Saddam Hussein Captured

[uNz[i]]

Story just broke on Sky News.

Head of Iraqi Council confirms capture
A media conference is expected to be given in about 30 minutes after the time of this post.

(By request)
What do you think they should do to Saddam? Vote in tralalala's poll (http://klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=88031)

[RGX]

Its all over UK news, anyone in the UK turn to channel 2, they are blasting it out, been confirmed by Tony Blair as well

[J'Pol]

This seems like the most sensible thread on this subject. At least from what I have read.

Let the USA / UK and the rest of the Alliance forces show what democracy, justice and due process means.

We are not vigilantes, we are not a lynch mob.

[uNz[i]]

A couple of points I've gleaned from the news reports that are a bit worrying.

1 They want to try him in Iraq, and that's fair enough.
2 There's talk that the US want to give him the death penalty.

While I can certainly understand why the US would want that, isn't it the Iraqi people who should decide his fate?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@14 December 2003 - 14:51
A couple of points I've gleaned from the news reports that are a bit worrying.

1 They want to try him in Iraq, and that's fair enough.
2 There's talk that the US want to give him the death penalty.

While I can certainly understand why the US would want that, isn't it the Iraqi people who should decide his fate?
It is indeed a matter for the Iraqi people. To be honest several other peoples may also have an interest, the Kuwait people for example. The dis-enfranchised Kurds may also be interested in what happens.

That does not necessarily mean that the trial has to take place in Iraq. Tho' I for one think it should. However would that necessarily be the best thing for public order and fairness to the accused and indeed the people.

Take for example the Lockerbie bombing trial. One could have argued Scotland was the best place for the trial, however the trial was not here.

Given the current situation, it is important that the international community ensure a fair trial. Both for his sake and for the sake of the Iraqi people.

The most important thing is transparency. Let's not talk about sentencing until the person has been tried and if appropriate convicted of a crime / or crimes.

[wormless]

thx didnt no about it till i saw this thread

[kalashnikov]

yea right a fair trial they might make it look fair but it wont be we already know he will get the death penalty

[wormless]

whats this about the americans are gonna make him say he has weapons of mass destruction? i say kill him! and then get bin laden!!!

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by kalashnikov@14 December 2003 - 15:03
yea right a fair trial they might make it look fair but it wont be we already know he will get the death penalty
If you think that is what the people of Iraq want, then that may well happen.

I personally do not believe in the death penalty. I know many others do.

I believe it is may be more common in the middle east. However I stand to be corrected on that.

[internet.news]

Originally posted by RGX@14 December 2003 - 13:35
Its all over UK news, anyone in the UK turn to channel 2, they are blasting it out, been confirmed by Tony Blair as well
I heard it ;) I think both sides were surprised - Saddam looks really surprised
- I did not expect this.

Well, I hope he would be taken far away from his country to Den Haag...

[wormless]

keep him in america where they will treat him worse than uk. bring him to uk and he might get a house and a cup of coffee for a welcoming

[Alucard1475]

Seems that nobody cares about "weapons of mass destruction" if there were any, and that's the only reason US could start a war agains Iraq.

Hmmmm, why were there none found?? :argue:

Now that Saddam's captured and maybe later got his ass kicked personally by Bush, Iraqi people will "start" to recognize american people as friends if of course they don't kill anybody "innocent" else. :rolleyes:

["The Avatar Man"]

its all a distraction to try to make people forget that bin laden is still out there. :angry: :angry: :angry:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by "The Avatar Man"@14 December 2003 - 15:16
its all a distraction to try to make people forget that bin laden is still out there. :angry: :angry: :angry:
That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever seen anyone post here.

["The Avatar Man"]

THE WHOLE WAR was a crock of shit.
1.If there was an extensive wmd program WE WOULD OF FOUND IT BY NOW!
2.If the US had ANY interest in liberating oppressed people we would have invaded North Korea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 :angry:

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+14 December 2003 - 13:19--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 14 December 2003 - 13:19)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-"The Avatar Man"@14 December 2003 - 15:16
its all a distraction to try to make people forget that bin laden is still out there. :angry:&nbsp; :angry:&nbsp; :angry:
That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever seen anyone post here. [/b][/quote]
You forget Hypo (http://www.mcbriens.net/liam/hyposample.doc).


Fantastic news that Hussein is captured - let us hope that the Allies deal with him in an appropriate manner.

["The Avatar Man"]

Originally posted by Lamsey@14 December 2003 - 15:23
let us hope that the Allies deal with him in an appropriate manner.
and hows that?

[uNz[i]]

Thats for the court to decide

["The Avatar Man"]

wich court?
guantanamo?

[ghetto_gurl]

just annsumma binlarden to catch now :) :)

[wormless]

@lamsey what the download 4?

["The Avatar Man"]

hey he would have been caught if we had INVADED afghanistan in 2001 or early 2002 like we should have&#33;

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Lamsey+14 December 2003 - 15:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lamsey @ 14 December 2003 - 15:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@14 December 2003 - 13:19
<!--QuoteBegin-"The Avatar Man"@14 December 2003 - 15:16
its all a distraction to try to make people forget that bin laden is still out there. :angry: :angry: :angry:
That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever seen anyone post here.
You forget Hypo (http://www.mcbriens.net/liam/hyposample.doc).


Fantastic news that Hussein is captured - let us hope that the Allies deal with him in an appropriate manner. [/b][/quote]
1 - No I didn&#39;t.

2 - See my earlier.

