HolidayBuyer's Guide

Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Will Saddam recieve a fair trial or a political?

by Charlie Thunell PL&T / December 17, 2003 8:21 AM PST

Saddam is going to stand trial for the crimes against humanity that he has committed during his presidency/tyranny. That is absolutely correct! No doubt on anybody?s mind, I hope.

One of the crimes was the war on Iran where he used a lot of WMDs and the gassing of the Kurds, which he now blames on the Iranians BTW.
During half of his time as a president, 12 years, he was an ally of the USA?s. I wonder if it is possible to have a fair trial against Saddam since there are a few presidents of the USA who are accomplices to Saddam?s crimes since they have sold weapons and supported him financially during their terms as presidents. A fair trial thus would include the presidents who have supported him. Will Saddam have a fair trial or a political one? The future will show us.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Will Saddam recieve a fair trial or a political?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Will Saddam recieve a fair trial or a political?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re:Will Saddam receive a fair trial or a political?
by Mark G / December 17, 2003 8:33 AM PST

he will get a fair trial and a good hanging i hope

and i wish it would be televised

Collapse -
OK, and the accomplices?
by Charlie Thunell PL&T / December 17, 2003 8:53 AM PST

OK, that is your wish Mark. It is my opinion that there is no need to televise such things. I think there is enough violence already on the TV and on the movie theaters. I don't drool over the killing of other people, but I know there are people who do so. Saddam is one of them!

But do you think there are accomplices who should stand trial too? Wouldn't that be the most logical thing? I mean, the weapons that the USA exported to Iraq during Saddam's period as a president/tyrant of the country weren't exported to give the people food with, were they? It is a fact that the US supported Saddam with weapons and money in the war against Iran, which is one of the cases he has to stand trial for since a lot of international laws were broken by Saddam during the same.

Collapse -
Should everyone that supplies explosives to suicide bombers, including Palestine,
by Roger NC / December 17, 2003 9:04 AM PST

be tried as accessories to murder?

Collapse -
That's the question...

And I think we should ask ourselves if those who have provided weapons and set up training camps for Al Quaeida, should be held as accomplices for 9/11...

What do you think Roger? The fact is that the training camps and the weapons were set up/sold only to kill! I doubt the training camps were set up in order to keep the terrorists in shape...

Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
by Edward ODaniel / December 17, 2003 10:35 AM PST
In reply to: That's the question...
Collapse -
NT *picking up my lower jaw off the floor* :)
by T Lee / December 17, 2003 1:07 PM PST
In reply to: That's the question...
Collapse -
Re:That's the question...
by Roger NC / December 18, 2003 12:03 PM PST
In reply to: That's the question...

So who do you wish to charge?

Iran? Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Jordon?

Oh and of course I bet, the USA?


roger

Collapse -
NT Roger, you mean Jordan? :)
by T Lee / December 19, 2003 4:31 AM PST
Collapse -
Re:of course he does
by jonah jones / December 19, 2003 5:30 AM PST

and charley will stand at the front of the queue saying "accuse me, i take responsibility"

Collapse -
Saddam may have had links with past US presidents but
by SteveGargini / December 17, 2003 9:24 AM PST

That certainly doesn't give him any excuse to butcher thousands of innocent men, women and children.
The sign of a fair trial I.M.O is when he is being lead away for execution.

Collapse -
OK, Steve...
by Charlie Thunell PL&T / December 17, 2003 10:16 AM PST

so you don't see the previous Amrican presidents (those who supported him with weapons and money during twelve years) as accomplices?

Collapse -
If my memory serves me right - the weapons were meant to protect Saddam
by SteveGargini / December 17, 2003 10:33 AM PST
In reply to: OK, Steve...

from a possible Russian invasion, as did happen in Afgan. There is no way on earth that weapons given to Saddam were meant to be used against his own people.
I don't know why Saddam turned into such a monster but it would be ludicrous to blame someone living in America.

Collapse -
Right...

but part of the criminal actions that he will stand trial for is those committed against Iran too...

Collapse -
A Tangled Web We Weave...
If my memory serves me right - the weapons were meant to protect Saddam from a possible Russian invasion, as did happen in Afgan. There is no way on earth that weapons given to Saddam were meant to be used against his own people. - SteveGargini

Actually, much of Iraq's arsenal came from the USSR. We weren't arming Iraq to protect them from the former Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was caught up in a very bloody and endless battle that was wiping out their national treasure and troops. The USSR had no ability to fight on more than one front at that time. The USSR had its hands full with the American armed Afghanis, of which Osama bin Laden was one...

We helped Iraq because it was the lesser of two evils. Iran had held our people as hostages for over a year. So the US armed Iran's enemy, Iraq. If the US hadn't armed Saddam, Iran would have defeated Iraq...

