Mass grave unearthed in Iraq

[conjur]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/...iraq.graves/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S. forces have exhumed a mass grave site in northwestern Iraq and uncovered the remains of scores of people.

Many of the bodies found at the site near al-Hatra are believed to be the bodies of Kurdish women and children thought slaughtered by the Saddam Hussein regime.

A pool reporter recently was taken to the site, and the evidence gathered at the site -- a remote wadi or valley that cannot be seen by passing vehicles -- is expected to be used in the war crimes trial against Saddam Hussein and his Baathist allies.

"A perfect place for execution," Greg Kehoe, the head of the Regime Crime Liaison Office and leader of the forensic excavation, said on Wednesday.

"It is my personal opinion that this is a killing field," Kehoe told reporters during a visit to the site south of Mosul.

"Someone used this field on significant occasions over time to take bodies up there, and to take people up there and execute them."

Authorities began digging on September 1 at the site -- found a year ago by the U.S. Army.

Crews have excavated two grave trenches, and officials say there could be as many as 12 in the general area. Kehoe said the bodies were apparently bulldozed into the graves.

"Unlike bodies that you've seen in many mass graves -- they look like cordwood -- all lined up," he said. "That didn't happen here. These bodies were just pushed in."

The first trench contains the remains of women and children, and the second contains the remains of men only. More than 100 bodies have been found from the first location and a similar number from the other.

Officials say it is enough to determine a pattern for the killings.

Kehoe said the victims appear to be Kurds, based on the dress and the personal belongings found.

He believes they were probably killed in early 1988, though it might have happened in late 1987.

Many of the victims wore multiple layers of clothing and carried small personal items like jewelry and medication. One child was found with a ball in his hand.

The women -- four or five of whom were pregnant -- and children appear to have been killed with a single small caliber gunshot to the head.

Some of the women were blindfolded, but Kehoe says 95 percent of the men were blindfolded and had their hands either tied to the man next to them or tied behind their back. Al-Hatra is in Nineveh province, the location of Mosul and Tal Afar.

A lawyer, Kehoe also spent five years working on the Balkans War Crimes Tribunal.

Kehoe said that most mass graves in Bosnia largely contain men of fighting age. Graves near Hatra included many women and children, he said.

"Genocide is the attempt to eliminate, limit or exterminate a religious, ethnic, national or racial group," he said.

"The Kurds are clearly a different nationality. So could it be considered genocide? It could be. Killing, ethnic cleansing, property relocations, all of those were used to try to limit the Kurdish population. What it is fundamentally is downright murder."

Human rights groups believe about 300,000 people were killed during Saddam's 24-year rule, which ended when U.S.-led forces toppled his regime in 2003.

Saddam is set to stand trial for crimes against humanity and other offenses next year. No trial date has been set.

Let's see Saddam explain this one away.

 

[dnuggett]

For once, I think we will agree, conjur. I hope Saddam pays dearly for the atrocitities he has committed.

 

[conjur]

If this is northwestern Iraq, would that probably be from the 1991 Kurdish uprising? Anfal is in northern...northeastern part.

 

[classy]

Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

True, but we have the man. Hopefully Saddam will face the Iraqis in an open court to say whatever he has to say without interference, and judgement be done.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

 

[Gravity]

A baby had been shot in the back of its head and was found still being clutched by its mother, who had been shot in the face. The discovery was reported as Tony Blair came under mounting pressure to apologise to Parliament for the misleading intelligence claiming Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

<--weeps...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs

Neither was Saddam, it was only in his dreams.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K


You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

people who state these reasons as justifications for the war truly boggle my mind. I often wonder if they really do belive this tripe or if they are just towing the line. It also amazes me how this presidential race is so close and why it is. How can so many Americans buy into the propaganda Bush and his team is spewing ? Its all a farce. This is not a war for the innocent Iragis that were being persecuted, or for ridding the world of a ruthless tyrant that was had programs for developing WMD. It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K


You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

people who state these reasons as justifications for the war truly boggle my mind. I often wonder if they really do belive this tripe or if they are just towing the line. It also amazes me how this presidential race is so close and why it is. How can so many Americans buy into the propaganda Bush and his team is spewing ? Its all a farce. This is not a war for the innocent Iragis that were being persecuted, or for ridding the world of a ruthless tyrant that was had programs for developing WMD. It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few.