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by wormless@14 December 2003 - 13:31
@lamsey what the download 4?
Its an example of why "The Avatar Man"s post was not quite the stupidest thing ever seen on the board. A small sample of distilled Hypoluxa.

["The Avatar Man"]

well if tony blair is correct then my question is answered.he just said it is the iraqui people who will decide his fate

[guit_steel]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@14 December 2003 - 08:51
A couple of points I&#39;ve gleaned from the news reports that are a bit worrying.

1 They want to try him in Iraq, and that&#39;s fair enough.
2 There&#39;s talk that the US want to give him the death penalty.

While I can certainly understand why the US would want that, isn&#39;t it the Iraqi people who should decide his fate?
Keep in mind that there really is no firm judicial system in Iraq at the present outside of the American authorities. U could wait until one is established, but that may be years down the road and many of his victims mau not want to wait that long.

War crimes trials are a tricky topic anyway. Unless they are the result of an internal revolution, crimes against humanity are rarely tried under local jurisdiction b/c of efforts to establish gov&#39;ts — Germany, Japan, Serbia, etc. What will probably happen is that he is tried by an American led tribunal in Iraq. It would be a serious question as to whether a standard US court has standing to try him criminally under US law — there are no actually US crimes that were actually committed outside of the conduct of war.

BTW: Considering the justice system in the Middle East, what leads one to believe that the biggest lynch mob wouldn&#39;t be composed of the Iraqi people? Anyone care to name the last dictator in the region that wasn&#39;t killed upon losing power, short of fleeing the country, of course?

[wormless]

Originally posted by Lamsey+14 December 2003 - 14:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lamsey @ 14 December 2003 - 14:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-wormless@14 December 2003 - 13:31
@lamsey what the download 4?
Its an example of why "The Avatar Man"s post was not quite the stupidest thing ever seen on the board. A small sample of distilled Hypoluxa. [/b][/quote]
ok thanx lamsey i just wondered

[J'Pol]

The news seems to be confirming that it will be a trial in Iraq.

What court / tribunal it will be is still unclear. As is who will sit on it.

[uNz[i]]

guit_steel - All good points. I have a feeling you may be right about the Tribunal, but I seriously hope that the US don&#39;t lead it.

While my view may upset some,(deal) I don&#39;t think the US can be impartial in this case.
In fact, the less the US has to do with Saddam from this point on, the better it will be for US-Iraq relations, imho.

I do suspect now that even though Saddam won&#39;t be going to The Hague for his trial, it&#39;s quite likely that The Hague will go to Saddam...

[J'Pol]

Prepare yourself for two things.

1. I&#39;m a very sick old man, who is unfit to stand trial and I won&#39;t really know what is going on.

2. I am totally insane and always have been. I am not and never was responsible for my actions. How else can anyone explain the things I was responsible for.


Either way, just keep me in reasonably comfortable custody for the rest of my life. I won&#39;t be a danger to anyone.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@14 December 2003 - 15:58
I do suspect now that even though Saddam won&#39;t be going to The Hague for his trial, it&#39;s quite likely that The Hague will go to Saddam...
That is a good point, however also see my last.

[SeK612]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/images/main_promo/news/saddam_captured_d0e2ee_l_1.jpg

It&#39;ll be interesting to see if this stops all the attacks troops in Iraq. Maybe this will reveal all of the elusive Weapons of Mass destruction (I heard a while back that there were supposed to be dumps of such things in the western parts of Iraq). I guess he&#39;ll be tried in an Iraqi court but there may be U.S influence in the overall decision.

[FatBastard]

They have a full judicial system in Iraq, it&#39;s just been abused over the years. This should be a trial that the US does not take part in, if they do it will be a big mistake. The new Iraqi government should be in place in 18 months, Sadam&#39;s trial could take longer than that to come up. I agree with JPol, it should be open, and transparent, just as you would expect in any civilised country.

[Biggles]

If Saddam was living in a six by eight hole in the ground I suspect he is probably fairly glad he has been caught. I think that might have become rather unpleasant over the coming winter months for an elderly man used to gold taps and feather beds .

It would also suggest that he has little to do with the continued bombings and attacks, as six by eight holes in the ground don&#39;t tend to make for great command and control centres. If one were to be totally pessimistic one could take the view that this simply opens up the field for other power groups in Iraq and that the attacks and internecine warfare will carry on. No doubt we will not have long to wait to find out.

As the overwhelming bulk of Saddam&#39;s crimes were carried out in Iraq the matter should be resolved in that country, although I daresay the Iranians would love to get their hands on him. He was, after all, responsible for the Iran/ Iraq war in which over a million people died. Almost all his attempts to develop WMD stem from this war and the chemicals he did develop were used in this war (icluding the attack on the Kurds who he felt were helping the iranians make cross border attacks). We in the west actually have little to gripe about as he has not been implicated in any attacks on us. It will be interesting to see if the Iranians and their very legitimate grievances are given any credence in any trial that takes place: although the evidence presented by the defence could prove embarrassing for Western governments and business corporations.

I don&#39;t believe any of the other most wanted individuals have been removed from Iraq so the chances are Saddam will be held in Iraq for a future Iraqi judicial system to deal with (with the hope he might peg it before it comes to anything substantive).

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by Biggles@15 December 2003 - 00:27
.... although I daresay the Iranians would love to get their hands on him. He was, after all, responsible for the Iran/ Iraq war in which over a million people died.
The US was responsible for the war on Iran, not Iraq, they were just a tool. The US financed them through Gulf State&#39;s banks, and supplied them with weapons through other Middle Eastern countries. This is well documented.

