Americans tortured me - Saddam

[kirovman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4550314.stm

"I have been beaten on every place of my body, and the signs are all over my body," he told the court.

True or False?

Just or Unjust?

You discuss.

 

[CptStern]

well judging from other incidents I have no problem believing it ...not that I feel sorry for him, it's just that torture is wrong, no matter who the victem is

 

[15357]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4550314.stm



True or False?

Just or Unjust?

You discuss.

I have no idea wether this is true or not, but I'd say its unjust.

 

[Raziaar]

Have him show us his naked body to prove it. I mean, he says the signs are all over his body. Then after that, i'd like to see proof on how old the wounds are, and what could of caused them(medical science is good at that).

If they're wounds he couldn't have possibly forced upon himself, I could believe it.


But until then, I wouldn't believe the man, EVEN IF you believe the US is capable of torture. America has the unfortunate position that they are believed guilty before ever being proven innocent, instead of believed innocent until proven guilty.

Some people will believe ANYTHING bad about the USA, even no matter how wild and rediculous the accusations are.


"This just in: United States kidnapping foreign civilians for use in processed foods!"

 

[Sparta]

well judging from other incidents I have no problem believing it ...not that I feel sorry for him, it's just that torture is wrong, no matter who the victem is

But it is Saddam we're talking about here. Does it really matter if he was tortured? (which i doubt)

He deserves it thats for sure.

 

[kirovman]

But it is Saddam we're talking about here. Does it really matter if he was tortured? (which i doubt)

He deserves it thats for sure.

Well, it doesn't really serve any purpose to torture him other than to satisfy some sick draconian urge.

Also, we shouldn't be hypocritical to talk about how we have "fair and just trials." If he does indeed deserve to be tortured, the trial will conclude that.

If it turns out to be true, it may generate a lot of sympathy for Saddam. Worth torturing one man, at the expense of throwing more fuel on the fire?

 

[Glirk Dient]

Sounds more like Saddam is trying to make stories up so people will jump on the bandwagon and to rally more people against the U.S.

 

[CptStern]

But it is Saddam we're talking about here. Does it really matter if he was tortured? (which i doubt)

He deserves it thats for sure.

torture is still torture no matter who the victem is. I just think it's hypocritical to condemn saddam for torturing his subjects when they're doing the exact same thing

Sounds more like Saddam is trying to make stories up so people will jump on the bandwagon and to rally more people against the U.S.

it's not like the rest of the world doesnt have a reason to believe the US uses torture

But until then, I wouldn't believe the man, EVEN IF you believe the US is capable of torture. America has the unfortunate position that they are believed guilty before ever being proven innocent, instead of believed innocent until proven guilty.

there is NO question of capability ..if the US hadnt denied it, attempted to hide, circumvented international law to justify it and taken great care in presenting themselves as the "liberators" people wouldnt be so quick to judge

 

[Raziaar]

there is NO question of capability ..if the US hadnt denied it, attempted to hide, circumvented international law to justify it and taken great care in presenting themselves as the "liberators" people wouldnt be so quick to judge

I don't deny the US government has the capacity for torture. Government groups like the CIA for instance, would be more than willing, I am sure.

But I don't think you were understanding what I was saying.

 

[CptStern]

I don't deny the US government has the capacity for torture. Government groups like the CIA for instance, would be more than willing, I am sure.

But I don't think you were understanding what I was saying.

yes I do understand what you're saying ...and you're sidestepping the issue by saying they have the "capacity" because that implies it may or may not be happening when it is an undeniable fact

 

[chimpmunk]

But it is Saddam we're talking about here. Does it really matter if he was tortured? (which i doubt)

He deserves it thats for sure.

Congratulation for a logic that looks like it's been taken straight out of the middle ages...

The american soldiers who tortured Saddam (Wich i have no problem believing they did) should be put in jail, as they are as guilty and criminal as he is.