People who actually believe the president would invade another country so some buddies could make money on contracts have to be seriously delusional. If Bush wanted to "fatten the wallets of a select few", there would have been a hell of a lot easier ways to do it besides going to war and risking the political ramifications of that.

I can certainly respect the opinions of those who believe the war was wrong and those who believe Bush was an idiot and even those who believe he intentionally misled us. But suggesting that it was all just a scheme to make some people rich is absolutely absurd and shows your total lack of anything resembling intelligence.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs

Neither was Saddam, it was only in his dreams.

I guess you missed the 9/11 commission report.

 

[GoPackGo]

Isn't nice where we live in a world where we (the world) accept genocide as long as its "not in my back yard"

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs

Neither was Saddam, it was only in his dreams.

I guess you missed the 9/11 commission report.

I guess you missed the Duelfer report.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq...0,2763,1321386,00.html

Also, how do you know the counties in Africa don't want them?

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: classy
Everyone knows Saddam is an evil dictator. But thats not why we went to war. There are dictators all over the globe just like him and some worse, but I don't see us invading these countries. To me they could unearth a million dead and it would still be a moot point, cause this was not a human rights war. If thats the case far more are dying in Africa and you don't hear much of us using military might to free them. I wish people would stop bringing this up as some kind of justification.

You still don't get it do you?

Things like this show what kind of person Saddam is and what his regime was capable of and willing to do.
Things like these prove that it was standard operating procedure for his regime to engage in the murder of innocent woment and children.

It is this fact COMBINED with the proven fact that he was continually deceiving the UN and actively engaged in the pursuit of WMDs that made him a threat.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

There may be brutal, murderous regimes in Africa, but AFAIK, they aren't actively pursuing the development of WMD programs

Neither was Saddam, it was only in his dreams.

I guess you missed the 9/11 commission report.

I guess you missed the Duelfer report.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq...0,2763,1321386,00.html

Also, how do you know the counties in Africa don't want them?

Seeing as how I don't work for the CIA, I can't say whether or not African regimes are currently seeking WMD's. Which is why I said AFAIK. But I haven't heard any reports of them, nor have I heard of any reports of African countries previously having documented stockpiles of WMDs, using them on their neighboring countries and their own people, then claiming to have destroyed them while actively deceiving inspectors who were there to verify their destruction.

I didn't say Saddam had WMD's. I said he was actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.
In the future, you might want to actually read the page before you provide a link to it:

He added, however, that the ISG concluded Saddam had the desire and increasingly the capacity to develop WMD as sanctions weakened, and in 2003 was only months away from producing mustard gas.

"Evidence suggests that, as resources became available and the constraints of sanctions decayed there was a direct expansion of activity of supporting future WMD reconstitution".

You may also want to read at least the key findings here before you claim knowledge of the lack of intent to develop WMD programs.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K

People who actually believe the president would invade another country so some buddies could make money on contracts have to be seriously delusional. If Bush wanted to "fatten the wallets of a select few", there would have been a hell of a lot easier ways to do it besides going to war and risking the political ramifications of that.

I can certainly respect the opinions of those who believe the war was wrong and those who believe Bush was an idiot and even those who believe he intentionally misled us. But suggesting that it was all just a scheme to make some people rich is absolutely absurd and shows your total lack of anything resembling intelligence.

I never said that profit was the only reason for invading Iraq. It probably was a major consideration but there were other factors. He wanted revenge for his Daddy. George W even said during a speech when he was trying to garner support for this effort that "he tried to kill my Dad" meaning Saddam. There was a huge mosaic floor in the design of the elder Bush's face that everyone entering the building would have to walk on in Iraq. Our troops put a jackhammer to that floor as one of the first things they did there. George W did not want his Dad dissed like that and had the power to do something about it. So he did, and to Hell with all the ramifications and American blood that spilled and will spill yet.