[uNz[i]]

J&#39;Pol - Yes, I saw your last just after I posted. :)

Did you see Saddam&#39;s face just after the doctor finished with the tongue depressor?
He knew exactly how much sh*t he&#39;s in.

I don&#39;t think the "I&#39;m a harmless sick old man" act is gonna fly, somehow.
He&#39;s co-operating and answering questions. He knows the jig is up.


SeK612 - I wouldn&#39;t be surprised if the attacks intensify over the next few days. Hope I&#39;m wrong though.

Edit: OMG&#33; Pinned&#33; :o

[Biggles]

There is an element of truth in that which is why I said the case for the defence may prove embarrassing.

[backlash]

w00t w00t w00t w00t

This is great news to wake up to. Along with more snow. :) hehe..well, more snow means more work (Shoveling)

[Money Fist]

:lol: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39633000/jpg/_39633977_saddamcaptured203.jpghttp://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39634000/jpg/_39634141_nowpic203.jpg

take a good look @ the enemy

not so tough, high and mighty now

:lol: LOL

[FatBastard]

Here is a chronology, I don&#39;t vouch for it&#39;s accuracy or bias, but Google has plenty of other pages on the subject.

Arming Iraq and the Path to War (http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php)

[annie5]

:D glad to hear the news on capture of saddam hope they hang him.
I live in australia and wouldn`t want him here

[Money Fist]

one thing i dont get&#33;

1. we win the war against of iraq (iraqi people celebrating in streets)
2. few days later they are telling us "GO home" (they start throwing shit at our boyz)
3. we get saddam (party starts up again)

conclusion:
a place on this planet is starting to sound stupid&#33;

[muchspl2]

I was playing SOCOM II Online when some guy said that Saddam was captured and everyone suddenly stopped firing and got offline

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by Fiber@15 December 2003 - 00:50
one thing i dont get&#33;

1. we win the war against of iraq (iraqi people celebrating in streets)
2. few days later they are telling us "GO home" (they start throwing shit at our boyz)
3. we get saddam (party starts up again)

That&#39;s three things.

[Money Fist]

i never knew i would come up with 3 points :blink:

[cosmic doobie]

;)
Saddam, Osama, George W, Putin, Chirac, Shroeder, Blair.....................
Same Faces different masks all directed by their puppet masters the Illuminati, the global fascist dictatorship that&#39;s under all your noses.

Anyhow who&#39;s to say that this Saddam is the genuine one when the &#39;real&#39; one is probably sunning himself on a tropical island with Lord Lucan, Bin Laden and Shergar the horse :lol:

DNA CONFIRMATION - Yeah confirmed by Who?
Some puppet lap dog doctor :lol:

[wormless]

y would saddam have us dollars on him?

[uNz[i]]

Bribe money. US&#036; is good anywhere.

[wormless]

ok. bribe money to force him to say that there is weapons of mass destructiobn or something else. the simpsons and south park will prob do episodes too then. was the uk soldiers there too or was it just americans? they dont really say so next on their list should be bin laden

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by cosmic doobie@14 December 2003 - 15:05
Saddam, Osama, George W, Putin, Chirac, Shroeder, Blair.....................
Same Faces different masks all directed by their puppet masters the Illuminati, the global fascist dictatorship that&#39;s under all your noses.

:blink:

Our Radio Station manager is out for world domination? :o

[uNz[i]]

wormless - No. Saddam had that cash all along so he could use it to bribe others...
He&#39;s probably had it with him since the US first rolled into Basra last April.

btw, it was the US 4th Infantry Division that captured him.
600 US troops were involved in Operation Red Dawn.

He was armed with a pistol but offered no resistance. Two others were captured along with him (caught as they tried to run away) also captured was 2 assault weapons, US&#036;750,000 cash and a taxi.
This info is all on CNN.com.. and Reuters.com... and probably every other news service on the planet by now
.
Damn... I don&#39;t know whats up with you guys and these conspiracy theories :lol:

Lamsey - That&#39;s been obvious been the plan from day 1
Today The Lounge, Tomorrow.. The World&#33; :lol: :ph34r:

[RAM%ROD]

He vowed never to be taken alive, if that is him what a pathetic piece of shit the "Butcher of Baghdad" is.

[Aaron_T]

Originally posted by "The Avatar Man"@14 December 2003 - 14:16
its all a distraction to try to make people forget that bin laden is still out there. :angry: :angry: :angry:
wot a stupid thing to say

[james_bond_rulez]

certainly a good news

this means US can stop bitching about all this crap about wmd, terrorists and shit

and pull the trooops back

but when i first heard the news on klboard i was like :blink:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

congrats US troops

[hobbes]

Being caught alive, priceless&#33;

[Money Fist]

&nbsp; Being caught alive, priceless&#33;

BARS CANT HOLD HIM
http://www.periphery.co.uk/ypapers/saddam.jpg
he will remember what u said too


:lol: :lol: :lol:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by hobbes@14 December 2003 - 21:34
Being caught alive, priceless&#33;
The Mother of All Surrenders.

[james_bond_rulez]

i&#39;ll bet he hasn&#39;t got the balls to shoot himself when he knew he&#39;s gonna be captured. <_<

He had a pistol u know? <_<

make all of our lives easier

Hilter got the balls to shoot himself in the head when he knew he&#39;s gonna be cap&#39;ed. :lol:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@14 December 2003 - 22:04
i&#39;ll bet he hasn&#39;t got the balls to shoot himself when he knew he&#39;s gonna be captured. <_<

He had a pistol u know? <_<

make all of our lives easier

Hilter got the balls to shoot himself in the head when he knew he&#39;s gonna be cap&#39;ed.&nbsp; :lol:
Yes, I agree. He could have sealed his legacy with a convenient bullet. It is hugely significant that he had the means but passed on the opportunity. He is moment by moment losing his "awe" status and is becoming a simple, scared, tired old man in the eyes of those who once feared him.

