U.S. wants Saddam, but dead - not alive

[BarneyFife]

http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/margolis_aug3.html

 

[daniel1113]

Anyone willing to defend Saddam Hussein, regardless of his past connections with the United States, is a sick individual. However, I am sure there is someone willing to do it, and if I were in the government or military, I would rather find him dead than have to deal with the psycho lawyers. Knowing our judicial system, he'd probably get prison for 10 years, but get out after 18 months because of good behavior.

Then again, would he even get a trial? I'm guessing that it would be a war tribunal, as he is not a citizen of the U.S. or entitled to legal council.

Either way, finding him dead or killing him after a trial are both good.

 

[BarneyFife]

Daniel,
Don't you think it would be better if he was captured alive so we can find out where the WMD are? So we can find out more information about his supposed chemical weapons? You never kill people that have information. He wouldn't be tried in the US anyways. He hasn't committed a crime in this country.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: daniel1113
Anyone willing to defend Saddam Hussein, regardless of his past connections with the United States, is a sick individual. However, I am sure there is someone willing to do it, and if I were in the government or military, I would rather find him dead than have to deal with the psycho lawyers. Knowing our judicial system, he'd probably get prison for 10 years, but get out after 18 months because of good behavior.

Then again, would he even get a trial? I'm guessing that it would be a war tribunal, as he is not a citizen of the U.S. or entitled to legal council.

Either way, finding him dead or killing him after a trial are both good.

This is Margolis that you are talking about. He is building a career on his US criticism. At least BF did link from a Pakistani paper, that's all I have to say on it.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Daniel,
Don't you think it would be better if he was captured alive so we can find out where the WMD are? So we can find out more information about his supposed chemical weapons? You never kill people that have information. He wouldn't be tried in the US anyways. He hasn't committed a crime in this country.

he would be tried at an iraqi tribunal

 

[jjones]

Dead works for me; much less messy that way.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Daniel,
Don't you think it would be better if he was captured alive so we can find out where the WMD are? So we can find out more information about his supposed chemical weapons? You never kill people that have information. He wouldn't be tried in the US anyways. He hasn't committed a crime in this country.

He is not the mastermind behind the weapons program. His information would be useless. As an example look at what kind of military intelligence information you could gather from Donald Rumsfield about the U.S. military. If the North Koreans had Rumsfield any information from him would be tactically useless. Keeping Saddam alive would only prolong the guerilla war in Iraq and you would probably even see some high level diplomats being taken hostage elsewhere in the hopes of bargaining for Saddam.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Daniel,
Don't you think it would be better if he was captured alive so we can find out where the WMD are? So we can find out more information about his supposed chemical weapons? You never kill people that have information. He wouldn't be tried in the US anyways. He hasn't committed a crime in this country.

He is not the mastermind behind the weapons program. His information would be useless. As an example look at what kind of military intelligence information you could gather from Donald Rumsfield about the U.S. military. If the North Koreans had Rumsfield any information from him would be tactically useless. Keeping Saddam alive would only prolong the guerilla war in Iraq and you would probably even see some high level diplomats being taken hostage elsewhere in the hopes of bargaining for Saddam.

You are saying that Saddam has no information regarding the existance of WMD's? You can bet is there are special big ticket items to be approved, Rumsfeld it going to know it. But Saddam isn't Rumsfeld, he is Bush, and if Bush wanted a missle defense program or some such, you can durn well believe Bush would know about is. The only reason to want Saddam dead is to make sure he can never reveal that weapons do not exist. Kill him before he can talk.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Daniel,
Don't you think it would be better if he was captured alive so we can find out where the WMD are? So we can find out more information about his supposed chemical weapons? You never kill people that have information. He wouldn't be tried in the US anyways. He hasn't committed a crime in this country.

He is not the mastermind behind the weapons program. His information would be useless. As an example look at what kind of military intelligence information you could gather from Donald Rumsfield about the U.S. military. If the North Koreans had Rumsfield any information from him would be tactically useless. Keeping Saddam alive would only prolong the guerilla war in Iraq and you would probably even see some high level diplomats being taken hostage elsewhere in the hopes of bargaining for Saddam.

You are saying that Saddam has no information regarding the existance of WMD's? You can bet is there are special big ticket items to be approved, Rumsfeld it going to know it. But Saddam isn't Rumsfeld, he is Bush, and if Bush wanted a missle defense program or some such, you can durn well believe Bush would know about is. The only reason to want Saddam dead is to make sure he can never reveal that weapons do not exist. Kill him before he can talk.