Here you are singing the praises of our President and defending this war. Your reasons are just regurgitated from the shakey aguements presented by the President. They do not hold water with me and I hope that many more Americans see through this smoke screen of pure BS.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K

People who actually believe the president would invade another country so some buddies could make money on contracts have to be seriously delusional. If Bush wanted to "fatten the wallets of a select few", there would have been a hell of a lot easier ways to do it besides going to war and risking the political ramifications of that.

I can certainly respect the opinions of those who believe the war was wrong and those who believe Bush was an idiot and even those who believe he intentionally misled us. But suggesting that it was all just a scheme to make some people rich is absolutely absurd and shows your total lack of anything resembling intelligence.

I never said that profit was the only reason for invading Iraq. It probably was a major consideration but there were other factors. He wanted revenge for his Daddy. George W even said during a speech when he was trying to garner support for this effort that "he tried to kill my Dad" meaning Saddam. There was a huge mosaic floor in the design of the elder Bush's face that everyone entering the building would have to walk on in Iraq. Our troops put a jackhammer to that floor as one of the first things they did there. George W did not want his Dad dissed like that and had the power to do something about it. So he did, and to Hell with all the ramifications and American blood that spilled and will spill yet.

Here you are singing the praises of our President and defending this war. Your reasons are just regurgitated from the shakey aguements presented by the President. They do not hold water with me and I hope that many more Americans see through this smoke screen of pure BS.

Originally posted by: Stifko
It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few.

Ummm, ok.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K

I didn't say Saddam had WMD's. I said he was actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

This is such political double speak. So since he was "actively pursuing the delelopment of WMD programs" invading Iraq was the right thing to do ? Are you trying to tell me that knowing what we know now, the invasion was still justified ? Given the condition of his facilities, how long would the Iraqis be pursuing this alleged development before they would have had bonified WMD ? Any idea ? Probably a long time, no ? You don't know do you ? Neither do I and neiter did our Pres. He did not care to know, he was all gung ho.

It saddens me to hear how the demolition of the WTC on 9/11 has been twisted around to pose as justification for all kinds of seemingly abusurd actions. This war on terror is a load of garbage. We are more hated and more alienated in the world now than before we attacked Iraq for the second time.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K

People who actually believe the president would invade another country so some buddies could make money on contracts have to be seriously delusional. If Bush wanted to "fatten the wallets of a select few", there would have been a hell of a lot easier ways to do it besides going to war and risking the political ramifications of that.

I can certainly respect the opinions of those who believe the war was wrong and those who believe Bush was an idiot and even those who believe he intentionally misled us. But suggesting that it was all just a scheme to make some people rich is absolutely absurd and shows your total lack of anything resembling intelligence.

I never said that profit was the only reason for invading Iraq. It probably was a major consideration but there were other factors. He wanted revenge for his Daddy. George W even said during a speech when he was trying to garner support for this effort that "he tried to kill my Dad" meaning Saddam. There was a huge mosaic floor in the design of the elder Bush's face that everyone entering the building would have to walk on in Iraq. Our troops put a jackhammer to that floor as one of the first things they did there. George W did not want his Dad dissed like that and had the power to do something about it. So he did, and to Hell with all the ramifications and American blood that spilled and will spill yet.

Here you are singing the praises of our President and defending this war. Your reasons are just regurgitated from the shakey aguements presented by the President. They do not hold water with me and I hope that many more Americans see through this smoke screen of pure BS.

Originally posted by: Stifko
It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few.

Ummm, ok.

okay but what I meant to say was this:

It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few AS WELL AS George W exacting some personal revenge for his old man.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K

I didn't say Saddam had WMD's. I said he was actively pursuing the development of WMD programs.

This is such political double speak. So since he was "actively pursuing the delelopment of WMD programs" invading Iraq was the right thing to do ? Are you trying to tell me that knowing what we know now, the invasion was still justified ? Given the condition of his facilities, how long would the Iraqis be pursuing this alleged development before they would have had bonified WMD ? Any idea ? Probably a long time, no ? You don't know do you ? Neither do I and neiter did our Pres. He did not care to know, he was all gung ho.

It saddens me to hear how the demolition of the WTC on 9/11 has been twisted around to pose as justification for all kinds of seemingly abusurd actions. This war on terror is a load of garbage. We are more hated and more alienated in the world now than before we attacked Iraq for the second time.