[uNz[i]]

Well, I&#39;ve heard different reports on this... some said that he was asleep when they found him, others said that he was "disoriented and confused"
Maybe he was just too shagged out from the months of hiding and running ?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@14 December 2003 - 22:14
Well, I&#39;ve heard different reports on this... some said that he was asleep when they found him, others said that he was "disoriented and confused"
Maybe he was just too shagged out from the months of hiding and running ?
Yes, the mother of all sleepiness. Awe inspiring&#33;

[uNz[i]]

:lol:

Or, on the other hand, what&#39;s his view on suicide?

I know he thinks it&#39;s okay to top yourself if you&#39;re taking infidels out with you, but maybe it&#39;s not the same if you&#39;re alone?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by hobbes+14 December 2003 - 22:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 14 December 2003 - 22:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-uNz&#091;i
,14 December 2003 - 22:14] Well, I&#39;ve heard different reports on this... some said that he was asleep when they found him, others said that he was "disoriented and confused"
Maybe he was just too shagged out from the months of hiding and running ?
Yes, the mother of all sleepiness. Awe inspiring&#33; [/b][/quote]
That&#39;s a bit harsh.

The chaps getting on a bit, he was having his nap and the bad men woke him up.

Bet he was grumpy for the rest of the day after that.

[shelly]

Probally heard from his information minister " No Saddam no troops within a hundred miles from here, Honestly"

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by shelly@14 December 2003 - 22:40
Probally heard from his information minister " No Saddam no troops within a hundred miles from here, Honestly"
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Very droll.

[j2k4]

I am sorely tempted to view this grand development with a jaundiced eye.

Anti-U.S. sentiment is already rearing it&#39;s head here-possibly we should regard Saddam&#39;s capture as another miserable failure of American intelligence.

Who would stand with me in demanding the United Nations furnish Saddam with the finest French lawyer American dollars can buy?

Saddam will be tried in Iraq, by Iraqis.

The U.N. and the Hague Court will bellyache to no avail.

So be it.

Let us not forget Saddam was, at heart, a secularist, which accounts at least in part for his docility during capture.

Watch for the subtle effect of this little-noted fact in the reactions of the Arab street as well as any statements by Hamas, or actions by other terrorist groups.

This will be very interesting.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by j2k4@14 December 2003 - 22:44

Let us not forget Saddam was, at heart, a secularist, which accounts at least in part for his docility during capture.


I think you over-analyse j2.

He was a cowardly bag of shite. When the chips were down, he went with a whimper and not a bang. He was happy for everyone else to die for the cause, but when it came to him, I think not. It sums his existence up.

I stay say he will go hat-stand defence.

Though I have to say, I cannot support your position with regard to Legal Aid.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+14 December 2003 - 17:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 14 December 2003 - 17:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@14 December 2003 - 22:44

Let us not forget Saddam was, at heart, a secularist, which accounts at least in part for his docility during capture.


I think you over-analyse j2.

He was a cowardly bag of shite. When the chips were down, he went with a whimper and not a bang. He was happy for everyone else to die for the cause, but when it came to him, I think not. It sums his existence up.

I stay say he will go hat-stand defence.

Though I have to say, I cannot support your position with regard to Legal Aid.[/b][/quote]
You over-state with regard to my over-analysis, J&#39;Pol.

It is that he was a non-believer that was his un-doing.

He was, purely and simply, nothing more than a (simple) PUNK.

Which was my point; also that he can now safely be disavowed by the Arabs who do genuinely believe. :)

So you don&#39;t think he is worthy of legal-aid?

I reckon if Kofi Annan agrees with you than Saddam is in heap big-trouble.

[J'Pol]

I say this as a mate, please take it the right way -

No shit Sherlock.

[uNz[i]]

Well, according to the news, it looks like Saddams trial will indeed be a public one, held by the Iraqi people.

Theres also talk of him being given hundreds of death sentences for war crimes.

...and then they&#39;ll start on the 20+ years of crimes against humanity....

I don&#39;t think theres ever been another man in history who&#39;s been more screwed than Saddam is right now..

[j2k4]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@14 December 2003 - 18:07
I say this as a mate, please take it the right way -

No shit Sherlock.
:lol: Just so- :lol:

I&#39;ll be back on tomorrow for more-

My project is finally turning the corner. ;)

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by j2k4+14 December 2003 - 23:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 14 December 2003 - 23:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@14 December 2003 - 18:07
I say this as a mate, please take it the right way -

No shit Sherlock.
:lol: Just so- :lol:

I&#39;ll be back on tomorrow for more-

My project is finally turning the corner. ;) [/b][/quote]
Bon Chance, mon capitain.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@14 December 2003 - 23:15
Well, according to the news, it looks like Saddams trial will indeed be a public one, held by the Iraqi people.

Theres also talk of him being given hundreds of death sentences for war crimes.

...and then they&#39;ll start on the 20+ years of crimes against humanity....

I don&#39;t think theres ever been another man in history who&#39;s been more screwed than Saddam is right now..
Warren Beatty ?

