TSS Posted June 18, 2014 #76 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I expect you enjoyed seeing him verbally abused and hung then..... . I didn't watch it. Do I feel sorry for man who gases people, executes, tortures or imprisons anyone who opposes him? No. Do you feel sorry for him then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted June 18, 2014 Author #77 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I didn't watch it. Do I feel sorry for man who gases people, executes, tortures or imprisons anyone who opposes him? No. Do you feel sorry for him then? I didn't think it was right....like I didn't think it was right the way Gaddafi died and the way our newspapers splashed horrible pictures all over the front pages... I remember seeing the front pages of Saddam's sons dead and in glorious close-up... Gaddafi's bloody dead face in close up.... There's something about it all that feels barbaric and uncivilized...even if the victims have done very nasty things themselves. I expect that, at the end of the day, Blair is responsible for more Iraqi deaths than Saddam??...don't know if that is right but it wouldn't surprise me. I wouldn't want Blair strung up though and abused publically as he died.. that just seems so wrong to me... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSS Posted June 18, 2014 #78 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) I didn't think it was right....like I didn't think it was right the way Gaddafi died and the way our newspapers splashed horrible pictures all over the front pages... I remember seeing the front pages of Saddam's sons dead and in glorious close-up... Gaddafi's bloody dead face in close up.... There's something about it all that feels barbaric and uncivilized...even if the victims have done very nasty things themselves. I expect that, at the end of the day, Blair is responsible for more Iraqi deaths than Saddam??...don't know if that is right but it wouldn't surprise me. I wouldn't want Blair strung up though and abused publically as he died.. that just seems so wrong to me... . I agree it is a difficult one to get your head around...and certainly not what you would see over here. Having said that, if Blair hadn't killed many Iraqi's with his decisions, and instead had gased the people of Scotland, had his secret police remove and execute anyone who disagreed with him etc...then his victims over here may well want to see him on the end of a rope. I'm not going to say that what they did was right or wrong in terms of the sentence given to him - because it happened to them, not me.......if my family disappeared in the night under his command, I may well want to be the one who puts the noose around his neck....you never know how you'll feel until the unspeakable happens to you. Edited June 18, 2014 by The Sky Scanner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted June 18, 2014 Author #79 Share Posted June 18, 2014 ...you never know how you'll feel until the unspeakable happens to you. true we are lucky to live in a society where we are safe most of the time... let's hope the Islamic jihadists don't get their way in the middle east and nearby countries... because that might encourage a significant number of muslims here to kick off...? And although it seems unthinkable now...we could end up in a state of civil war.. Cameron was saying that the biggest threat to this country was the jihadists returning to Britain from fighting in Syria and Iraq...and I expect he's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted June 18, 2014 #80 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Yet, as with all these nutters, their priorities change in accordance to the given situation. It was quite obvious the US would attack, that fact was his only priority in the lead up to war...so losing face with the neighbours doesn't really factor into the decision making when the options on the table are as limited as he had. He was obviously influenced and assisted in his war with Iran, but Kuwait does not strike me as a situation that was seen as being needed by the West (in terms of giving him the green light) to simply use as a ploy to later turn him into the bad guy....the gas attack that occurred in Halabja had already taken place, hardly any need to turn him into anything when he'd already shown he was a lunatic who needed hanging from a lamppost anyway. Kuwait wasn't needed by the West? It was very very convenient for the West, I'd say, giving them a whole new purpose in life (at least until the next Enemy was decided on, something that Milosevic considerately provided). I don't think they particularly wanted to make him the bad guy, just that he was the most convenient candidate for the position, since he was very likely to be eager to do something that would make him the New Hitler. And that of course was the reason GB Sr. didn't want to go on & finish the job the first time round, since he wanted to have a Bogyman on standby for whenever he might come in useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted June 18, 2014 #81 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I didn't watch it. Do I feel sorry for man who gases people, executes, tortures or imprisons anyone who opposes him? No. Do you feel sorry for him then? A magnificent example of how the West is always scrupulous in demonstrating that even the most unpleasant of people can be expected to be given a fair trial under the strict observance of the law, wasn't it, just like the arrest and trial of O. bin Laden and M. Gadaffi, wasn't it ... Really showed the world that the West does not condone the law of the lynch mob, didn't it... