Saddam Hussein captured!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I didn't say you couldn't. I was giving Gimli a hard time anyway - hence the smilies.

I see said the blind man...

But the fact remains - he did brutalize his people and the rest of the world just wanted to sit by and do nothing. Endless ignored resolutions (or the lifting of snactions like France wanted) is in effect doing nothing.

My reasons for not supporting the war are perhaps off topic in this thread. I think there was an Iraq thread somewhere.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
My reasons for not supporting the war are perhaps off topic in this thread. I think there was an Iraq thread somewhere.

Yeah there is. You can add them there and then we can argue over in that thread instead.

[The Gaffer]

Well, if that thread gets reactivated it would be interesting to discuss how it affects people's views. It doesn't change my opinion on whether it was right to go to war, but it IS great news nonetheless.

Well done to the US troops who did it, and especially that they managed to bring him in alive to face justice.

I hope they get all of the family members of his victims to queue up to kick him in the goolies.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
...I hope they get all of the family members of his victims to queue up to kick him in the goolies.

I don't think that's very civilized. Do you?

However, he should stand trial. My step-father said it was a shame he wasn't killed in that hole he was living in, and I said, no... it would have been a shame had he been killed, justice is only served when all of what happened comes to light.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ruinel
However, he should stand trial. My step-father said it was a shame he wasn't killed in that hole he was living in, and I said, no... it would have been a shame had he been killed, justice is only served when all of what happened comes to light.

I agree and by him being tried in Iraq - he can be executed anyway. I don't think it would be good to allow a leader like him to be around so people can rally behind and hope he will get out.

I also think it's important to have him on public display for all to see and hear - especially the Iraqis.

[Nurvingiel]

I found the Iraq thread, but it was closed due to lack of civility towards the end. I don't want this thread to meet the same fate. Though we disagree, I respect you, and I do not take issue with you, but some of your ideas.

Since this thread is about the capture of Saddam Hussein, the desired conclusion of the Iraq war, I suppose my views on the events leading up to it are relevant.

As with many controversial and complex issues, I have mixed feelings. I acknowledge that Hussein was a terrible dictator, and that less Iraqis died during the war then probably would have during the same period of his reign. Hussein needed to be removed from power and face justice. (Though not necessarily by getting kicked in the junk, as Gaffer would suggest. )

That being said, I don't agree with the way it was done. I would have supported a UN led attack, but unfortunately they are completely useless when it comes to enforcing anything.

As a sidenote, I believe this is because no country is willing to comprimise their sovereignity to allow the UN to regulate some of their actions. This leads to the UN not having any real power. If all countries simultaneously (probably the only way this could be pulled off) acknowledged the authority of the UN as an international body, things might be a little different.

Anyway, perhaps the end justifies the means, but I don't believe in war. A few countries attacking Iraq is a war, but a UN led attack would have been an attack against Saddam. I recognize the amazingly thin and blurry line here, but I feel that it should have been an international effort.

I have no issue with the United States, but I do not trust Bush or his administration. Will he stick around to help Iraq rebuild properly? Saddam's capture was not the conclusion to this war. The installment of a stable government is, and that could take many years. I worry that Bush, and the next administration, will not see it through, leaving the door wide open for another dictator, and more suffering for the Iraqi people.

Since I started this post, I have done dishes, and made and eaten a fried egg sandwich. I have had plenty of time to contemplate this very complicated issue.

By the way JD, how did you feel about the whole "freedom fries" incident? If I was american, I would have been embarassed.

[jerseydevil]

I would rather not get this into a debate thread - but I will answer these since you asked.

Originally posted by Nurvingiel

That being said, I don't agree with the way it was done. I would have supported a UN led attack, but unfortunately they are completely useless when it comes to enforcing anything.

As a sidenote, I believe this is because no country is willing to comprimise their sovereignity to allow the UN to regulate some of their actions. This leads to the UN not having any real power. If all countries simultaneously (probably the only way this could be pulled off) acknowledged the authority of the UN as an international body, things might be a little different.

Most people on this board know that I can't stand the UN. Think they are nothing but windbags. They only have 30% approval rating in the US.

Anyway, perhaps the end justifies the means, but I don't believe in war. A few countries attacking Iraq is a war, but a UN led attack would have been an attack against Saddam. I recognize the amazingly thin and blurry line here, but I feel that it should have been an international effort.

i feel sometimes war is necessary to bring about a greater peace. Such as if Europe had taken out Hitler when he started building up things.

I have no issue with the United States, but I do not trust Bush or his administration. Will he stick around to help Iraq rebuild properly? Saddam's capture was not the conclusion to this war. The installment of a stable government is, and that could take many years. I worry that Bush, and the next administration, will not see it through, leaving the door wide open for another dictator, and more suffering for the Iraqi people.

We will stay the course under Bush. I don't know why you don't trust Bush - considering he has done everything he has said he would. YOu may not agree with what he does. As for if someone else - the chances are that Howard dean would be most likely the one to pull out before getting the job done in Iraq.

By the way JD, how did you feel about the whole "freedom fries" incident? If I was american, I would have been embarassed.

I didn't see anything wrong with it actually. Plenty of countries have done similar things to us. It was way for citizens of this country to show our displeasure with France and them going out of their way of undermining the US efforts.

So was I embarrassed - nope. The "Freedom Fries" thing was first started in a small restaurant or diner in the south.

[Nurvingiel]

Alright, I won't debate it here. In the end, I don't disagree with you that much anyway. (The Freedom Fries thing isn't really that important, though I don't think people of any nationality should retaliate like that.)

I was going to make a couple off-topic comments about why I don't trust Bush, and the rebuilding of Iraq, but I will start another thread for that.

