Saddam Hanging (I hope I did this right)

JazzBill · **on:** December 31, 2006, 07:58:19 AM

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=863ce7d4a3

Robbie883 · **Reply #1 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:11:09 AM

I'm not a fan of watching people die, but this was definately somthing I needed to see. Sadam was a nasty man, and deserved every bit of his sentence.

jrvass · **Reply #2 on:** December 31, 2006, 12:19:18 PM

I saw this on Google video last night. I want to see a higher quality film of his neck <snap>ing!

James

brett11253 · **Reply #3 on:** January 01, 2007, 01:59:28 PM

he got what he deserved.

JazzBill · **Reply #4 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:08:22 PM

Quote from: brett11253 on January 01, 2007, 01:59:28 PM

he got what he deserved.

Maybe so, but was it worth the 3000 "and counting" young American lives ? I'm still undecided on that.

brett11253 · **Reply #5 on:** January 01, 2007, 04:50:19 PM

I think it is. But this is a huge number and think it could of been smaller. If we didnt do something to stop him he woulda killed so many more.

shemps#1 · **Reply #6 on:** January 01, 2007, 06:37:13 PM

So who deemed the US to be the world's police? There are plenty of other evil dictators running countries (even those we didn't put in power), why not oust them as well?

Robbie883 · **Reply #7 on:** January 01, 2007, 06:59:25 PM

Quote from: shemps#1 on January 01, 2007, 06:37:13 PM

So who deemed the US to be the world's police? There are plenty of other evil dictators running countries (even those we didn't put in power), why not oust them as well?

So are you saying you disagree with the U.S. getting involved taking Sadam out of power? I personally agree with how the United States is stepping up to the plate to try to conquer the world's evils, and Sadam was definately an evil man. I know it was none of our bussiness getting involved, but you know how Sadam hated the U.S. he would have probably tried to wage war with U.S sometime before the end of his reign, so why not just wage war with him first?

jrvass · **Reply #8 on:** January 01, 2007, 10:58:02 PM

Quote from: shemps#1 on January 01, 2007, 06:37:13 PM

So who deemed the US to be the world's police? There are plenty of other evil dictators running countries (even those we didn't put in power), why not oust them as well?

Sweet. We have your permission! Let's split in 2 and charge both ways! (Iran & Syria).

James

JazzBill · **Reply #9 on:** January 01, 2007, 11:10:00 PM

Quote from: jrvass on January 01, 2007, 10:58:02 PM

Sweet. We have your permission! Let's split in 2 and charge both ways! (Iran & Syria).

James

Don't forget about that wack-job, in North Korea.

shemps#1 · **Reply #10 on:** January 01, 2007, 11:14:21 PM

Sorry Kid, but Saddam didn't "hate" the US until the first Bush went and attacked him. I'm saying is that the US had no good reason to go into Iraq. If this country is going to police the world by going into Iraq and taking out Saddam then why not to N. Korea and any other country the government deems "evil" and take out those leaders too?

So we are supposed to wage war on "probably"? You think just as the Oval Office does, apparently. Let's say you are at a bar and there is an attactive woman who is scantily dressed. Said woman looks in your direction and you think "she probably wants to have sex with me". If you were to go up to her and jump on top of her your ass would definately be arrested no "probably" about it. My point is you don't act on a "probably" unless you want trouble. For example, we were told Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when in fact it was a "probably". We've come to find out that they in fact did NOT have WMD's. Iraq was also mysteriously woven in with 9/11, when in fact they had nothing to do with 9/11. Therefore we had no good reason to attack Iraq (again) and no good reason to remove Saddam, who's political party was brought to power in a bloodless coup with US aid. We also were buddy-buddy with Saddam in the 80's when Iraq was at odds with the USSR and Iran.

I'm not saying Saddam was a great guy, he most certainly was not. With "evil" you need to have "good", and neither Bush can be considered a "good guy". They are just as rotten as the Saddam's of the world, if not more so. Therefore with no "good" side you cannot have "evil"; all you have is a bunch of rotten assholes fighting each other. However, if you would like to continue to be so single-minded and see the US Govt as "good" and any of it's percieved enemies as "evil" then I'm sure you can get a job in DC. Don't forget to pick up your National ID Card and wave to Big Brother through one of the many cameras watching your every move while you're at it.