 

[CptStern]

actually the person who ordered the torture should be put on trial in front of an international court ..just think of all the opportunities to show him dishevelled, wearing an orange suit and yelling at the judges about the legitimacy of the court

 

[Max35]

I think it was pretty clear from the beginning that Saddam was tortured in one way or another. Torture is pointless, and the man who ordered it should be brought to justice. However, Saddam deserves nothing less than execution. He is undeniably insane, I don't think he is going to be let back onto the streets. It also looks like the trial will become needlessly drawn-out to bring to light all of his atrocities. The world is aware of his tyranny, stick him with the needle and be done with it. This should have nothing to do with vengeance, but getting rid of someone who has genocide as a hobby.

 

[Raziaar]

I think it was pretty clear from the beginning that Saddam was tortured in one way or another. Torture is pointless, and the man who ordered it should be brought to justice. However, Saddam deserves nothing less than execution. He is undeniably insane, I don't think he is going to be let back onto the streets. It also looks like the trial will become needlessly drawn-out to bring to light all of his atrocities. The world is aware of his tyranny, stick him with the needle and be done with it. This should have nothing to do with vengeance, but getting rid of someone who has genocide as a hobby.

Insert old, "Sodamn Insane" joke.

 

[CptStern]

he should have been tried in an international criminal court or a war crimes tribunal ..no execution, plus he gets the benefit of being tried for ALL of his crimes instead of just the crimes that doesnt make the US look bad

 

[Teh Pwned]

Whether he's being tortured or not, hes not making the situation any more empathetic to himself by making outbursts in court, so its hard for him to play on the heartstrings of the world when he keeps losing his head.

 

[kirovman]

"I'm not complaining about the Americans, because I can poke their eyes out with my own hands"

It does seem rather like he's exaggerating a bit.

 

[Polaris]

You trust Saddam?

 

[Loc-Dog]

I think situations like that are always funny. The hicks that want to judge saddam are just as guilty as him. Even more guilty in a way, because saddam tortured prisoners for what he belived was best for the country. The hicks do it because they think it's justice. Ignoring the fact that it's the court who has the say on what's justice and not.

 

[Max35]

he should have been tried in an international criminal court or a war crimes tribunal ..no execution, plus he gets the benefit of being tried for ALL of his crimes instead of just the crimes that doesnt make the US look bad

Why shouldn't there be an execution?. There are still a few Saddam loyalists out there orchestrating terrorist attacks from my understanding. He will remain a major problem unless this is done. And I thought he was being tried for all of his crimes anyway, maybe I was misinformed. Or are you just saying that with a war crimes tribunal, it will be guarenteed that he will be tried for all his crimes, and no execution is a side-effect?.

 

[CptStern]

Why shouldn't there be an execution?. There are still a few Saddam loyalists out there orchestrating terrorist attacks from my understanding. He will remain a major problem unless this is done. And I thought he was being tried for all of his crimes anyway, maybe I was misinformed. Or are you just saying that with a war crimes tribunal, it will be guarenteed that he will be tried for all his crimes, and no execution is a side-effect?.

because captial punishment is against international law especially when it is a head of state ..saddam committed crimes outside of his country therefore should be tried in an international court not the kangaroo court set up by the occupiers ..and dead or not the violence wont stop just like it didnt when he was captured as the righties would have you believe

 

[Raziaar]

I think situations like that are always funny. The hicks that want to judge saddam are just as guilty as him. Even more guilty in a way, because saddam tortured prisoners for what he belived was best for the country. The hicks do it because they think it's justice. Ignoring the fact that it's the court who has the say on what's justice and not.

Hicks? Why do you keep saying hicks? Hicks refers to any rural living person, who may have less sophistication because of their distance from urbanized society.

Are you full of classism or something? I think you need a better term to describe the people you're talking about, other than 'hick'.

 

[Loc-Dog]

Hicks? Why do you keep saying hicks? Hicks refers to any rural living person, who may have less sophistication because of their distance from urbanized society.

Are you full of classism or something? I think you need a better term to describe the people you're talking about, other than 'hick'.

Because the people who do that are usually white bread dumbass ku klux clan members. Or something of that nature. It's just a figure of speech, nothing against people who live in rural places.