Oh c'mon. That's not the only reason and you know it. A very valid reason is to tidy up an otherwise messy situation that could easily occur should he remain alive, which has nothing to do with WMD. Besides, all Saddam has to do is say, "No, they never existed", and the US administration says, "Well, he's obviously lying". It solves nothing.

 

[Corn]

Besides, all Saddam has to do is say, "No, they never existed", and the US administration says, "Well, he's obviously lying". It solves nothing.

Surely the lefties wouldn't advocate torture to glean the real truth, would they?............oh, wait, that's right, he'd be telling them what they want to hear, so it obviously would be the truth.

 

[da loser]

saddam would not be useful alive. if he was sent to the hague, he would make the trial a sideshow just like milosevic. Although, I'm sure this would delight the rest of the world as he discusses the US involvement while leaving out everything else. One can never have enough information, regardless if it's true or not right? To say he would give any useful information is ludicrous. He's a master manipulator coupled with a rabid media, he would be detrimental to the iraqi reconstruction effort. How sad is it that the US has less credibility here and abroad than saddam hussein?

Also it wouldn't help establish the legitimacy of iraqi courts either. their legitimacy will depend on the individual cases they prosecute against normal criminals and bribes.

 

[JellyBaby]

It's part of the new Leave No Dictator Behind (alive) program.

 

[kage69]

I say once we nab him, throw him into a room filled with Shiites and Kurds. I'd pay a dollar to see that show.

 

[Gaard]

jjones - <<A very valid reason is to tidy up an otherwise messy situation that could easily occur should he remain alive>>

Anybody else scratching their heads after reading that statement?


Kill him or capture him? What are the advantages with each?
For the people (me included) who question(ed) the reasons given for this war it'd be better to at least try to get some info from him. Wouldn't it be a good thing if we got some info collaborating our president's claims?
For those who don't care (and as some members have stated..."couldn't care less about the reasons given"), I guess it doesn't matter to them if we gathered any info from Saddam.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Corn

Besides, all Saddam has to do is say, "No, they never existed", and the US administration says, "Well, he's obviously lying". It solves nothing.

Surely the lefties wouldn't advocate torture to glean the real truth, would they?............oh, wait, that's right, he'd be telling them what they want to hear, so it obviously would be the truth.

I am sure the righties, who are in charge will treat him as kindly as any Nazi would have. Now is that the kind of inane answer you were hoping for to an inane statement?

 

[Moonbeam]

jjones, I'm ashamed of you. Try to understand there's a difference between being practical and being human. Do you really want to be claimed by the dark side?

I can understand about daniel, he's a Christian. But you?

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: Gaard
jjones - <<A very valid reason is to tidy up an otherwise messy situation that could easily occur should he remain alive>>

Anybody else scratching their heads after reading that statement?


Kill him or capture him? What are the advantages with each?
For the people (me included) who question(ed) the reasons given for this war it'd be better to at least try to get some info from him. Wouldn't it be a good thing if we got some info collaborating our president's claims?
For those who don't care (and as some members have stated..."couldn't care less about the reasons given"), I guess it doesn't matter to them if we gathered any info from Saddam.

Well, I can understand your desire for answers; I just think that if he stays alive, that means more people are likely to die because of that. You'll have to excuse me for desiring a quick demise to Saddam. Look at his two sons. They're dead. No one can do anything about that now. There's no trial, no incarceration, no disputes over who's to do what with them. No one trying to take hostages or causing general mayhem in an attempt to get them free. It's over for them, they're history, and the world is already moving on. I can only wish the same for dear old Dad. Answers would be nice but I still think that all parties involved are better off when Saddam and sons are all taking a dirt nap.

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
jjones, I'm ashamed of you. Try to understand there's a difference between being practical and being human. Do you really want to be claimed by the dark side?

I can understand about daniel, he's a Christian. But you?

Didn't you know? I was born again over the weekend; I'm practically not human but you can't tell the difference in the dark.

 

[LunarRay]

US wants... hmmm...

Well... If we are legally in Iraq to extinguish the exigent condition regarding the WMD and Iraqi intended imminent use on the US I see no reason to want SH dead. He surely will know the whereabouts of the weapons and will testify that he intended to invade the US and would have had the US not invaded Iraq first.

Why kill the witness to so significant an event. Makes no sense... made no sense to kill the kids either given they could be witness to events in dispute.