[Elf Girl]

My gut reaction was to at least suspect fraud on the part of our dear Shrub. Since I have changed my mind. If they wanted to lie, they would just drop a bomb somewhere and claim he was under it, not bother to get a double to play the part.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elf Girl
My gut reaction was to at least suspect fraud on the part of our dear Shrub. Since I have changed my mind. If they wanted to lie, they would just drop a bomb somewhere and claim he was under it, not bother to get a double to play the part.

They could have done that at the end of the war though. But then you always have to fear that Hussein would resurface. We could also have done that with bin ladin - but didn't - so I'm not sure why you would think Bush would do this with Hussein.

We're not like the Soviet Union. They did something similar with Hitler during World War II. But instead they destroyed his body and claimed they didn't find him.

[Nurvingiel]

Hitler commited suicide.

Capturing Hussein alive is definitely the best result. There can be a proper trial and some resolution.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Hitler commited suicide.

Yes - Hitler did commit suicide, but the Soviet Union destroyed his body and claimed they did not know where he was.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Capturing Hussein alive is definitely the best result. There can be a proper trial and some resolution.

I agree. Without a trial nothing will have closure.

I'm wondering if a trial by his own people wouldn't be the best for all. No one in America wants the US involved at all. It would appear to the world like tampering with justice.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ruinel
I'm wondering if a trial by his own people wouldn't be the best for all. No one in America wants the US involved at all. It would appear to the world like tampering with justice.

Most likely it will be a trial in Iraq. That is what the Iraqi people want, the Iraqi council wants and what the US wants.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Most likely it will be a trial in Iraq. That is what the Iraqi people want, the Iraqi council wants and what the US wants.

Do you know if they (the Iraqis) have anything set up yet to take on such a big trial?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ruinel
Do you know if they (the Iraqis) have anything set up yet to take on such a big trial?

Yes they recently in the last couple of weeks set up the war tribunal. They've already been trying others under this court. Hussein's trial will be months though. It's not happening any time soon.

Saddam to face war crimes tribunal


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Saddam Hussein will get a fair trial before a war crimes tribunal that was approved just last week, members of the Iraqi Governing Council said Sunday.

The court sessions will be "open to the public, with the press, so that people in Iraq can see the nature of crimes committed with Saddam at the helm," said Dara Noor Alzin.

Saddam is accused of crimes against humanity during his three-decade reign of terror, including using chemical weapons to kill thousands of Kurds.

The council members spoke after meeting with Saddam and described him as "tired and haggard, unrepentant, even defiant."

Asked about thousands killed and dumped in mass graves, Saddam dismissed his victims saying, "They were thieves," said one council member.

"He was not apologetic. He was sarcastic and making a mockery of Iraqi people," said one member of the council.

But council members promised Saddam would have "a just and fair trial" and said he will even have the right of appeal.

"We found him obviously tired and haggard, unrepentant, even defiant, justifying crimes saying he was a just but firm ruler, our answer was that he was unjust ruler responsible for death of thousands of people," said Adnan Pachachi, a member of the council.

Council members said if Saddam cannot afford an attorney to represent him, one will be provided for him, and added that the court will not have the final say and that Saddam's attorneys can file an appeal.

"The former dictator of Iraq will face the justice he denied to millions," President Bush said in a short address from the White House.

Citing estimates of the death toll under Saddam's Baath Party rule, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas and chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said there were "about 300,00 to a million reasons why" Iraq should try the ousted leader.

Saddam is currently in U.S. custody at an undisclosed location. U.S. officials have not said if they have decided where the former dictator would stand trial.

As far back as 1991, the U.S. Congress has been calling for Saddam to be tried before a United Nations war crimes tribunal.

When Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Missouri, was asked Sunday what should happen to Saddam he said that while it is too early to say for sure, "I do think it would be good if the people of Iraq, the governance in Iraq, could perform the act of bringing Saddam Hussein to justice, having a trial for the crimes that he committed while he was the leader of Iraq."

The Iraqi tribunal will address genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed from July 14, 1968 -- when Saddam's Baath Party came to power -- until May 1, 2003 -- when President Bush declared major hostilities over, Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, current president of the interim government, told The Associated Press. (Full story)

Judges and lawyers involved in the prosecution will be vetted by a select committee and trained by an international committee of lawyers, council members said when announcing the tribunal.

The tribunal is expected to consult war crimes courts at The Hague, Netherlands, and in Rwanda.

Amnesty International wants Saddam to have POW status and visits from the international Red Cross, according to AP.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Sunday the Iraqis will determine his fate and how the former ruler is treated.

Some Iraqis have already decided Saddam's ultimate fate.

"I believe he will be sentenced to hundreds of death sentences at a fair trial because he's responsible for all the massacres and crimes in Iraq, Amar al-Hakim, a leader of the powerful Shi'ite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, told Reuters.

No judges or administrators have yet been appointed to the tribunal. And the transitional government set to assume sovereignty by July 1, will decide whether the tribunal will have the power to impose death sentences.

[Nurvingiel]

Saddam's capture is on the news right now. He was hiding in a tiny bunker under a barn south of Tikrit. He was across the river from one of his lavish palaces.

There wasn't too much celebrating in the streets. Some people were excited, others dismayed.

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
Saddam's capture is on the news right now. He was hiding in a tiny bunker under a barn south of Tikrit. He was across the river from one of his lavish palaces.

There wasn't too much celebrating in the streets. Some people were excited, others dismayed.

It wasn't a bunker, it was a hole covered by styrofoam and a rug, lol.

[hectorberlioz]

well, i'm glad he came down in such a humiliating fashion. and that he didnt try to escape or commit suicide...
lets those hussein supporters see he is a coward, and nothing more.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I just want to say: hurrah! I hope this is a time when all can put aside their feelings on US policy and celebrate over the capture of Saddam Hussein.