Agreed....Quote:
Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus
Printable View
Agreed....Quote:
Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus
I think he got off lightly being hung, life in prisonment with one of RobHays sexual predators could have been a better punishment.
What can you do with a people who have allowed their adherence to a vicious, cruel and ruthless medieval fable to dominate their law, culture, behaviour, & day to day life, and is keeping them in subservience to their religious leaders, and their countries in the dark ages. Even Roman Catholics have mostly broken away from the religious control exercised over them up until quite recent times.
Look, it's just like dealing with teenagers.
You can't tell them anything, nor can you force them to do anything.
If they want to change, they will. Else we will just have to be patient. They are the only ones who can change and they will only change if they want to change.
Forcing our idealogies and dogma's onto them only strengthens their resolve to resist and do things their own way.
One must try to lead by example and hope.
Read the post again!Quote:
Originally Posted by RobHay
The Iraq war unleashed ethnic and sectarian forces suppressed by Saddam, and the genies can't be put back in the bottle, writes Paul McGeough.
When it came, the news was quite stunning. Despite all the certainty that Saddam Hussein would swing from the hangman's noose, the first reports confirming that he was just another of the corpses that litter liberated Iraq was a powerful reminder that justice of some kind catches up with all.
But the former dictator's execution was more of a traditional revenge killing than what Western legal experts like to describe as justice being done, and also being seen to be done.
Such was the violent intimidation and political interference in Saddam's trial that no appeal court in the US, Britain or Australia would allow the verdict to stand.
However, in the hearts and minds of many Iraqis, the death of the former dictator satisfies the simple, if brutal, requirements of the system of tribal justice that prevails in much of the Arab world. Pity, though, that Saddam swung in what was to be George Bush's new democracy beachhead in the Middle East
Some will be tempted to use Saddam's death to debate the merits of capital punishment, but the only sensible prism through which to view this execution is its likely impact on the level of sectarian death and destruction.
Does it provide a circuit-breaker or, like so many post-2003 milestones that Washington insisted were "turning points", does it again reveal how Washington has lost any control over events in Iraq?
Sadly, it's the latter. What Washington did not appreciate when it insisted that Iraq had to become the main battlefield in the so-called war on terror was that Saddam was a product of Iraq, not the reverse.
Now, when it is too late, there is a sense in the commentary and analysis coming out of Washington that the Iraq-made-Saddam equation is better understood in some quarters. But now it is being used to whip the Iraqis as, increasingly, they are blamed for all that has gone wrong since the US-led invasion in March 2003.
It's as though it all being "their fault" somehow justifies rising demands in the US for Washington to quit Iraq and to leave the "ungrateful" Iraqis to "fix their own mess".
In the early years of Saddam's rule, Iraq was a model nation in the Middle East; secular, investing its billions of dollars from oil in services for the people while it enjoyed rising political and cultural influence in the region.
But Saddam's opportunist madness drove him to war with Iran and, later, the invasion of Kuwait at the same time as his brutal security apparatus steadily enmeshed Iraqi society in a straightjacket of fear and repression.
oday, few Iraqis are starry-eyed about the Saddam years, but they do long for one single element of the dictatorship - the rigid law and order that allowed many of them to get on with their lives as long as they kept their mouths shut. Since the US-led invasion, the ethnic and sectarian forces that Saddam had effectively suppressed have erupted with explosive force to confound Washington's attempt to impose a democracy that, it hoped, would be the first element in a reverse domino theory that would transform the Middle East and stabilise oil supplies to Western economies.
Key figures in Washington genuinely expected US troops numbers to be down to about 30,000 who would be on a "watching brief" within a few months of the invasion. There are still 140,000 in the country and the Bush team is seriously considering another 30,000 in what it describes as a "surge" to wrest control of Baghdad city, which then, so the argument goes, would allow significant US troop cuts before the 2008 US presidential election.
The fear among many Iraqis and others is that it is all too late. Spend time, as The Sun-Herald did earlier this month in the company of the leader of one of the Shiite death squads now pushing a bloodied sectarian broom through entire Baghdad neighbourhoods, and you understand that the explosive forces unleashed by the US-led invasion are beyond control.
Observe the ease with which they call on the US-provided and funded resources of the new Iraqi security forces and you understand that, instead of creating single national institutions, the US has merely established training academies at which Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are provided with the skills needed to fight each other. The Iraqi political process is stalled, trust does not exist between any of the parties and, in the absence of law and order, Iraqis are again locking themselves in their homes or leaving for areas of greater safety among greater numbers of their co-religionists.
Thousands of Iraqis and Americans are dead; tens of thousands are injured and billions of dollars have been poured into an infrastructural black hole in a failed attempt to reconstruct Iraq.
Despite some contrite rhetoric, there is little evidence that Bush is ready for a major policy shift, or that the new Democratic majorities in Congress will be able to move him.
Bush and his allies, including Australia, have made an unbelievable mess of Iraq. It is impossible to see how the death in Baghdad of a man called Saddam Hussein can alter any of that.
Source: The Sun-Herald
This article sums it up.
Cheers.
EXACTLY.:nazilock:Quote:
Originally Posted by Feral
He is dead.......
A video of his hanging.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch'search=&mode=related&v=sroZVwS_jxo
Explicit material...it might offend you
You need to log into "Youtube" to confirm you are over 18
Good ridance, he was a murderer, even though US foreign policy put him into power. George Bush should be next. This moron does not even mind sending his troops and ours to their deaths for no real reason. Another Vietnam.
About time we learnt to live in peace and respect each other.
:mad:
Unlikely. There can't be a higher level of terror than "complete".Quote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
Go on then Ron, you know you want to !Quote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
I don't agree we should nuke them.
It would make it harder to go in and get the oil with all that radioactivity hanging about !
Seriously though, I (as did at least one other on this site) used to live in the middle east. There are PLENTY of lovely people there, and I sometimes wonder how it go so F***d up.
They make good tea, too.