Blair silent about death of Saddam

[VALIS]

I can't believe you missed the manner in which they bumped off the former Iraqi leader, but in case you are one of the few on the planet who does not have access to a television or the internet, it was a hellish business.

The viewer was led by cameraphone into some dark dungeon full of hooded men. There was a rope and scaffold, and the only visible face was Saddam's, looking calm and dignified.

You could see flash after flash from the cameras and hear them goading and taunting a man on the verge of his death. He replied rather mildly.

Then there was a yammering of "Moqtada! Moqtada! Moqtada!", in honour of the fanatical Shia cleric, and a chanting of the name of the Prophet, and then — whoosh — almost in slow motion you saw him fall through the trap.

There was a great scuffling, and joyous shouts, and at last you had what they call the money shot: a man in death, his bloody neck at right angles.

Was this what we fought for? Is this really the lesson in human rights and Western values we hoped to deliver to the people of Iraq? This wasn't justice. This was a sectarian lynch mob. This was a snuff movie.

-Boris Johnson

LINK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../04/do0401.xml

[Carach]

blair wasnt silent over the issue :/ we just have a pathetic little voice behind america's.

[Parmenion96]

Well he tried hard to make the British hateable to the world. but thank's got he didn't achive his goal. As allways.

[humvee2800]

who can really hate britain, you get angry with them then some irish guy is like "come to the pub and ave a beer old chum"

[VALIS]

who can really hate britain, you get angry with them then some irish guy is like "come to the pub and ave a beer old chum"

thats more like how a posh english person talks, not an irishman.
and ireland isnt part of britain in case you didnt know.

[Parmenion96]

thats more like how a posh english person talks, not an irishman.
and ireland isnt part of britain in case you didnt know.

eh humvee there is a republic of Ireland (not sure of the name). An Irish isn't actually an example of british fellowers

[Carach]

thats more like how a posh english person talks, not an irishman.
and ireland isnt part of britain in case you didnt know.

but to americans we are in a time warp set in the 1850's when ireland was indeed still part of Great Britain, we either talk irish, scottish, or a london chimney-sweep kid's voice.. or "shoe shine guv'na?"

[RZZZA]

I see far too much remorse over the death of a bloody tyrant.


Honestly, what did people expect? Did you expect western style civility in iraqi execution chambers? when theyre executing a man that held them under their boot for thirty years? Western countries like America and Britain can afford to show some restraint because we view this whole Saddam thing from the sidelines, but iraqis have been affected by saddam in ways we cant even imagine. Frankly, I'm surprised they didnt beat the %$^& out of him before the execution, I think they showed remarkable civility and restraint. Its ridiculous, the execution went FLAWLESSLY as far as I'm concerned.

You people....When slobodon milosevich was executed, people cried that he should not have been tried in an international court. People cried that the serbian people should try and execute him. This time with Saddam, we let iraqi courts try him and an iraqi execution commence....and people STILL *****? This just proves that youre damned if you do and damned if you dont.

edit: so that article in the original post is BS. Now...everyone agree with me, I command you.

[Erik]

I see far too much remorse over the death of a bloody tyrant.

The remorse isn't over Saddam's death, but over the fact that they just replaced one murdering tyrant by a new one. (and this one actually killed people with his own hands as well as ordering other to kill)

Oh, milosevich was never executed? Well thats the only mistake I made then, my analogy between how people reacted to milosevich's trials and Saddams is still valid isnt it?

No.
The trial of Milosovic didn't go as most people hoped, but most still prefer an international court over the mob/show trial he would have gotten in his own country.

[Parmenion96]

No.
The trial of Milosovic didn't go as most people hoped, but most still prefer an international court over the mob/show trial he would have gotten in his own country.

Agree, cause in that trial, if you gonna read, came out a different story about who is who and all that crap saying from the west about slobodan milosevic. If he didn't die he would be the first who would have to be released as "not guilty". He started to look "bad" to the west (americans) when he declined to enter globalisation and american influence sphere. Yougoslavia was the last european country that didn't fit in america's plans. That is kinda diffeent to iraq. Actually the serbs blamed him for his arangement with the american in dayton. He was buried with states costs like other statesman.

[Da Skinna]

Milosevic died in a cell, he was never executed, perhaps you are confused with someone else.

The point of the article is that this is the crowning achievement of Blair's time in office, a moment touted to be something so great, and yet.... what? It ain't. And Boris is saying he's not even commenting on the death of someone they sold to the populations of their nations as a tyrant out to get them, someone with WMD's, harbors terrorists, and beds with Bin Laden. He didn't, and never did, and never had to be outed. Now look at Iraq. And now the only man who kept it together for decades is dead, and the leaders of his opposition are silent, save the crazy, fanatical ****tards that want influence and money and whatnot.

Who's gaining then from his death? It can't be very many Iraqi people, it can't be the trillions of dollars spent on a groundless, pointless war, nor can it be the reputations of the free West. Who's gaining, maybe the profiteers and businessmen involved in arms, oil, and national and private assets.