[Rock Tonic Juice Magic]

silly america

like capturing saddam
will change anything

[x_gimpg]

Will he get a lawyer? :lol:

[uNz[i]]

Nope, not even Mr Promiscuity himself is this screwed.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Rock Tonic Juice Magic@14 December 2003 - 23:48
silly america

like capturing saddam
will change anything
Actually, watch and learn what this will do.

You should become familiar with the legend of Pancho Villa. He was a Mexican general, who probably died in a cave somewhere.

His mysterious disappearance sparked a legend about him. 150 years later, people still talk about him being alive. Crazy, sure, but that is the power of the unknown.

Saddam is now seen to be a secularist coward, not an Islamic symbol.

His cowardly capture is monumental.

[mogadishu]

but what is really important is will they get wmd info from him. If he is willing to go without a fight after all the shit hes said, he should spill his guts, right?

Oh, but when the interrogators get nothing out of him because there really aren&#39;t any WMD&#39;s.. then the US is screwed. I dont think that his capture really changes anything in the Muslim World. No one really liked him, especially terrorists groups such as Al Qauda. People just hoped he would go out with a fight, which he did sort of.. but if things had been more organized, way more US troops would have died. People still dont like saddam, and no one was every really supporting him.. they were just against american intervention, not pro Saddam. This doesnt change anything and it will eventually backfire on the US when they are forced to admit what they always knew.. there are and never were any WMD.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by hobbes@14 December 2003 - 23:54

Saddam is now seen to be a secularist coward, not an Islamic symbol.

His cowardly capture is monumental.
I totally agree.

From a figure of fear and terror for millions of people. Who dominated and terrorised their every waking moment (and probably sleeping one as well).

From a genocidal maniac who murdered hundreds of thousands of people without any compunction. Ethnic cleansing (the very words stick in my throat).

From a man who let his people starve and suffer disease, whilst he stole billions of dollars from them and let the infrastructure of the country rot.

From a man whose family and "friends" lived like kings and did whatever they wanted, with impunity. Whilst the people of Iraq cowered in fear.

To a sad, lonely coward, hiding in a hole in the ground. Surrendering when the US Troops found him. Whatever happened to "I will keep the last bullet for myself" ?

I said it early in this thread, I say it again. Let us show the world what democracy, justice and due process mean. Let us ensure that the lowest of the low gets a fair and transparent trial. Let us ensure that those who wish to speak against this vile creature are allowed to do so. Let us also ensure that he is allowed to defend his actions and call any witnesses he wishes, to support his claims.

Let us be fair, even if the accused person was anything but.

[fkdup74]

Here is a chronology, I don&#39;t vouch for it&#39;s accuracy or bias, but Google has plenty of other pages on the subject.


regarding the "cronology...." BS
not exactly the best sources to rely on <_<
extreme leftists all the way ;)


Washingtonpost.com. December 30, 2002
Jonathan Broder. Nuclear times, Winter 1990-91
Kurt Nimno. AlterNet. September 23, 2002
Newyorktimes.com. August 29, 2002
ABC Nightline. June9, 1992
Counter Punch, October 10, 2002
Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
Timeline: A walk Through Iraq&#39;s History. U.S. Department of State
Doing Business: The Arming of Iraq. Daniel Robichear
Glen Rangwala. Labor Left Briefing, 16 September, 2002
Financial Times of London. July 3, 1991
Elson E. Boles. Counter Punch. October 10, 2002
Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988. Iranchamber.com
Columbia Journalism Review. March/April 1993. Iraqgate
Times Online. December 31, 2002. How U.S. Helped Iraq Build Deadly Arsenal
Bush&#39;s Secret Mission. The New Yorker Magazine. November 2, 1992
Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia: Iran-Contra Affair
Congressional Record. July 27, 1992. Representative Henry B. Gonzalez
Bob Woodward. CIA Aiding Iraq in Gulf War. Washington Post. 15 December, 1986
Case Study: The Anfal Campaign. www.gendercide.com

[Pitbul]

Originally posted by hobbes+14 December 2003 - 15:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes &#064; 14 December 2003 - 15:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rock Tonic Juice Magic@14 December 2003 - 23:48
silly america

like capturing saddam
will change anything
Actually, watch and learn what this will do.

You should become familiar with the legend of Pancho Villa. He was a Mexican general, who probably died in a cave somewhere.

His mysterious disappearance sparked a legend about him. 150 years later, people still talk about him being alive. Crazy, sure, but that is the power of the unknown.

Saddam is now seen to be a secularist coward, not an Islamic symbol.

His cowardly capture is monumental. [/b][/quote]
Pancho Villa led part of the Mexican Revolution and tried to show the Mexican people not to be scared. he was ambushed and shot 42 times. hes a hero amung some of my people and to some hes not. hes dead but of course in the American history book hes portrayed somewhat as a evil bad man kinda funny when i read it. as for Tonic Juice, hes a moron plain and simple. what he doesn&#39;t recognize is we might have saved his country from getting bombed by Saddam. he was a threat to any country he didn&#39;t like. stupid Anti Americans. they will talk shit so far away, shows how cowardly they are.

[hobbes]

Pitbul,

I hope you realize that I was just giving Pancho Villa as an example, and in no way wanted to degrade his heroism or place in history. Whether he is American or Mexican, his individual strength is what is to be respected.

I just wanted to demomstrate the power of the unknown.

