inaccurate. Having seen your typical, geopolitically-challenged American, using Saddam for a convenient verbal punching bag since 1991, it essentially boils down to: "Saddam thinks he can start war with Uhmurika. We'll kick his ass! USA is #1!" I have seen this viewpoint innumerable times through the years, and not until ~2002 did I see people start apeing a more sophisticated line, such as "Saddam is a terr'ist, and is responsible for 9/11! He will nuke us!. We need to turn that place into a glass parking lot."

Starr
12-31-2006, 03:50 AM
This is not inaccurate. Having seen your typical, geopolitically-challenged American, using Saddam for a convenient verbal punching bag since 1991, it essentially boils down to: "Saddam thinks he can start war with Uhmurika. We'll kick his ass! USA is #1!" I have seen this viewpoint innumerable times through the years,."

I heard a lot of this kind of thinking after 9/11, especially, not just about Saddam, per se, but about middle eastern people in general. Some of it, especially from males bordered on the genocidal, "lets go get/kill/bomb them all" variety.:eek: "we will show them what happens when they mess with the U.S.A!!!!"

Sulla the Dictator
12-31-2006, 07:31 AM
il ragno does an excellent job demonstrating why American hatred for Saddam is irrational, idiotic and completely unjusitifed given the long neo-liberal tradition the US government has of supporting sadistic despots from Ngo Dinh Diem to Noriega to Pinochet.


Most dictators the US have supported have been small potatos compared to Saddam, but I'm glad you brought that up. We have been LOUDLY CRITICISED by people like you, as well as foreign and domestic leftists for having anything to do with anyone other than democratic states.

Which goes to show how insincere your outrage is. We do business with despots and you're unhappy. We topple them and you're unhappy. America is the place you ACTUALLY have a problem, and thus there will always be a critique with our policy.

Il ragno showed absolutely nothing. He just whines that it is ALLOWED for shitheels like Saddam to comit atrocities because he doesn't have nuclear weapons, whatever sense that makes. Its a bit amusing to me, to see all the whimpering which surfaces after the broken neck of Papa Saddam.


Incidentally, that infamous sack of neo-liberal shit, Pinochet, recently hit the bucket himself, yet nearly no public celebration and gloating is seen, despite the fact that he was much in the same league as Saddam.

Ha ha ha, on what planet is Pinochet in the same league as Saddam Hussein?

Der Sozialist
12-31-2006, 07:33 AM
Ha ha ha, on what planet is Pinochet in the same league as Saddam Hussein?

On the planet earth, Sulla.

Jake Featherston
12-31-2006, 07:39 AM
I was 10 days old during the gassing of Halabja—does anyone, who was obviously much older, remember if it was a media scandal or ignored?

I recall reading an article about Saddam Hussein gassing Khurds, I believe back in '86. It was in Newsweek. But no, for the most part, only political junkies were more than dimly aware anything like that was happening. It wasn't a big story, except for maybe one week. Not until Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, anyway.

Jake Featherston
12-31-2006, 07:42 AM
Personally, I prefer a pragmatic Muslim who crushes fundmamentalism, gives women the right to vote, allows liquor and forearms to be sold openly, and appoints Christians to high government posts to a suicide-bombing Al-Quaeda fanatic, but that's just me. Whatever the case, Saddam did more to supress Islamic fundamentalism than the entire rabble of effeminate chardonnay-sipping, cock-smoking faggots that comprises the ruling class of Europe, your beloved senile pedophile in the Vatican included.

A little gratuitously rude to the Pope, but otherwise, a pretty fair analysis.

il ragno
12-31-2006, 08:25 AM
President Bush recognized that the age of dictators was ending, that the era of the popular will had arrived. He and his advisers put us back on the moral side of history.

Bush revealed the bankruptcy of the European-designed system of international relations. An unspoken code agreed between kings and czars, emperors and kaisers, had protected rulers - however monstrous - for centuries, while ignoring the suffering of the masses. The result was that any Third World thug who seized a presidential palace could ravage his country as long as his crimes remained within his "sovereign" borders.

Bush acted. Breaking Europe's cynical rules, our forces invaded a dictatorship to liberate its population.

And suddenly, the world was no longer safe for tyrants.

Sulla, when exactly do we get to hang Mugabe?

What's that? We don't? Gee; I guess some murderous tyrants just don't measure up in the Evil Dept.

If I were Brotha Robert, I'd avoid antagonizing Israel in any way, and stay safely on the Good Despot list. Or better yet, get hold of some nuclear weapons - then I could do anything I want to anyone I want, and not have to worry about an American response.

WFHermans
12-31-2006, 09:50 AM
Mugabe is a good kosher negro, because he buys the equipment for his police from Israel who gets it for free from America. Sulla loves the guy!

Petyr Baelish
12-31-2006, 10:02 AM
[...]We have been LOUDLY CRITICISED by people like you, as well as foreign and domestic leftists for having anything to do with anyone other than democratic states.[...]

Who is 'we' and who are 'people like you'?


Which goes to show how insincere your outrage is. We do business with despots and you're unhappy. We topple them and you're unhappy.

Are you insinuating that I should not have a problem with a perifuous foreign policy that amounts primarily to installing and deposing sadistic murderers as rulers of various banana republics at whim to further a neo-liberal geopolitical agenda?

America is the place you ACTUALLY have a problem, and thus there will always be a critique with our policy.

I love America and the American people (being one myself). However, I have no great affection for the cabal of ill-repute that currently occupies the White House - these people are, at the very best, complete idiots, and at worst, irredeemable traitors.

Ha ha ha, on what planet is Pinochet in the same league as Saddam Hussein?