If you're going to send young men overseas to fight in a war with the odds stacked in favor of them not coming back, you better be justified in doing so. The last war the US was justified in fighting in was WWII. We were attacked by the Japanese, who were aligned with the Germans and Italians, so we had every right to fight back. Iraq did nothing whatsoever to the US, so we were not justified in taking out Saddam.

brett11253 · **Reply #11 on:** January 02, 2007, 12:16:14 AM

i dont see how iraq wasnt involved with 9/11. I dont believe all that stuff about the U.S. Government doing that. But if thats what your claiming happened then I dont need an explanation because I already know what is going to be said, but if you think something else happened feel free to explain.

shemps#1 · **Reply #12 on:** January 02, 2007, 01:13:35 AM

You don't "see" how Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11? What do you "see" that links them with 9/11? Let me answer that for you...NOTHING. In fact, all of those militant Islamic nuts hated Saddam because he modernized Iraq and were afraid of him. Saddam and his government were also secular in a region where religion rules just about everywhere else. Seeing as though most of the hijackers came from Saudi-Arabia and not one of them were from Iraq, coupled with the fact that there is absolutely nothing linking Iraq to 9/11 means there is nothing to "see". Iraq having nothing to do with 9/11 is a fact.

The US backing Iraq against Iran is common knowledge. Don't believe me? Check out of the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam in 1983, who was representing Reagan, during a visit that I have included below. If you still think the US wasn't friendly with Iraq then you are hopeless. All you need to is type "Real ID act" into a search engine to find out that the National ID cards are indeed going to be reality. They should be ready by 2008.

Piffle on these children...piffle I say! You youngins are ill-equipped to put up a decent argument that isn't easily torn asunder. Where's the other James, at least he is a worthy foe!

[attachment deleted by admin]

brett11253 · **Reply #13 on:** January 02, 2007, 02:19:29 AM

then whos responsable for 9/11? thats the question i asked

Refer to the first rule in the Posting Guidelines. S#1

shemps#1 · **Reply #14 on:** January 02, 2007, 03:11:43 AM

I'm not answering any question until you learn how to type.

brett11253 · **Reply #15 on:** January 02, 2007, 09:06:14 AM

Hmm.. Its not that important anyways so forget about it.

metaldams · **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2007, 10:24:28 AM

While I can remember Iraq being an U.S. ally when I was a kid, I don't claim to be an expert on world politics, so I don't comment often on them.

What I do know is I have no desire to watch snuff films, and I don't care how evil the person getting his just desserts is. If everybody else here wants to watch it, knock yourself out, I won't judge you. As for me, I know I'd feel pretty dirty willingly witnessing a man's death, so I choose not to watch.

shemps#1 · **Reply #17 on:** January 02, 2007, 10:25:21 AM

You're right, what's more important is the fact that the public school system is doing you a great disservice.

Bangsmith · **Reply #18 on:** January 02, 2007, 03:10:34 PM

He certainly got what he deserved, but we have a bad habit of overthrowing rulers for reasons other than the government tells us. Saddam was our friend when he committed the deeds for which he was tried and executed. There is a Central Asian nation called Uzbekistan, and they are our allies. They also have the worst proven human rights record in the world now, including boiling religious and political prisoners alive. Those onlookers who were saying "al-Sadr, al-Sadr, al-Sadr" were taunting Saddam with an old enemy of his who is just as fucked as he was. By the way, has anyone seen Osama lately?

brett11253 · **Reply #19 on:** January 02, 2007, 04:26:55 PM

I havnt seen him in ages.

Bangsmith · **Reply #20 on:** January 02, 2007, 04:40:07 PM

Check in Pakistan-----another ally of ours!!!

jrvass · **Reply #21 on:** January 02, 2007, 09:15:59 PM

Quote from: shemps#1 on January 01, 2007, 11:14:21 PM

Sorry Kid, but Saddam didn't "hate" the US until the first Bush went and attacked him. I'm saying is that the US had no good reason to go into Iraq. If this country is going to police the world by going into Iraq and taking out Saddam then why not to N. Korea and any other country the government deems "evil" and take out those leaders too?

So we are supposed to wage war on "probably"? You think just as the Oval Office does, apparently. Let's say you are at a bar and there is an attactive woman who is scantily dressed. Said woman looks in your direction and you think "she probably wants to have sex with me". If you were to go up to her and jump on top of her your ass would definately be arrested no "probably" about it. My point is you don't act on a "probably" unless you want trouble. For example, we were told Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when in fact it was a "probably". We've come to find out that they in fact did NOT have WMD's. Iraq was also mysteriously woven in with 9/11, when in fact they had nothing to do with 9/11. Therefore we had no good reason to attack Iraq (again) and no good reason to remove Saddam, who's political party was brought to power in a bloodless coup with US aid. We also were buddy-buddy with Saddam in the 80's when Iraq was at odds with the USSR and Iran.