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by FKDUP74@15 December 2003 - 09:12
regarding the "cronology...." BS
not exactly the best sources to rely on <_<
extreme leftists all the way ;)


Washingtonpost.com. December 30, 2002
Jonathan Broder. Nuclear times, Winter 1990-91 US Department of State;
Kurt Nimno. AlterNet. September 23, 2002
Newyorktimes.com. August 29, 2002
ABC Nightline. June9, 1992
Counter Punch, October 10, 2002
Riegle Report: Dual Use Exports. Senate Committee on Banking. May 25, 1994
Timeline: A walk Through Iraq&#39;s History. U.S. Department of State
Doing Business: The Arming of Iraq. Daniel Robichear
Glen Rangwala. Labor Left Briefing, 16 September, 2002
Financial Times of London. July 3, 1991
Elson E. Boles. Counter Punch. October 10, 2002
Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988. Iranchamber.com
Columbia Journalism Review. March/April 1993. Iraqgate
Times Online. December 31, 2002. How U.S. Helped Iraq Build Deadly Arsenal
Bush&#39;s Secret Mission. The New Yorker Magazine. November 2, 1992
Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia: Iran-Contra Affair
Congressional Record. July 27, 1992. Representative Henry B. Gonzalez
Bob Woodward. CIA Aiding Iraq in Gulf War. Washington Post. 15 December, 1986
Case Study: The Anfal Campaign. www.gendercide.com

Yeah, sure, you just keep talking out of your arse. Any view you people don&#39;t like has to be extreme left, doesn&#39;t it? Come up with an opposing view then, be constructive.

Read the list again; U.S. Department of State; Senate Committee on Banking; Financial Times of London; Times Online; Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia; Congressional Record. As for the Washington Post, the New Yorker Magazine, New York Times and ABC, how extreme left are they?

Sadam Hussein will be charged with internal atrocities, in an Iraqi court. If he were to be tried in an international court, he could be charged with war crimes. The war crimes were commited against Kuwait and Iran. In this court, he could submit evidence of outside complicity, monetary and weapons support. I don&#39;t think the US wants this, and will be quite happy for him to be tried in Iraq.

[Monkeee]

so whats gonna happen to Saddam? is he going to death penelty or soemthing? :blink:

[sparsely]

I doubt it&#39;s him.

I think it&#39;s really the creepy old maintenance guy from the amusement park&#33;

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by Monkeee@15 December 2003 - 07:29
so whats gonna happen to Saddam? is he going to death penelty or soemthing? :blink:
It&#39;s a possibility, depending on what he&#39;s charged with, and where he&#39;s on trial.

:ninja:

[jetje]

well already heared some conspiracy complot theories ;)

The US had Saddam already for a long time, just brouht it out right now. they already broke him (interigation) that&#39;s why he looked this way(as a broken man not resisting).
Because of the fact no one knew they had him they could do with him what they wanted (no questions asked) so interegation could be against every human right rule ;) 2nd reason is quite obvious with the forthcoming president elections and the very bad poll score Bush has now he could use a little succes.. ;)
The weapons of mass destruction will pop up in march-april of next year, to help GW get re -elected ;)

personally i have nothing with Saddam, i think it&#39;s a very bad dictator that has done a lot evil to his people and deserves not much respect. But i must say i can&#39;t understand the way he&#39;s treated now. The US declared him a POW (prissoner of war) but do everything that&#39;s against the genevian convention. That is made to give POW some rights. Following that rules they wren&#39;t allowed to show the fysical exam they gave him also the shaving etc on TV, hell they weren&#39;t allowed to show him in public at all ;)

therefor i can believe the last conspiracy saying it was not a bad time to get some good news for George W ;)

[J'Pol]

I thought he was arrested. That is what was said on the BBC and on Sky.

Is that not different from capturing an opponent, making them a prisoner of war. I don&#39;t know if the Geneva Convention covers arrested persons.

Anyway, a dictator with a horrendous record of human rights violations has been caught. The Iraqi people seem happy about it. Certainly the pressmen were, in addition to any civilians in the street who were televised and everyone I have heard speak on television.

A damn fine day. Now let the Iraqi people try this monster. There has already been a senior Judge in Iraq saying that they were ready and able to do it.

[chalice]

I haven&#39;t much to say on the subject but I would ask one genuine question.

I&#39;m probably wrong but the footage shown yesterday of Saddam having an oral examination, wasn&#39;t that a medical examination and so private.

It may be completely irrelevant but isn&#39;t that a breach of Geneva conventions?

Can anyone shed any light?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by chalice@15 December 2003 - 08:57
I haven&#39;t much to say on the subject but I would ask one genuine question.

I&#39;m probably wrong but the footage shown yesterday of Saddam having an oral examination, wasn&#39;t that a medical examination and so private.

It may be completely irrelevant but isn&#39;t that a breach of Geneva conventions?

Can anyone shed any light?
They may have been checking for the much-storied "suicide capsule".

I think if they were checking him for a testicular rupture you might then beg privacy. ;)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by FatBastard@15 December 2003 - 02:26
[ As for the Washington Post, the New Yorker Magazine, New York Times and ABC, how extreme left are they?


On the American political spectrum?

VERY.

[Barbarossa]

Originally posted by chalice@15 December 2003 - 11:57
I haven&#39;t much to say on the subject but I would ask one genuine question.

I&#39;m probably wrong but the footage shown yesterday of Saddam having an oral examination, wasn&#39;t that a medical examination and so private.

It may be completely irrelevant but isn&#39;t that a breach of Geneva conventions?

Can anyone shed any light?
I think technically they can circumvent the Geneva Convention by technically stating that technically there is not actually a war/battlefield situation happening at the moment, so it doesn&#39;t apply. Technically speaking of course.

