You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-16   16-40   41-65   66-90   91-115   116-140     
 
Author Message
25 new of 140 responses total.
eprom
response 16 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 14 22:48 UTC 2003

hmmm....

from the video footage on the major networks, I could have swore I saw 
the iraqi's waving red flags with a yellow hammer and sickle logo.
jmsaul
response 17 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 01:04 UTC 2003

Re #15:  Various Saudis, including their government, have been pouring money
         into Wahhabi outreach programs and related Islamic charities for
         decades.  I'm sure a lot of that money wound up with Al Qaeda.

Re #16:  We can only hope.  At least Communism is secular, and intolerant
         of religious radicals.
richard
response 18 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 01:40 UTC 2003

Saddam's trial is going to make O.J Simpson's trial seem like it got little
coverage in comparison.  I hope they put it off until after next year's
electon, so it doesn't get politicized.  Saddam will need OJ's Dream Team of
JOhnny Cochran, F. Lee Bailey and Robert Shapiro, plus Alan Derschwitz and
the guy defending Michael Jackson and every other great defense lawyer to
avoid execution
other
response 19 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 02:49 UTC 2003

Saddam will be executed, and no great lawyers will be able to do 
anything about it, even if they do turn out to be qualified to 
represent clients under the system that will try him.

You sound like you're rather gleefully anticipating the spectacle.  
Personally, I'm dreading the gargantuan effort it will take to avoid 
being sickened by it.
jp2
response 20 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 03:01 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

jep
response 21 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 03:06 UTC 2003

I'm glad Saddam has been captured.  I was glad when he was removed 
from power and still think it was a good thing.

I am still upset that I was misled into supporting the war in part by 
false guarantees of finding nuclear weapons.  Capture Saddam, bin 
Laden, and 50 other huge terrorist figures, and that one still isn't 
going away.  The phrase, "Oops!  We invaded another country, it was a 
mistake" doesn't work well for me.
russ
response 22 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 04:27 UTC 2003

Re #4:  Terrorists require nothing, true.

However, consider the environment.  The Saddam Fedayeen no
longer have any authority figure behind them.  Neither do
the other Ba'athists trying to get rid of the coalition
forces; their prospects of regaining their old perquesites
under a restored Saddam regime just went from slim to zero.
And the anti-Ba'ath forces are energized.  This is going
to make it much harder for the foreign jihadis to operate,
as they are much more likely to be reported than before
(perhaps even by Ba'athists trying to curry favor).

This is not a good day to be a jihadi in Iraq.  Thank goodness.

Interestingly enough, the conspiracy theory that Saddam was
already in American custody just waiting to be trotted out when
Bush needed a PR boost has just taken a serious hit; the problems
with Kellogg, Brown and Root overcharging the DoD might have been
sufficiently dire in some people's eyes, but are not convincing.
jmsaul
response 23 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 04:41 UTC 2003

Re #20:  If Hussein donated to them, he's one of many.  Most of whom are our
         allies.  That's messed up, that is.

Re #21:  Meanwhile, the Saudis had more to do with 9/11 than Iraq, and we
         didn't invade them.  Iran actually *has* a nuclear weapons program,
         and we didn't invade them.  Hmm...

Re #22:  I've never heard anyone advance the theory that they've had Saddam
         on ice all this time.  I've heard a theory that they've been holding
         back evidence on WMDs for the election, but if they had Saddam
         they would have let us know pretty quick.
richard
response 24 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 04:57 UTC 2003

The question now becomes, "Did the ends justify the means?"  Yes, we captured
Saddam but at what cost, how many billions of dollars and how many american
lives to get this moment.  Was the price too high?  You know that we almos
certainly just didn't stumble upon that hole he was hiding in.  There was a
$25 million bounty we had on Saddam's head.  One of Saddam's ex-friends may
soon have a nice fat swiss bank account
scott
response 25 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 05:09 UTC 2003

Re 23:  Actually *I* have speculated, here on Grex, that perhaps Saddam had
been captured long ago.
sj2
response 26 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 05:15 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

sj2
response 27 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 05:21 UTC 2003

Re #24, you are forgetting the half-a-million or so Iraqi 
children who died for the lack of food and medicines during a decade 
of sanctions. It is appalling, how the international community can 
demonize Saddam for it and not take any blame for that??!!

The Lancet
Volume 351(9103)
February 28, 1998             
p 657
------------------------------------------
Does Iraq's depleted uranium pose a health risk?

Birchard, Karen
-------------------------------------------
The office of the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights has
received a report hypothesising that the current health and 
environmental problems in Iraq may be linked to US and British weapons 
left behind after the Gulf War in 1991.