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted June 18, 2014 #82 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I didn't think it was right....like I didn't think it was right the way Gaddafi died and the way our newspapers splashed horrible pictures all over the front pages... I remember seeing the front pages of Saddam's sons dead and in glorious close-up... Gaddafi's bloody dead face in close up.... There's something about it all that feels barbaric and uncivilized...even if the victims have done very nasty things themselves. I expect that, at the end of the day, Blair is responsible for more Iraqi deaths than Saddam??...don't know if that is right but it wouldn't surprise me. I wouldn't want Blair strung up though and abused publically as he died.. that just seems so wrong to me... . Well, exactly, any nation that does or condones that really doesn't have much of a leg to stand on what accusing whatever today's current Bad guys may be of brutality and atrocities, does it ... And yes, it's a very good question, would people be happy to see that done to a Western leader, even if they were, as some undoubtedly are, demonstrably evil? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSS Posted June 18, 2014 #83 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Kuwait wasn't needed by the West? It was very very convenient for the West, I'd say, giving them a whole new purpose in life (at least until the next Enemy was decided on, something that Milosevic considerately provided). I don't think they particularly wanted to make him the bad guy, just that he was the most convenient candidate for the position, since he was very likely to be eager to do something that would make him the New Hitler. And that of course was the reason GB Sr. didn't want to go on & finish the job the first time round, since he wanted to have a Bogyman on standby for whenever he might come in useful. I'm not sure I can add much more to what i've already said in terms of my thoughts on it, we seem to be going round in circles on this particular point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSS Posted June 18, 2014 #84 Share Posted June 18, 2014 A magnificent example of how the West is always scrupulous in demonstrating that even the most unpleasant of people can be expected to be given a fair trial under the strict observance of the law, wasn't it, just like the arrest and trial of O. bin Laden and M. Gadaffi, wasn't it ... Really showed the world that the West does not condone the law of the lynch mob, didn't it... What does that have to do with what I said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted June 18, 2014 #85 Share Posted June 18, 2014 What does that have to do with what I said? It rather sounded as if you were suggesting or implying that if one was shocked by the way he was disposed of, then one must feel sorry for him, i was just trying to explain that it is possible to feel abhorrence for him and also to be shocked at the way he was brought to "justice". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSS Posted June 18, 2014 #86 Share Posted June 18, 2014 It rather sounded as if you were suggesting or implying that if one was shocked by the way he was disposed of, then one must feel sorry for him, i was just trying to explain that it is possible to feel abhorrence for him and also to be shocked at the way he was brought to "justice". No I never suggested or implied that - it's up to individuals how they feel about his sentence. I simply said that i'm not shocked by the way it happened, they had 3 decades of fear under him, and whilst it's favourable for us in the West for things to be done with how we think it should be done, we didn't live it, in fact, we don't have the slightest idea what they went through for 3 decades, we're a world away and little more then arm chair critics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Border Collie Posted June 18, 2014 #87 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I expect you enjoyed seeing him verbally abused and hung then..... . Quite a few Iraqi's were very happy to see this. What happened later doesn't wipe clean what went on before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted June 23, 2014 #88 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) What's happened in Iraq is the direct result of the West, cheering on the revolution Syria, while supporting it with nothing more than empty rhetoric. The devastating consequences of destabilizing the middleast for the sake of feeling good about promoting democracy are all too apparent, now. Arab Winter is coming early this year. Edited June 23, 2014 by hammerclaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted June 28, 2014 Author #89 Share Posted June 28, 2014 And we appointed him to bring peace to the Middle East Or did we. Br Cornelius "Sack Blair from Middle East Peace Envoy and try him at the Hague" "A group of former diplomats have written to demand Blair be fired - one of them is retired Ambassador Oliver Miles" Some very plain speaking from Oliver Miles... At some point in the video he says.. " I don't think he'll resign. He's a very tough operator" How true this is...he IS a tough operator, with the cheek of the devil.. At the end of the day...with all his wealth and political fame.. who would want to be in his shoes - with the death of so many on his conscience. I know he is in denial, but he knows...HE KNOWS...but must deny to stay sane (ish) [media=] [/media] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2014 #90 Share Posted June 28, 2014 What's happened in Iraq is the direct result of the West, cheering on the revolution Syria, while supporting it with nothing more than empty rhetoric. The devastating consequences of destabilizing the middleast for the sake of feeling good about promoting democracy are all too apparent, now. Arab Winter is coming early this year. This is a rather simplistic analysis. Destabilizing the ME is a strategic objective in of itself and has been pursued since well before Saddams time. The gains are in maintaining access to the life blood of US civilization at the cheapest price possible. Trade always favours the stronger party and it is the objective to maintain the oil exporting block as weak trading partners. This was always official policy - but became pre-eminent post the 1970's oil crisis which was precipitated by the strong OPEC trading block getting their act together and demanding an appropriate price for their product. Democracy and the rhetoric of liberation are nothing but window dressing to the primary strategic interests of the Western parties. Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now