Anyway, I&#39;m sure some very clever lawyers are sorting all this out as we speak.. :blink:

[Barbarossa]

Originally posted by j2k4@15 December 2003 - 13:54

I think if they were checking him for a testicular rupture you might then beg privacy. ;)
See, it&#39;s a shame this never happened to Hitler, because then you&#39;d have to do that to see that he really had only got one ball..... :P

[Sparkle1984]

I think it&#39;s just as well he&#39;s been captured so he can&#39;t hurt anyone else. But never forget who it was who armed and supported him into power in the first place... <_<

[Barbarossa]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984@15 December 2003 - 15:22
I think it&#39;s just as well he&#39;s been captured so he can&#39;t hurt anyone else. But never forget who it was who armed and supported him into power in the first place... <_<
His older cousin, General Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr? Isn&#39;t he dead?? :blink:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984@15 December 2003 - 12:22
I think it&#39;s just as well he&#39;s been captured so he can&#39;t hurt anyone else.&nbsp; But never forget who it was who armed and supported him into power in the first place...&nbsp; <_<
Oh, don&#39;t worry, Sparkle.

We won&#39;t.

I&#39;m the biggest hawk on this board, and I&#39;ve acknowledged your charge time and again, whilst also stating that, even as we had a large hand in creating Saddam, we should likewise be charged with the duty of "undoing" our mess.

Of course, if you continue to suffer from the need to harp, knock yourself out.

I would, of course, hasten to remind the rest of the board that we are being reminded of the U.S.&#39;s past sins, and also of who continues to remind us.

In fact, I hereby christen you Official Board Reminder of U.S. Sins, Atrocities, and Any Other Bad Things You Can Think Of.

[uNz[i]]

... hmmm.. okay. Maybe we should just cool it and take this in a different direction.

So far, there&#39;s been no mention of the DNA testing that was used to confirm Saddam&#39;s identity.

While we watched the reports about his capture, my g/f (who&#39;s a chemistry/biology major) was intrigued by the fact that DNA testing was used and commented on the rapidity with which the test results were returned.

According to her, it normally takes a couple of days (at least) to run a DNA identification test from start to finish. She thought that it was decidedly dodgy that the tests proving it really was Saddam were completed as fast as they were.

But today I found this article on the New Scientist website:


Fast-track DNA tests confirm Saddam&#39;s identity

17:19 15 December 03

Fast-track DNA tests were used to confirm the identity of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, after his capture by US forces on Saturday.

DNA profiling experts contacted by New Scientist are surprised at the speed of the results, but all agree such a rapid conclusion would be possible. "I have to say I&#39;m quite impressed," says Alec Jeffreys at the University of Leicester, UK, who pioneered DNA profiling techniques. "The time scale is feasible."

Hussein was discovered at 2026 local time (1226 EST) in a small underground chamber near a shack in the village of Ad Dawr, south of his hometown Tikrit. Soldiers also found &#036;750,000 in cash.

The man was then conveyed to a "secure area" by 1315 EST and US President George Bush was informed that a man thought to be Saddam Hussein had been captured. However, it was not until 0514 EST on Sunday, that Bush received confirmation of Hussein&#39;s identity.

Major General Ray Odierno, commander of 4th infantry division that caught Hussein, said the former dictator confirmed his identity when asked. "I&#39;m Saddam Hussein, I&#39;m the president of Iraq and I&#39;m willing to negotiate", he told his captors. (report MSNBC)

The man also had a small tattoo on one hand, believed to indicate Hussein. However, DNA tests were carried out to prove the prisoner was not one of the many "body doubles" of the former dictator.


Blood or saliva

The three required stages of DNA profiling could be done quickly if scientists were on standby, Jeffreys told New Scientist. Firstly, DNA would have to be extracted from a swab. This can be done in about half an hour.

The DNA is then amplified using a standard technique called polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which takes a couple of hours. Lastly, the amplified sample is "typed" to give the profile. This also takes a couple of hours.

Charlotte Word, laboratory director at Orchid Cellmark, Maryland, which conducted DNA tests on the victims of the September 11 attacks, is also surprised by the speed of the testing, but agrees it is possible with a good blood or saliva sample.

She notes that tests for use in criminal cases often takes much longer because samples are scant or contaminated.

Lawrence Kobilinsky, a DNA expert at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, US, adds that DNA profiling in criminal cases can also be delayed due to paperwork. He says the procedure could be done in about seven hours.

Father to son

Kobilinsky says that the military appear to already have Hussein&#39;s genetic profile stored away for comparison. US forces claimed to have samples from the dictator in April 2003. This could be from personal items such as a toothbrush or cup he drank from, Kobilinsky told New Scientist.

"They certainly had access to the two sons, Uday and Qusay, who were killed," he says. A "very quick way" of identifying Saddam Hussein would be to compare the new sample with variable regions called short tandem repeats on the sons&#39; Y-chromosomes. As this male sex chromosome is passed directly from father to son, it should match.

Kobilinsky suspects both Y-chromosome DNA and other DNA from the nucleus&#39;s of Hussein&#39;s cells would have been tested.

The experts also believe the tests are unlikely to have been conducted in the field, but at a laboratory in Iraq or a neighbouring country. "It sounds to me like they have a lab in Iraq," says Jeffreys

SOURCE: New Scientist Article (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994481)

There. A little more insight into proceedings.
Amazing what they can do these days, isn&#39;t it?

Edit: Grammar

[j2k4]

Yes, and a spot-on post, uNz[i].

Absent your info, someone would surely have attempted to refute the aforementioned DNA evidence. ;)

Well done. :)

[uNz[i]]

Thanks j2k4.