We tend to arm the people who cause us trouble later on. We armed and trained both bin Laden and Hussein and look what happened. We helped topple the Democratically elected government of Iran and installed the Shah as their leader. Then the Iranians revolted and overthrew the Shah. Because of our actions in destroying their democracy, we became a hated nation in Iran. So the Iranians attacked our embassy and took all inside as hostages for over a year which made them our enemy and caused us to arm Iraq. Such is a tangled web we weave...
Collapse -
Yep! Sorry I stand corrected - It was Iran giving Iraq a big headache.
by SteveGargini / December 17, 2003 3:10 PM PST

That ended when Saddam used poison gas on Iran I think. I don't personally like Iran but what a terrible thing to do to innocent men, women and children. Saddam doesn't seem to have a conscience.

Collapse -
And we knew about it, Steve!

That was exactly what I wanted to focus on when I talked about a fair trial. USA, among other states, supported Saddam WHILE HE WAS USING POISON GAS on innocent men and women. USA and the other states that supported him KNEW about this! And they KEPT supporting him after the war on Iran!!! Shouldn't those presidents/kings/prime ministers stand accomplices for that? IF it turns out to be a FAIR trial and not a political, then the accomplices will stand trial too! I think, that if Mohammar Gaddafi was one of the major supporters of Saddam at the time, like the US, UK, France and other states were, he would be held partly resposible for it!

Collapse -
supported Saddam WHILE HE WAS USING POISON GAS
by SteveGargini / December 17, 2003 3:41 PM PST

Very difficult territory because in a war situation certain things happen as a part of war, which at all other times would be found totally unacceptable.
We lost innocent civilians in the 2nd world war with Germany, and no doubt the same in Germany from us, but recrimination, which you are proposing, wouldn't stand up very well when people are fighting for their lives.

Collapse -
That's exactly what a war criminal is, Steve! And those who help him/her too!
by Charlie Thunell PL&T / December 17, 2003 3:54 PM PST
"Very difficult territory because in a war situation certain things happen as a part of war, which at all other times would be found totally unacceptable. - Steve Gargini

Are you now saying that what Saddam did was because "in a war situation certain things happen as a part of war... "?
Collapse -
I am not saying that exactly Charlie

When I draw a parallel between Saddam sending over rockets filled with poison gas, whatever, to what happened to us in England when Hitler used V2 rockets, which dropped from the sky loaded with high explosive, and which caused many deaths to men, women and children, then the synopsis is the same.
The only real difference is that the V2 rockets were designed and manufactured in Germany, but the missiles that Saddam used may have been sold to him.
But let's face reality Charlie, if you were to hold responsible every person who sold weapons to warring countries, then the numbers would be massive, and explain how you would deal with this vast army of weapons dealers, who exist in every corner of the globe?

Collapse -
Ignoring The Problem...
by Blake Cook / December 18, 2003 4:20 PM PST
if you were to hold responsible every person who sold weapons to warring countries, then the numbers would be massive, and explain how you would deal with this vast army of weapons dealers, who exist in every corner of the globe? - SteveGargini

It may be true that there are a lot of people and companies that should be prosecuted that are supplying arms to rogue nations and leaders. But you really can't ignore that simply because there may be too many of them. That would be the same as saying there is no need for police and courts if the crime rate is too high. If you ignore the problem, the problem will continue and thrive...
Collapse -
It's very noble of you Blake to care about the spread of dangerous weapons
by SteveGargini / December 19, 2003 5:16 AM PST

But you or anybody else will have to find an answer to the financial problem of a country that relies on the export of military weapons.
People who sell weapons conveniently forget the impact of the sale. We have tried to stop the spread of Nuclear weapons, but without any help from the US North Korea has obtained the necessary technology to build their own Nuclear power station, and apparently would be very capable now of building their own bomb.
Who was responsible for this, and I don't think it was America.
Who do you think should be held responsible?
Our governments have tried to stop the spread of W.M.D but there is always someone, and not American necessarily, who would find it impossible to turn down the chance of a financial kill.
So, ignoring the problem, I don't think so!
Failing to stop the spread because of factors beyond our control - yes that sounds better!

