Page 1 of 2
Saddam on trial
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:19 am
by Grim...
Anyone else think it's a farce?
Saddam was ruling Iraq when the events of the charges in question occured.
Has head of state immunity vanished?
Should Tony and George be on trial for the death of many, many innocent Iraq civillians?
The whole damn thing, from the start of the war to this point, is just a load of crap.
IMO.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:25 am
by Chris Corbyn
Might wanna be careful with this thread... politics is a pretty volatile topic so this may be locked if needs be...
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:26 am
by Grim...
So I hear.
Sorry, I didn't want to start a flame war, just a discussion.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:50 am
by Moocat
1) Saddam was crazy.
2) The war was/is crazier.
3) Saddam on trial is craziest.
1 - He killed people for disagreeing with him. Torture was common.
2 - The idea of assaulting a country because we disagree with them and to promote our own politics and business (HALIBURTON) is SOOOO 13 hundred (the year).
3 - Not a single country in this ENTIRE WORLD would say he's innocent because Bush would nuke their country so fast they'd be shadows before sunup. (refering to the effect of a nuclear bomb)
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:55 am
by Grim...
He's not inncocent, he's a very guilty man, but I still believes he deserves a fair trial.
Which means he deserves the same rights as every other head of state.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:00 am
by Grim...
I guess we'll have to wait...
BBC News wrote:Saddam and seven associates pleaded not guilty to charges of ordering the killing of 143 Shia men in 1982. The trial was adjourned until 28 November.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:01 am
by Charles256
about the nuke thing..don't be silly...no fool would nuke any other country.it's one of those death wish things..you just don't do it:-D
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:03 am
by shiznatix
politics ooooohhhhhhh how fun! nobody can do anything about it except the leaders of the countries, no matter how many hundreds of protests with thousands of demonstrators there are, the people got no say. so what to do? move to another country where nobody gives a crap about the war and drink cheap beer while hitting to the hot estonians and russians. ahhhhh politics, you make my life great by me getting away from them
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:18 am
by Charles256
if they had broadband i'd be there....until then..i'll put up with an idiot of a leader:-D (granted,that is my opinion.i say that in case someone thought it was someone else's opinion even though I typed it:) )
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:31 am
by Bill H
Has head of state immunity vanished?
Something that never existed can't vanish.
Many heads of state have been tried for war crimes, and more would have been had they been alive. Kings have had their heads summarily lopped off. Quite a few Nazi criminals were tried after WW2; do you think the Allies would have exempted Hitler had he been alive?
George W. has done some (imo) pretty stupid things, but none of them are technically war crimes. The Iraq War was sanctioned (not declared, admittedly) by Congress. The treatment of the prisoners comes close, but I doubt it can be proven that even approved of it, much less instigated it.
We may not like some things, we may even hate them, but that doesn't make them crimes.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:38 am
by Grim...
Bill H wrote:The Iraq War was sanctioned (not declared, admittedly) by Congress.
This would be fine if he'd invaded LA or something, but (and someone needs to tell Mr. Bush this) Congress doesn't speak for the entire world. The UN (who, of course, don't speak for the entire world either, but quite a bit more of it) were mighty annoyed when he and his 'Boy Wonder' Tony set off across the sea.
Hell, maybe he had a go on Command & Conquer and thought "Crickey! This is good fun! I'll try it for real!"
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:18 am
by Maugrim_The_Reaper
It's a good point - disregarding the UN damaged the US image and reputation a great deal. Even my wee little island, next to the lightly befuddled larger Island...what's it called...the UK

, now has a far more active group of people who like waving banners at US Military transport plance passing though.
I think Iraq is now one of the few nations after an ordeal in which no Irish Army peacekeepers have been sent. The common concensus is that the US broke it, they can at least pay to fix it...not start pointing fingers at France, or the rest of Europe for their self inflicted woes...
It doesn't look like any more big invasions are planned - I guess that rules out an assault on Europe...

I suppose they could put Florida citizens on alert for suspicious Espresso drinkers with their newfound public shooting rights...

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 4:00 pm
by timvw
What should be done with the people that gave Saddam and his army training? What about those for that delivered him weapons? How about their accessory??
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:22 am
by shiznatix
timvw wrote:What should be done with the people that gave Saddam and his army training? What about those for that delivered him weapons? How about their accessory??
you cant sue a gun company for making a gun that was used to kill a person
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:22 am
by Grim...
Unless it was badly made and blew up in the owners face, of course...