I just figured that this topic needs another conspiracy theory about as much as we need another hole in the head. :rolleyes:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by uNz[i]@17 December 2003 - 01:30
.....another hole in the head. :rolleyes:
I have 11. :)

How &#39;bout you? :huh:

[FatBastard]

I still don&#39;t believe it, that was an actor, and the "set" with the hole he was supposed to have been in was the same set used to fake the moon landing.

[uNz[i]]

:lol: :lol:

Just the standard factory issue

[j2k4]

Originally posted by FatBastard@17 December 2003 - 01:57
I still don&#39;t believe it, that was an actor, and the "set" with the hole he was supposed to have been in was the same set used to fake the moon landing.
......and just like that, Serious was gone&#33; :huh:

[fkdup74]

Originally posted by FatBastard@14 December 2003 - 22:26
As for the Washington Post, the New Yorker Magazine, New York Times and ABC, how extreme left are they?


sorry for a late reply, been outta world news for a few :)
ok, in reply, name some pro right or even un-biased articles from these sources
its not that i&#39;m disagreeing with the possibility of us involvment,
just the sources
(and they all wanna blame the bush admin., but the articles all point to reagan)

[fkdup74]

Originally posted by j2k4@15 December 2003 - 06:56
On the American political spectrum?

VERY.
missed that one, thank you j ;)

are you even an american FB?

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by FKDUP74+22 December 2003 - 16:06--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FKDUP74 @ 22 December 2003 - 16:06)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FatBastard@14 December 2003 - 22:26
As for the Washington Post, the New Yorker Magazine, New York Times and ABC, how extreme left are they?


sorry for a late reply, been outta world news for a few :)
ok, in reply, name some pro right or even un-biased articles from these sources
its not that i&#39;m disagreeing with the possibility of us involvment,
just the sources
(and they all wanna blame the bush admin., but the articles all point to reagan) [/b][/quote]
If you have a contrary opinion, post it here. Google any point in that article, and see how many sources you can find. Knocking something without conflicting evidence is meaningless.

Do you doubt US involvement? Do you doubt the evidence posted on US government websites? I&#39;m interested to hear the other side of it.

Me? American? No, why?

[fkdup74]

Originally posted by FatBastard@21 December 2003 - 23:55
If you have a contrary opinion, post it here. Google any point in that article, and see how many sources you can find. Knocking something without conflicting evidence is meaningless.

Do you doubt US involvement? Do you doubt the evidence posted on US government websites? I&#39;m interested to hear the other side of it.

Me? American? No, why?
its just that you seem to have a strong opinion on wether or not american
corporations are left or not :blink:

as for us involvement, as far as all your sources say, that was a prior admin (reagan) ;)

it could be leftists in the us gov that submitted the info ;)

and if google is hosting shit like that, i&#39;m glad i dont use their browser :lol:
maybe the contributors to googles database are leftists too :unsure:

[fkdup74]

and dont forget, those motherfuckers wiped out thousands of civilians
in that sorry ass 9/11 deal, so why try to defend em?
maybe it&#39;ll be somewhere close to you next, huh?
will you feel different then? if the shit hits the fan in your country/state?
maybe in your own home town?

the thing is, that fucker was a menace to THE WORLD, but nobody had the balls to take him out, and when someone stepped up, then the world starts feelin sorry for his ass, wtf? everyone wants to point blame, but nobody wants to lend a hand, except for GB....yeah, the us may have had something to do with sadaams making, but at least we were trying to tie up loose ends, how bout the rest of the world?

and according to you FB, its already a forgone conculsion....
so whats the point of fessing up?
you already know the deal, right?

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by FKDUP74@22 December 2003 - 17:05
.. it could be leftists in the us gov that submitted the info ;)

and if google is hosting shit like that, i&#39;m glad i dont use their browser :lol:

maybe the contributors to googles database are leftists too :unsure:
Ah&#33; The lefties. I forgot all about them. Us righties should take away their freedom of speach, cos the bastards keep using it&#33;

[FatBastard]

Originally posted by FKDUP74@22 December 2003 - 17:25
and dont forget, those motherfuckers wiped out thousands of civilians
in that sorry ass 9/11 deal, so why try to defend em?

Yeah, that&#39;s right, and we really showed them, didn&#39;t we? And if they kill another three thousand of us, we&#39;ll go back and kill another thirty thousand of their innocent civilians. That should teach them&#33;

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by FatBastard+21 December 2003 - 23:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FatBastard @ 21 December 2003 - 23:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FKDUP74@22 December 2003 - 17:25
and dont forget, those motherfuckers wiped out thousands of civilians
in that sorry ass 9/11 deal, so why try to defend em?

Yeah, that&#39;s right, and we really showed them, didn&#39;t we? And if they kill another three thousand of us, we&#39;ll go back and kill another thirty thousand of their innocent civilians. That should teach them&#33; [/b][/quote]
i hope you dont really mean that

if you do then you are really no different than the terroists themselves <_<

peace out ;)

[J'Pol]

Actually, unless I am much mistaken, FB (BD&#39;s Sister :blink: ) Is an ex-pat Englishman living in Australia. At least so the story goes.

It&#39;s nice that the whole family moved to keep together.

Again as I understand it both the British and the Australians supported the war effort.

Oh and he only had to stand down - could have gone to a neutral country, no questions asked. He was offered places and declined. If anyone is responsible for the deaths it is saddam. That includes those during his reign of terror and as a result of it&#39;s downfall.

It could all have been very different, but he was happy for the people to die for him, the human shield scenario again. Wasn&#39;t that keen on it himself tho&#39;.