I don't know about Pinochet, but Pervez Musharraf and Crown Prince Abdullah, both of whom receive billions of dollars in U.S. aid and are the beneficiaries of a very friendly U.S. foreign policy, consitently manage to land a spot in Amnesty International's annual list of the world's 10 Worst Dictators.

Petyr Baelish
12-31-2006, 10:13 AM
Sulla, when exactly do we get to hang Mugabe?

Mugabe is neither here nor there. I am, however, interested as to when the B.A. will sever ties with staunch allies and consistent listees on Amnesty International's Ten Worst Dictators King Adbullah and Pervez Musharraf. I am also interested as to when the Bush admnistatrion will sever diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China, as Hu Jintao has also been listed as one of the world's most brutal and repressive dictators.

If Sulla sincerely believes that the Bush admnistration invaded Iraq out of moral outrage, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn he may be interested in buying (right after I am done selling him something that came out of my ass last night). There is no 'good' or 'bad' in geopolitics; it's a game played by amoral, corrupt men who are interested primarily in maximizing their own power and influence. Even those who start out naive and idealistic soon grow very jaded with the entire situation and either leave it or join the ranks of the corrupt and greedy. At the very least, to suggest that a country that maintains favorable diplomatic and trade relations (including billions in foreign aid) with some of the world's most universally condemned despots (Adbullah, Musharraf, Jintao, etc...?) prtactices a foreign policy committed to 'liberating the oppressed from tyranny' is outright disingenuous, and anyone who sincerely believes such crock is an idiot indeed. However, I strongly doubt that Sulla is an imbecile, which raises even more troubling questions about his motivation for making such patently false claims...

JohnAFlynn
01-01-2007, 01:30 AM
Mugabe is a good kosher negro, because he buys the equipment for his police from Israel who gets it for free from America. Sulla loves the guy!

When do we get to hang Sulla? He is a self-proclaimed Dictator, after all!

Sulla the Dictator
01-01-2007, 03:09 AM
Sulla, when exactly do we get to hang Mugabe?

What's that? We don't? Gee; I guess some murderous tyrants just don't measure up in the Evil Dept.


Did you know, il ragno, that in the world of crime, some people get away with murder despite the best efforts of the police department? They never caught Jack the Ripper, or the guy responsible for the Black Dahlia killing. What does this mean? Homicide departments MUST be closed down, and death row MUST release its prisoners, becuase its SO UNFAIR to punish ANY murderer when some escape?

That makes a great deal of sense to you?

Keystone
01-01-2007, 03:13 AM
Did you know, il ragno, that in the world of crime, some people get away with murder despite the best efforts of the police department? They never caught Jack the Ripper, or the guy responsible for the Black Dahlia killing. What does this mean? Homicide departments MUST be closed down, and death row MUST release its prisoners, becuase its SO UNFAIR to punish ANY murderer when some escape?

That makes a great deal of sense to you?
I suppose he wants you to admit that you wouldn't want Mugabe killed because he's African and you are a neocon jew-lover, blah.....

It makes your eyes cross, this kind of thing.

Petyr Baelish
01-01-2007, 04:12 AM
Ha ha ha, on what planet is Pinochet in the same league as Saddam Hussein?


...
But the former dictator was unmoved. A powerful, feared figure for years after the return of democracy, Pinochet left army headquarters surrounded by his usual squad of bodyguards and was asked by reporters what he thought of the discovery that some of the coffins held two bodies each.

"A good cemetery space-saving measure," the general replied with a grin.

The quip caused an uproar. Reprimanded by his civilian successor, President Patricio Alwyin, the general acknowledged his words were "probably unfortunate."

It was the closest to an apology that Pinochet's victims would ever get.

For many Chileans, the remark was emblematic of Pinochet's lack of repentance, his disregard for those he considered his enemies.

According to an official report, 3,197 people were killed for political reasons in the 17 years after Pinochet overthrew the democratically elected government of Marxist President Salvador Allende. More than 30,000 were tortured, many more illegally imprisoned, thousands forced into exile.

A devote Roman Catholic, Pinochet often said he believed he acted on a God-given mission to fight communism. In a 2003 interview with a Miami-based Spanish-language television station, he said he saw no reason to ask forgiveness for human rights violations committed during his right-wing dictatorship.


Source (http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2714962)

themistocles
01-02-2007, 01:40 PM
On the planet earth, Sulla.

Does anyone remember how Pinochet was "toppled"? Anyone?

koch curve
01-02-2007, 01:46 PM
anyone remember when pinochet started a war with iran that killed millions of people?

Hrolf Kraki
01-02-2007, 03:49 PM
Many Iraqis hate him because he killed and tortured his own people. However I am absolutely baffled as to why so many Americans I encounter hate him. Who the hell cares about the Iraqi people? I don't.

Petyr Baelish
01-02-2007, 07:47 PM
anyone remember when pinochet started a war with iran that killed millions of people?

No, but I do remeber when President Bush started one with Iraq that has a kill tally of 650,000 and counting.

JohnAFlynn
01-02-2007, 08:21 PM
No, but I do remeber when President Bush started one with Iraq that has a kill tally of 650,000 and counting.


"You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later."

Der Sozialist
01-02-2007, 08:23 PM
anyone remember when pinochet started a war with iran that killed millions of people?

Saddam Hussein would never have gone to war, with Iran, without the promise of US dollars and assistance. The Reagan administration is just as responsible for that war as Hussein, possibly even more so.

If, we remove Kurdish civilians deaths—in that, most were killed during the Iran-Iraq war where they were clearly agitating for Iran and thus, making them part of the war—Hussein probably killed less than Pinochet. Remember, besides the Kurds, Hussein was only on trial for the deaths of ~140 Shiites—I am guessing that the other deaths that were attributed to Hussein were completely legal and within the framework of Iraqi law.