 

[Raziaar]

Because the people who do that are usually white bread dumbass ku klux clan members. Or something of that nature. It's just a figure of speech, nothing against people who live in rural places.

Dude, you're so far removed from reality, its not even funny. The people who want to judge saddam(he deserves to be judged! He's a ****ing mass murderer) are NOT only 'white bread dumbass ku klux clan members'.

Your naivety is disturbing.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Nah it's cool guys. Me and Ghost tortured sadam(lol...omg random lol! lawl).

 

[JNightshade]

Stereotyping comes in many shapes and forms, Loc. Everyone has their own opinion, and trying to lump everything together into something you can make fun of isn't commendable in the least. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that if you kill a killer in cold blood, you sink down to his level.

 

[Teh Pwned]

Hick- The defention of one usually implies a fat, albiet happy, person who lives in a rural society with simple life styles and enjoyment in all "manly" things, such as hunting and beer guzzling. And widdling. Also, known to dress not to sharply.

Does this apply to all of america loc? And besides, just because someone is in the KKK, doesn't mean they talk in southern drawl, or live in rural communities. I live in a town called "Niceville" known to host the annual "Mullet Festival." Stop making generalizations, your not cool.

 

[Raziaar]

Hick- The defention of one usually implies a fat, albiet happy, person who lives in a rural society with simple life styles and enjoyment in all "manly" things, such as hunting and beer guzzling. And widdling. Also, known to dress not to sharply.

No... Not really.

Provincial; unsophisticated





Or if you go by what wikipedia has to offer, which seems generally accurate on this part.

Hick (also country hick or country bumpkin) is a derogatory term for a person from a rural area.

"Hicks" have sometimes been seen, and often been portrayed in popular media, as easy marks for sophisticated urbanites. However, at times this can be turned to the advantage of an apparent hick who is more sophisticated than he appears, which is a frequent basis for a confidence game operation.

A famous usage of the term comes from the 1942 film Yankee Doodle Dandy which features the Variety headline "STIX NIX HIX PIX", which was a story about how movies portraying rural-dwellers as hicks were, unsurprisingly, unpopular in such areas ("the sticks"). Stereotypes of hicks in the popular mind are often derived from such motion pictures as The Egg and I, featuring the first screen appearance of the hick characters Ma and Pa Kettle. The Beverly Hillbillies were television hicks, although many feel that they, particularly Granny, often in the final analysis got the better of their nemesis, Mrs. Drysdale, and were more mentally stable than the repressed and effete Miss Jane Hathaway, banker Drysdale's secretary.

Hicks tend to be distinguished by a lack of sophistication deriving from their ruralness. Hence, the term is not exactly synonymous with white trash, nor has it been claimed with pride as has the similar redneck. Opponents of "political correctness" often complain that "hicks" continue as almost the only group that can be ridiculed and sterotyped with impunity.

 

[Glirk Dient]

I think situations like that are always funny. The hicks that want to judge saddam are just as guilty as him. Even more guilty in a way, because saddam tortured prisoners for what he belived was best for the country. The hicks do it because they think it's justice. Ignoring the fact that it's the court who has the say on what's justice and not.

You are a moron.

Are you actually being an apologist for sadam here?

Aside from that small bit...you go to say hicks tortured sadam and are just as horrible as him? You believe a genocidal maniac that is on trial trying and knows he is guilty and tried to make an excuse to save his ass and you buy it right away? Not only do you not believe either side...you go ahead and buy right into what that maniac says.

You may be one of the dumbest people ever.

 

[Loc-Dog]

Jesus, god. The word "hick" really has nothing to do with the topic, stop fussing over it. Way to blow something out of proportion.

Glirk, i think everyone knows what saddam did. You'd have to live on the north pole and hang out with santa to miss it. I say that if you want to do "justice" to the situation, you can't commit another crime in the process.

That's kind of like mopping the floor while at the same time taking a shit on it, isn't it? Unless you have proof that it didn't happen, you can't possibly make a better argument for anything than i can. All you can hope to do is express your personal opinon (appearantly, that saddam is a psycho and we should all fear him, forget about democratic justice). Sometimes when people have different opinions, it doesn't mean that they're dumber than you.