"He added, however, that the ISG concluded Saddam had the desire and increasingly the capacity to develop WMD as sanctions weakened, and in 2003 was only months away from producing mustard gas. "
Sure, that's not the same as nukes or bio weapons, but the Duefler report made it clear that Saddam's intentions were to reconstitute his WMD programs and eventually aquire nuclear weapons. It also indicated that Saddam himself intentionally created the belief that he had stockpiles of weapons. The fact that we wrong in believing this doesn't change the fact that Saddam's intentions were to develop WMD's.

So yes, it was absolutely the right thing to do.

The United State and Ronald Reagan in particular were also hated and alienated in the world when we took a strong stand against the USSR. That doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do.
The vast majority of the US population opposed our involvement in WW2. That doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K

People who actually believe the president would invade another country so some buddies could make money on contracts have to be seriously delusional. If Bush wanted to "fatten the wallets of a select few", there would have been a hell of a lot easier ways to do it besides going to war and risking the political ramifications of that.

I can certainly respect the opinions of those who believe the war was wrong and those who believe Bush was an idiot and even those who believe he intentionally misled us. But suggesting that it was all just a scheme to make some people rich is absolutely absurd and shows your total lack of anything resembling intelligence.

I never said that profit was the only reason for invading Iraq. It probably was a major consideration but there were other factors. He wanted revenge for his Daddy. George W even said during a speech when he was trying to garner support for this effort that "he tried to kill my Dad" meaning Saddam. There was a huge mosaic floor in the design of the elder Bush's face that everyone entering the building would have to walk on in Iraq. Our troops put a jackhammer to that floor as one of the first things they did there. George W did not want his Dad dissed like that and had the power to do something about it. So he did, and to Hell with all the ramifications and American blood that spilled and will spill yet.

Here you are singing the praises of our President and defending this war. Your reasons are just regurgitated from the shakey aguements presented by the President. They do not hold water with me and I hope that many more Americans see through this smoke screen of pure BS.

Originally posted by: Stifko
It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few.

Ummm, ok.

okay but what I meant to say was this:

It was about Haliburton contracts and deals being made behind closed doors to fatten the wallets of a select few AS WELL AS George W exacting some personal revenge for his old man.

Like I said, I think you are totally delusional to believe that Bush is some kind of psychopath who would invade an entire country and kill thousands of people simply to get back at Saddam for trying to have his dad killed.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K
So yes, it was absolutely the right thing to do.

I can't belive that you mean that. You must have some vested interest in some monitary gain from this war. There is no way that knowing what is now known that someone with anything resembling intelligence would still be backing this war, and really mean it.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: conjur
If this is northwestern Iraq, would that probably be from the 1991 Kurdish uprising? Anfal is in northern...northeastern part.

When it comes to the Kurds it could be from any time period.

I never said that profit was the only reason for invading Iraq. It probably was a major consideration but there were other factors. He wanted revenge for his Daddy.

Growing more delusional with each post.

Fatten Haliburton pockets, revenge for daddy. Ok is your source Moore?

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: DT4K
So yes, it was absolutely the right thing to do.

I can't belive that you mean that. You must have some vested interest in some monitary gain from this war. There is no way that knowing what is now known that someone with anything resembling intelligence would still be backing this war, and really mean it.

:roll:

Is it really so hard for you to understand that other people might have different opinions and not everything is about money?

Is the website in your profile really yours?

If so, everything has now become crystal clear.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: DT4K
:roll:

Is it really so hard for you to understand that other people might have different opinions and not everything is about money?

Is the website in your profile really yours?

If so, everything has now become crystal clear.

No thats not my site.

Different opinions are fine, but American died because of these ill advised decisions. Its very hard for me to understand why anyone would still be defending the war and saying it was the right thing to do. Its very obvious to me that it was a very bad idea. I don't see how anyone could possible see it otherwise. Unless they know deep down inside that its wrong, but for some reason that can't admit it. Some people have a hard time admitting when they are wrong, especially when the stakes are so high.

I am not gonna have web access for the rest of the night, please carry on w/out me.