Collapse -
Re:careful Steve

your talking to someone who said "It should be obvious by now that any attempt by you to disprove my perceptions is ridiculous and totally unnecessary because there is no possible way for you to understand, know, and/or prove the truth either way"

he doesn't handle 'facts' too well

Collapse -
I may be banging my head on a brick wall then Jonah - Ouch! see what you mean :)
by SteveGargini / December 19, 2003 7:58 AM PST
In reply to: Re:careful Steve
Happy
Collapse -
Wow - now this is interesting Blake
Collapse -
Was That Necessary Steve???
by Blake Cook / December 19, 2003 12:11 PM PST
You will be telling me that the moon is made of gold next. - SteveGargini

Was that necessary Steve???
Collapse -
May be not necessary but have you conclusive proof that America supplied
by SteveGargini / December 19, 2003 12:48 PM PST

Saddam with chemical weapons, and continued to supply him with them even after they were used against the Kurds. If the American forces did that then they have a lot to answer for, but I have never seen the conclusive proof. I know that America have been accused in the past of supplying chemical weapons to Saddam, but even if that was true in the 1st instant, to continue after the men, women and children were gased by him really does boarder on the gross.

Collapse -
Did I Miss Something???
Saddam with chemical weapons, and continued to supply him with them even after they were used against the Kurds. If the American forces did that then they have a lot to answer for, but I have never seen the conclusive proof. - SteveGargini

Steve, this has been brought up so many times and links have been provided on numerous occasions, it surprises me that now you are questioning the assertion. There are stacks of documentation describing how we armed and trained Iraq. You should be old enough to remember much of it. You are older than me and I sure remember the events. A simple Google search will reveal this widely known "secret"...

HOW US HELPED IRAQ BUILD DEADLY ARSENAL
What Bush didn't want you know about Iraq.(Pres George W. Bush)
How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons
How Did Iraq Get Its Weapons?
We Sold Them

Yes, U.S. Helped Iraq Get Chemical, Biological Weapons
Source: List Includes U.S. Firms That Aided Iraqis

I could post pages and pages of links but I doubt that you would read all of them. I hope you read at least one of the above links though...

We knew that Saddam was gassing the Iranians and we continued to support him. We even supplied his satellite Intel telling him where the Iranian troops were. We knew that Saddam had gassed the Kurds, yet we continued to support him. We supported Saddam's tyranny for 12 years. It wasn't until Saddam invaded Kuwait before we turned against him. Those are all verifiable facts that cannot be refuted no matter how people spin it...

So I'm curious. Why did you respond to me the way you did Steve? Usually friends wouldn't treat their friends like that. So did I miss something???
Collapse -
We are going back over 20 years - my memory really isn't that good when it
by SteveGargini / December 19, 2003 3:44 PM PST

comes to political events. I know it should, but it just doesn't want to.
I have looked at the links and was not aware that the US actually supplied the Gases used.
http://www.preda.org/research/r03020201copy2.html

I meant to half joke with the comment about the moon, with one of these Happy but if you take it that personally then there is nothing I can do about it. Sad

I cannot for the life of me wonder why Saddam continued to receive financial help after committing such a horrendous act upon his own people.

I didn't mean to offend with my comment because I am not an offensive person, and before you refreshed my memory with the links couldn't understand why a nation should arm a potential enemy with such awesome weapons.

I am completely baffled by this - I am out of here.
Don't expect any further posts on this matter.

Collapse -
Jumping To Conclusions...
my memory really isn't that good when it comes to political events. I know it should, but it just doesn't want to. - SteveGargini

This is even more reason not to jump to conclusions when discussing political events here in SE. I have tried to follow the news all my life yet there are so many events that I wasn't aware of. Sometimes the environment where we live shields us from hearing all the news. I missed an awful lot in Wyoming since there were very few news sources and I had to rely on what we were being fed at the time...

I cannot for the life of me wonder why Saddam continued to receive financial help after committing such a horrendous act upon his own people...couldn't understand why a nation should arm a potential enemy with such awesome weapons. - SteveGargini

I think that is exactly why several of us have brought these issues up so many times here in SE. Those who choose to remain ignorant to what's been going on are sure to repeat the mistakes...

I meant to half joke with the comment about the moon, with one of these but if you take it that personally then there is nothing I can do about it. - SteveGargini

I get enough flack, insults, and abuse by those who make it their life's mission to try to make life as miserable as possible here in SE. The last thing I would expect to see is a friend jumping on the bandwagon, even in a jocular manner. I can't understand why anyone would consider a put-down as a joke, even if they include the Happy
Collapse -
Re:Jumping To Conclusions
by jonah jones / December 19, 2003 8:04 PM PST

awwww *and you do it SO well*

#This is even more reason not to jump to conclusions when discussing political events here in SE#

#I had to rely on what we were being fed at the time#

*walks away whistling the theme to "The Jenin Massacre"...*

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

The Samsung RF23M8090SG

One of the best French door fridges we've tested

A good-looking fridge with useful features like an auto-filling water pitcher and a temperature-adjustable "FlexZone" drawer. It was a near-flawless performer in our cooling tests.