This reminds me why i stay away from discussions like this.

 

[Danimal]

Hmm, well if it's true the people resonsible and the people that did it should go to jail. I don't care if it was Satan himself that was tortured, they broke the law and should be punished like anyone else.

 

[Raziaar]

Hmm, well if it's true the people resonsible and the people that did it should go to jail. I don't care if it was Satan himself that was tortured, they broke the law and should be punished like anyone else.

What I can't understand... is why people sometimes are so choosey about what laws they choose to obey, or not obey.

You have these people who are screaming, don't torture saddam, its against the law! Or as you stated(no attack against you bud), not even satan himself(the ultimate evil badguy) should be tortured, because its the law.

But then when it comes around to a topic like drug law and stuff... people are screaming about how the law is unjust, unfair.

Jesus, god. The word "hick" really has nothing to do with the topic, stop fussing over it. Way to blow something out of proportion.

You're right, it doesn't really have much to do with the topic, but it illustrates your ignorance very well. Especially when you think what Saddam did to his people was justified because it 'was for the good of the country' or some such bullshit.

Please... thats idiocy speaking my friend, you're tainted.

 

[OvA]

Please... thats idiocy speaking my friend, you're tainted.

tehee....mad cow

 

[Glirk Dient]

Jesus, god. The word "hick" really has nothing to do with the topic, stop fussing over it. Way to blow something out of proportion.

Glirk, i think everyone knows what saddam did. You'd have to live on the north pole and hang out with santa to miss it. I say that if you want to do "justice" to the situation, you can't commit another crime in the process.

That's kind of like mopping the floor while at the same time taking a shit on it, isn't it? Unless you have proof that it didn't happen, you can't possibly make a better argument for anything than i can. All you can hope to do is express your personal opinon (appearantly, that saddam is a psycho and we should all fear him, forget about democratic justice). Sometimes when people have different opinions, it doesn't mean that they're dumber than you.

This reminds me why i stay away from discussions like this.

Just because there isn't proof it didn't happen doesn't mean you should go ahead and say it did. Especially given the circumstances that your listening to the words of a genocidal maniac and because theres proof it didn't happen you go along with it. That's the same BS that got religion to the point it is.

 

[hasan]

hmm .. funny how you make a big deal out of it ..

I don't think people in Iraq care much about the trial, they have far more important things to worry about!

 

[Raziaar]

hmm .. funny how you make a big deal out of it ..

I don't think people in Iraq care much about the trial, they have far more important things to worry about!

I would think the families his crimes directly affected, would recieve closure from the trial.

 

[Danimal]

What I can't understand... is why people sometimes are so choosey about what laws they choose to obey, or not obey.

You have these people who are screaming, don't torture saddam, its against the law! Or as you stated(no attack against you bud), not even satan himself(the ultimate evil badguy) should be tortured, because its the law.

But then when it comes around to a topic like drug law and stuff... people are screaming about how the law is unjust, unfair.

What I mean is, the government wrote the law and should follow it themselves.

 

[Absinthe]

What I can't understand... is why people sometimes are so choosey about what laws they choose to obey, or not obey.

You have these people who are screaming, don't torture saddam, its against the law! Or as you stated(no attack against you bud), not even satan himself(the ultimate evil badguy) should be tortured, because its the law.

But then when it comes around to a topic like drug law and stuff... people are screaming about how the law is unjust, unfair.

Oh no! God forbid the justice system is inconsistent and far from flawless.

 

[15357]

What I can't understand... is why people sometimes are so choosey about what laws they choose to obey, or not obey.

You have these people who are screaming, don't torture saddam, its against the law! Or as you stated(no attack against you bud), not even satan himself(the ultimate evil badguy) should be tortured, because its the law.

But then when it comes around to a topic like drug law and stuff... people are screaming about how the law is unjust, unfair.

Thats because they are the cancer of society. You don't choose which laws you obey, you only need to comply.

Obey the law. Contribute to society.

 

[Absinthe]

Numbers, you need to realize that not too many others wish to embrace your insane view of societal necessities.