|
Grex > Agora46 > #105: Uday and Qusay dead; victims of a family dispute over money? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 122 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 39 of 122:
| 
Jul 24 22:53 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
pvn
|
|
response 40 of 122:
|
Jul 25 04:16 UTC 2003 |
re#32: Perhaps police officers have the training and the patience to
wait out someone who shoots at them. Troopers on the otherhand are
trained to kill someone who shoots at them.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 41 of 122:
|
Jul 25 06:24 UTC 2003 |
There seems to be considerable objection to the killing of the brothers
rather than their capture among Iraqi citizens. Many would have liked to
have seen them captured and tried, largely to attain what people call
"closure" for all those who suffered at their hands. That is, they wanted
a full airing of their cruelty to their faces. It is apparent that Iraqi
citizens were not consulted on the course of action to take in this.
Typically, Bush's legions rush headlong and headstrong into use of force
above thought.
|
jep
|
|
response 42 of 122:
|
Jul 25 12:49 UTC 2003 |
Maybe there should have been a nationwide referendum in Iraq. "Should
the Hussein brothers be shot and killed, or should US forces attempt to
contain them and eventually arrest them?" That way, a popular decision
could have been assured.
|
gull
|
|
response 43 of 122:
|
Jul 25 12:49 UTC 2003 |
Re #40: Unless they're Detroit police officers. ;>
|
klg
|
|
response 44 of 122:
|
Jul 25 16:21 UTC 2003 |
Perhaps Odai and Qusai could have benefited from human shields. (Mr.
rcurl, are you busy these days??)
|
tod
|
|
response 45 of 122:
|
Jul 25 16:49 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 46 of 122:
|
Jul 25 16:54 UTC 2003 |
The "consultation" with the Iraqi public could have occurred if the brothers
had been taken alive, in the form of a trial - you know, the former American
standard of justive.
Someone above objected to their killing being called "assassination".
Perhaps "lynching" would be better? That is closer to another American
standard of frontier justice, when the posse breaks down the jailhouse
door and enacts "justice" on their own terms. Unfortunately there seems to
be no strict but honest Marshalls in our army.
|
klg
|
|
response 47 of 122:
|
Jul 25 17:02 UTC 2003 |
(Has Mr. rcurl been paying attention?)
|
novomit
|
|
response 48 of 122:
|
Jul 25 17:06 UTC 2003 |
Ah, yes, but could either of these two gentlemen have gotten a fair trial in
Iraq?
|
tod
|
|
response 49 of 122:
|
Jul 25 17:11 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 50 of 122:
|
Jul 25 17:30 UTC 2003 |
If by the "LAST time" you mean the Bush I war - Iraq had invaded Kuwait,
and we went to their defense. This time, we invaded Iraq.
|
tod
|
|
response 51 of 122:
|
Jul 25 18:23 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 52 of 122:
|
Jul 25 19:27 UTC 2003 |
That's pretty loopy (thanks, scg!). The Bush I war was ended with terms
agreed to by the UN and everyone else involved in the action. That was
then done and finished. Other things happened after that, but no one
invaded anyone else, or even threatened them, until the US invaded Iraq
with no legitimate provocation.
Of course it all is in the course of history in a particular region, but
there is no justification in the outcomes of the the Bush I war to justify
instigating the Bush II war, except for the war mongering of the Bush II
administration.
|
carson
|
|
response 53 of 122:
|
Jul 25 19:37 UTC 2003 |
(...because the Iraqi government had met all of the terms and conditions
agreed upon in 1991, right?)
|
janc
|
|
response 54 of 122:
|
Jul 25 19:45 UTC 2003 |
To be the same war, it would kind of have to have the same armies on both
sides. The first one was UN vs Iraq. The second one was US vs Iraq. It's
different.
|
tod
|
|
response 55 of 122:
|
Jul 25 19:47 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 56 of 122:
|
Jul 26 01:21 UTC 2003 |
I am confident the US army would have happily taken the brothers
Hussein captive, if they were sure they could do so. I find it hard
to imagine how anyone could believe otherwise -- other than because of
such passionate dislike for the president, military or war effort that
they aren't rational. Maybe some Army private overlooked the
political implications of a military assault on a house, but the whole
military surely did not.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 57 of 122:
|
Jul 26 01:43 UTC 2003 |
So, why didn't them captive? Nothing was stopping them except temporarily
(until they ran out of ammo/food/water/poweer/allofthese)? 200 troops,
several helicopters firing rockets, machine gun raking of the structure, and
I believe RPGs, don't sound like an effort to take them captive.
|
scg
|
|
response 58 of 122:
|
Jul 26 01:48 UTC 2003 |
What would you have them do if the Hussein brothers were shooting at them?
|
scott
|
|
response 59 of 122:
|
Jul 26 02:05 UTC 2003 |
The current version of the official story is that the troops didn't know who
was in the building, just that they were higher-ups.
Anyway, they got some recognizable bodies to show off, which is almost as
good.
<blatant Bush-bashing ON>
Actually, if they'd been taken alive they might have been able to give
crucial evidence about WMD. But luckily we're longer apparently worried about
WMDs, that was just an excuse to sell the war.
|
jep
|
|
response 60 of 122:
|
Jul 26 02:18 UTC 2003 |
re resp:57: Rane, couldn't it be possible they would have escaped
somehow, or been rescued by followers, or just caused a lot of damage,
if they were beseiged? I think it might have been reasonable to
assume any or all of those possibilities might exist and be worse than
directly assaulting the building.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 61 of 122:
|
Jul 26 03:01 UTC 2003 |
Nonsense. Troops can be protected from gunfire from the building. Tear gas
and other non-lethal weapons are available to drive out occupants. Time was
on our side. Escape routes would be known to us from the same source that
informed us they were there. Our our troops so incompetent that they can't
maintain a secure seige?
|
tod
|
|
response 62 of 122:
|
Jul 26 03:09 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 63 of 122:
|
Jul 26 12:06 UTC 2003 |
re resp:61: Things probably don't seem as clear when people are
shooting at you, and when you have actual military experience like the
commanders in Iraq, as they do when you're safely in another part of
the world.
|