I'm not saying Saddam was a great guy, he most certainly was not. With "evil" you need to have "good", and neither Bush can be considered a "good guy". They are just as rotten as the Saddam's of the world, if not more so. Therefore with no "good" side you cannot have "evil"; all you have is a bunch of rotten assholes fighting each other. However, if you would like to continue to be so single-minded and see the US Govt as "good" and any of it's percieved enemies as "evil" then I'm sure you can get a job in DC. Don't forget to pick up your National ID Card and wave to Big Brother through one of the many cameras watching your every move while you're at it.

If you're going to send young men overseas to fight in a war with the odds stacked in favor of them not coming back, you better be justified in doing so. The last war the US was justified in fighting in was WWII. We were attacked by the Japanese, who were aligned with the Germans and Italians, so we had every right to fight back. Iraq did nothing whatsoever to the US, so we were not justified in taking out Saddam.

Quickly...

1. First Bushie went after Saddam because he invaded Kuwait. So did most of the Arab world and other Allies.
2. Yes our intelligence in round 2 was poor. But it was similar to what the French, Britain, and Russia had. UN oil for food? Bah! "No fly" zone violations? Multiple violations of Gulf War I treaties. Fuck him. Take him out and his sons that killed approx 3/4 of a million Iraqis. Paying $10,000 to every suicide bomber in Israel? Where is your humanity?
3. They did have WMD's. But we fiddle-fucked around with the UN while they went into Syria. They discovered old chemical bombs buried in the desert. Still workable.
4. 80's... USSR and Iran. Using the "tools" you have is a policy that is OK with me.

Catching up...

James

jrvass · **Reply #22 on:** January 02, 2007, 09:23:33 PM

Quote from: shemps#1 on January 02, 2007, 01:13:35 AM

You don't "see" how Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11? What do you "see" that links them with 9/11? Let me answer that for you...NOTHING. In fact, all of those militant Islamic nuts hated Saddam because he modernized Iraq and were afraid of him. Saddam and his government were also secular in a region where religion rules just about everywhere else. Seeing as though most of the hijackers came from Saudi-Arabia and not one of them were from Iraq, coupled with the fact that there is absolutely nothing linking Iraq to 9/11 means there is nothing to "see". Iraq having nothing to do with 9/11 is a fact.

The US backing Iraq against Iran is common knowledge. Don't believe me? Check out of the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam in 1983, who was representing Reagan, during a visit that I have included below. If you still think the US wasn't friendly with Iraq then you are hopeless. All you need to is type "Real ID act" into a search engine to find out that the National ID cards are indeed going to be reality. They should be ready by 2008.

Piffle on these children...piffle I say! You youngins are ill-equipped to put up a decent argument that isn't easily torn asunder. Where's the other James, at least he is a worthy foe!

Did you mean me?

Everything above is true. I don't know about future ID cards, since... they are in the future! If I knew the future I'd be at racetracks and the party store buying lotto tickets.

Richer than Bill Gates? Time to retire at one of my mansions or yachts. Naked, nubile, prime, midwestern specimens dropping freshly peeled grapes into my mouth as I watch hockey fights!

1. Lord loves a workin' man.
2. Don't trust whitey.
3. See a doctor and get rid of it.

-Navin R. Johnson, Jerk

jrvass · **Reply #23 on:** January 02, 2007, 09:39:28 PM

Quote from: metaldams on January 02, 2007, 10:24:28 AM

While I can remember Iraq being an U.S. ally when I was a kid, I don't claim to be an expert on world politics, so I don't comment often on them.

What I do know is I have no desire to watch snuff films, and I don't care how evil the person getting his just desserts is. If everybody else here wants to watch it, knock yourself out, I won't judge you. As for me, I know I'd feel pretty dirty willingly witnessing a man's death, so I choose not to watch.

You don't see his death, per se. It picks up from the Iraqi Gov't video when they put the noose around his neck. Gibberish is shouted, the lens goes towards the 13 steps, the trapdoor opens, and he dies instantly. The next thing you see are some flashes of still cameras and him swinging around. Dead.

CNN had some still pix of him on their website afterwards. In a white shroud with one hell of a bruise on the left side of his neck where the noose knot was.

(Ever tie a noose? Scares the crap out of people! Use 13 wraps! It takes some practice.)

I have an Eric Cartman (South Park) keychain doll hanging a Tinkie Winkie (Teletubbies) keychain doll, with 1/4" dia. rope, pinned to my cube wall at work!

James