The literature review, compiled by Bill Griffin, an Irish petrochemical
engineer, with access to material in both the West and Iraq, points out
that the mortality rates among children have increased sharply: as 
many as 500 children a day are dying in Iraq along with cancer rates. 
He proposes that radioactive waste caused by projectiles containing 
depleted uranium (DU) may have played a part. DU weapons were 
developed by the Pentagon in the late 1970s as anti-tank armour-
piercing shells but were not used in combat until the Gulf War. DU is 
a radioactive by-product of the enrichment process used to make 
nuclear fuel rods and nuclear bombs.

The report notes that the death rate per 1000 Iraqi children under 5 
years of age increased from 2.3 in 1989 to 16.6 in 1993. Cases of 
lymphoblastic leukaemia have more than quadrupled with other cancers 
also increasing "at an alarming rate". In men, lung, bladder, 
bronchus, skin, and stomach cancers show the highest increase. In 
women, the highest increases are in breast and bladder cancer, and non-
Hodgkin lymphoma. Diseases such as osteosarcoma, teratoma, 
nephroblastoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma are also increasing with, 
according to the review, the most affected being children
and young men. Congenital malformations have also increased, as have
diseases of the immune system.

The review says that a confidential report by the British Atomic Energy
Authority in 1991 estimated that at least 40 tonnes of DU were 
dispersed in Kuwait and Iraq; but according to Greenpeace-based on US 
government information released under the Freedom of Information Act-
"over 300 tonnes of DU mostly in fragmented form (dust) were left on 
the battlefields in Iraq and Kuwait".
--------------------------------------------------------------------

See the whole item here:
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/1999/msg00246.html

Who accounts for these??
sj2
response 28 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 05:29 UTC 2003

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E8C356F9-E89F-4CD3-88B5-
BBBDF9E085C1.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uranium/0,7368,419839,00.html

While you celebrate and thump your chests at the arrest of Saddam, who 
cares about these?? The Iraqi children and thousands of soldiers - US, 
British and Iraqi - who got affected by DU shells? 

The British government admitted that there might be a link. The US 
flatly denied it.
rcurl
response 29 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 06:48 UTC 2003

It is possible that Saddam will cooperate with the US, tell all, and
offer to speak to his country to tell the guerillas to lay down their
arms and cooperate in rebuilding the country. It might save his skin -
or even make him a candidate for the Nobel prize.
mcnally
response 30 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 07:26 UTC 2003

  Despite some of the truly appalling Peace Prize awards over the years
  (Kissinger?  Arafat?) I doubt Hussein will be planning a trip to Oslo
  any time in the near future..
bhoward
response 31 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 07:31 UTC 2003

Uh, yeah.

So you want to like pass some of whatever it is your having
down this way?  

:-)
bhoward
response 32 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 07:32 UTC 2003

(Re#30 slipped in)

A trip to the Hague is more likely.
clees
response 33 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 09:43 UTC 2003

Not unless the US recognizes the International Court of Justice.

Btw, by the looks of him I truly think I have seen Saddam scurrying 
around the dustbins nearAmsterdam Central Train Station, the last 
couple of months.

Seriously, 
I am curious what details mr. Hussein is going to provide in about the 
US schemes in the eighties when they supported him in the war against 
Iraq. Or before that when they virtually helped get into power.
Every single time this happened with republicans in office. Coincidence?

bhoward
response 34 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 10:01 UTC 2003

The US isn't a signatory to it and therefore does not consider its
nationals under its jurisdiction.  I'm not certain that simple fact
would at all stop it from turning over a national from another country
to the court or to authorities of a country that has signed onto the
international court.
twenex
response 35 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 10:10 UTC 2003

Neither the US nor Iraq recognise the ICC. However, if the new Iraqi
administration chooses to recognise it, they might turn him over
instead of trying him in their own courts.

Also, a separate war crimes tribunal could be set up under the UN (the
court that is trying Milosevic is a war crimes tribunal, not the ICC).
However, this would require the legalization under UN law of the
occupation of Iraq, otherwise the UN would have no jurisdiction.
jp2
response 36 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 13:24 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

twenex
response 37 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 14:24 UTC 2003

Pax Americana?
scott
response 38 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 14:25 UTC 2003

Hmm... Bush secretly flies into Baghdad just a few days before Saddam is
finally captured... maybe it's time for a conspiracy item?
twenex
response 39 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 14:35 UTC 2003

Agora *is* the conspiracy item.
bru
response 40 of 140: Mark Unseen   Dec 15 14:54 UTC 2003

"27 of 39: by Siddhartha Jain (sj2) on Mon, Dec 15, 2003 (00:21):
Re #24, you are forgetting the half-a-million or so Iraqi
children who died for the lack of food and medicines during a decade
of sanctions. It is appalling, how the international community can
demonize Saddam for it and not take any blame for that??!!"

Well, do you think you could try and blame Saddam Hussein, who spent millions
of dollars building palaces adn buying the loyalty of his batthist party adn
the army rather than buying food to feed  and medicine to cure these children?
 0-16   16-40   41-65   66-90   91-115   116-140     
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss