Depends which Bush you're talking about.Shevchenko-[7] said:how many people have Bush "killed"? compared to Saddam?
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
Depends which Bush you're talking about.Shevchenko-[7] said:how many people have Bush "killed"? compared to Saddam?
The verdict was announced as soon as it was made by the court, not held back by anyone, and the US government did not have any influence over the duration of the trial.Krypton X said:Sentenced to death, who didn't see that coming. But for the verdict to be issued just 2 days before the US mid-term elections, now that's something else. Seriously these neo-cons have no shame, banking on something like that for short-term political gain, without sparing a moment to consider how their decisions will impact on others, or what ramifications they'll have in the more distant future.
Nah it would have to have been in an Iraqi run prison. I am opposed to capital punishment, but it would be very difficult to see how imprisonment would work. He couldnt exactly be kept in a regular prison alongside the other prisoners, but it would be inhumane to keep him in permanent solitary confinement. Some sort of house arrest probably would have been the only option, and that's not exactly a harsh punishment. And, of course, while he is still alive, there is always the chance, however small, that some future government will overturn the decision and release him, or that he may be freed, and that he may even look possible to return to power. It would anger the US no end, but as people like the President of Iran prove, that's not always much of a deterrent.Krypton X said:But I share the view that Saddam should've been thrown in a jail cell and left to rot there for ever. I hear Abu Ghraib prison has great accommodation and offers very nice retirement packages.
Yeah, I, like you, can definately see the mentality that would want him out of the way quickly. I'm not sure it will work exactly like that, may even cause violence to escalate, but atleast it will remove what is regarded by many to be the figurehead of the countries problems (though not by nearly as many as would regard George Dubya in that position) and perhaps deflate many of the insurgents somewhat.Krypton X said:I can still understand the Iraqi government's eagerness to do away with him as quickly as possible, specially with the country being so unstable and many Saddam supporters more than willing to fight to free him or even bring him back to power. And more importantly this will finally offer some sort of justice and bring closure to the millions of his victims and their families.
I hope you're joking here, because otherwise you would appear to be a very sick and twisted individual. How anyone can even consider torture to be acceptable in the modern world is beyond my comprehension, and it is one reason why Saddam was so evil. I'm not absolutely sure about this, but wasnt there a bill recently in the US that would have legalised some aspects of torture, that was only narrowly defeated thanks to John McCain? The level of hypocrisy and neanderthal draconianism that the US shows is putting up with and practising torture really disgusts me.Krypton X said:Instead of hanging though I would've preferred to see something more dramatic, like stoning to death, where each Iraqi citizen would get to throw one stone at him and they'll all get a turn even after he's dead. Or maybe use one of those ancient Chinese torture methods, like how they used to slice open a prisoner's flesh while he was all tied up and cut up his limbs while he was STILL ALIVE so that he could feel the full effect of the pain.
Or maybe i've just been watching too many violent horror flicks for my own good.
I dont know, man, 72 virgins may sound good on paper, but I'm willing to bet that after seven or eight blushing maidens you'd be begging for an experienced hooker to tug you just right.Krypton X said:But whichever way he dies, he can count on having a sexy hot date waiting for him when he does.
Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:He couldnt exactly be kept in a regular prison alongside the other prisoners, but it would be inhumane to keep him in permanent solitary confinement.
Nope, and I dont agree with it. I dont believe in any form of capital punishment, but when it is the only option (which I'm still not convinced that it is here), I believe it is essential that it is done painlessly, either by using gas or lethal injection.Virgo said:so hanging is more humane?
Shevchenko-[7] said:how many people have Bush "killed"? compared to Saddam?
Krypton X said:...
Instead of hanging though I would've preferred to see something more dramatic, like stoning to death, where each Iraqi citizen would get to throw one stone at him and they'll all get a turn even after he's dead. Or maybe use one of those ancient Chinese torture methods, like how they used to slice open a prisoner's flesh while he was all tied up and cut up his limbs while he was STILL ALIVE so that he could feel the full effect of the pain.
Or maybe i've just been watching too many violent horror flicks for my own good.
...
Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:......The verdict was announced as soon as it was made by the court, not held back by anyone, and the US government did not have any influence over the duration of the trial.
Possibly. Who knows what pressure the court was under to wrap up the Dujeil case quickly. In the past the Bush administration had often rejected any suggestions they pull out troops from Iraq 'before the job is done' but in the last few weeks they lambasted the Iraqi government for their slow progress and according to leaked reports they gave Iraq a timeline which will see most of the country handed back to the Iraqis within the next 2 years and a massive scaling down of troop presence from over 150,000 to nearly 66,000. Why this urgency and sudden shift of policy that was not so forthcoming before. Is it another case of party politics taking precedence over the national interest or international duty.Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:The verdict was announced as soon as it was made by the court, not held back by anyone, and the US government did not have any influence over the duration of the trial.
It is, Abu Ghraib was handed back to the Iraqis a couple of months agoSir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:Nah it would have to have been in an Iraqi run prison.
Dude, we're talking about Sadman Hussein here not Lee Stewart.Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:I am opposed to capital punishment, but it would be very difficult to see how imprisonment would work. He couldnt exactly be kept in a regular prison alongside the other prisoners, but it would be inhumane to keep him in permanent solitary confinement.
I don't think the US cares about Saddam anymore, he was a nuisance and now he's out of the way, they're just holding on to him because he's one of the last cards they still have with which they could attempt to justify the war.Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:And, of course, while he is still alive, there is always the chance, however small, that some future government will overturn the decision and release him, or that he may be freed, and that he may even look possible to return to power. It would anger the US no end, but as people like the President of Iran prove, that's not always much of a deterrent.
It's still alot more humane than George Michael music death campsSir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:I hope you're joking here, because otherwise you would appear to be a very sick and twisted individual. How anyone can even consider torture to be acceptable in the modern world is beyond my comprehension, and it is one reason why Saddam was so evil.
Saddam and his sons have already raped half the virgins they had in Iraq. 72 virgins doesn't do much for them anymore, but I believe Saddam will finally find true love and (anal) fulfillment where he's going.Sir Sir_Didier_Drogba said:I dont know, man, 72 virgins may sound good on paper, but I'm willing to bet that after seven or eight blushing maidens you'd be begging for an experienced hooker to tug you just right.
It is an important milestone on Iraq's course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain, and defend itself
US President George W Bush
king;2248735 said:What a perfect timing! Because in 2 days, everyone will be having fun, getting drunk and will be spanking some bitches on New Years Eve and no one will remember him!!
leungtl;2248738 said:2 Days?! Try less than 24 hours
Tom;2248746 said:it's weird watching them explaining to him how the noose will be around his neck, just very strange to see someone being told things minutes before he will then cease to exist.
I'm not gonna start again with my "Death" thread, which was entirely demented, but it does make you think...