Is Iraq a better place than it was when Saddam was in power?

[RZZZA]

Oh, milosevich was never executed? Well thats the only mistake I made then, my analogy between how people reacted to milosevich's trials and Saddams is still valid isnt it?

And I believe saddam had to die for iraqis to move on, it is a symbolic and concrete ending of one era and the beginning of a new one. Thats the reason why I believe that saddam was executed. He had to be, the strangle hold he had on the iraqi people was far too strong. Even when he was already a prisoner, in the trials when he would stand up and announce that he was "Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq" many iraqis in the courtroom would cower in his presence. His influence is that great, as to still haunt iraqis even from handcuffs and a jail cell oceans away.

Hopefully he wont haunt iraqis from beyond the grave, but his execution was a foregone conclusion. It had to happen, a necessary step in the progression of iraq the country, iraq the vision, and just the mentality of the people.

edit: as long as he was alive there was always a chance he could still do harm. Its one of the reasons we were so adamant about handing Saddam over to the iraqis at the latest possible time. A) we were afraid they were gonan beat him, torture him, etc...B) we were afraid someone might try to bust him out.

[Da Skinna]

Oh, milosevich was never executed? Well thats the only mistake I made then, my analogy between how people reacted to milosevich's trials and Saddams is still valid isnt it?

No, it isn't. Bye.

And I believe saddam had to die for iraqis to move on, it is a symbolic and concrete ending of one era and the beginning of a new one. Thats the reason why I believe that saddam was executed. He had to be, the strangle hold he had on the iraqi people was far too strong. Even when he was already a prisoner, in the trials when he would stand up and announce that he was "Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq" many iraqis in the courtroom would cower in his presence. His influence is that great, as to still haunt iraqis even from handcuffs and a jail cell oceans away.

I'm not going to deny that his dying will move the Iraqis on. But he didn't have to leave just yet, he was disposed of prematurely and the Iraqis are paying for it. If the people were ready to move on, they could've done so themselves, even if that meant they would do that when Saddam died of illness or age and one of his sons was president. Instead, democracy was given to them rather shoddily by people accusing him of numerous hostile acts, many of which are false.

[RZZZA]

No, it isn't. Bye.

How rude. I think my analogy is perfectly plausible. Damned if you do, damnd if you dont. All things considering the execution went damn near perfectly imo, if only the shias didnt egg saddam on with religious taunts, the execution would have been perfect in my eyes. Considering all that could have gone wrong...

I'm not going to deny that his dying will move the Iraqis on. But he didn't have to leave just yet, he was disposed of prematurely and the Iraqis are paying for it. If the people were ready to move on, they could've done so themselves, even if that meant they would do that when Saddam died of illness or age and one of his sons was president. Instead, democracy was given to them rather shoddily by people accusing him of numerous hostile acts, many of which are false.

I agree that saddam could have been more use to us with the information he took to his grave, but this isnt about us, it is about the iraqis and I strongly believe that saddam had to die for iraqis to forget about him and move on. The iraqis cant "move on themselves" as long as their infamous dictator was still alive and giving orders from an ocean away. You understimate the grip Saddam had on iraqis.

[Tom Paine]

One voice was heard. Blair said nothing (and was on holiday at the time of the execution...), Prescott however was wheeled out. But did not attack the sentence, just the manner of the death penalty. A really rather ******** one, in the end; we publicly have stated we disagree totally with the death penalty, so why don't we disapprove of it this time? Gah.

[Carach]

because america supported it silly!

lol.

[Tom Paine]

because america supported it silly!

lol.

Well, yes, exactly. But then (and for once I agree with the Spectator) we should still have said we disapprove... Actually, in the light of this

Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki has said his government could review relations with any country which criticised the execution of ex-leader Saddam Hussein.

Mr Maliki said the hanging was a "domestic affair" for the benefit of Iraq's unity, adding that the former president had received a fair trial.

I think we should disapprove; they seem to be trying to prevent anyone questioning the execution, and that alone is reason enough to question its judicial merits.

[Tom Paine]

And you seem to think that killing him will solve the problems that were around in his life after the invasion; an illogical assumption, especially as killing a man just makes him a martyr.

[RZZZA]

And you seem to think that killing him will solve the problems that were around in his life after the invasion; an illogical assumption, especially as killing a man just makes him a martyr.

Again with this stupid martyr business? How does a man hated by his people become a martyr? Talk about illogical. Saddam was secular for god's sake!

edit: killing him is just a symbolic and definitive ending to a bloody era, thats all. It eases the minds of many, many iraqis.

[Tom Paine]

Again with this stupid martyr business? How does a man hated by his people become a martyr? Talk about illogical. Saddam was secular for god's sake!

edit: killing him is just a symbolic and definitive ending to a bloody era, thats all. It eases the minds of many, many iraqis.

He wasn't hated by those he gave power too, however.

And its really the continuation; killing cannot put an end to killing, unless it is the killing of the last living person.