Well time in coming wouldn't you say, but Saddam is still on the loose, but the noose is surely tightening around him. The Hussein dynasty seems to be broken, no inheiritance for the Iraqi throne.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/22/sprj.irq.sons/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Saddam Hussein's sons Qusay and Uday were killed Tuesday in a firefight with U.S. troops in Mosul, the commander of U.S. ground forces in Iraq said.

Uday, 39, and Qusay, 37 -- key members of Saddam's regime -- were among four people killed during a dramatic four-hour battle in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul.

Intelligence reports had indicated Uday and Qusay, who have $15 million bounties each on their heads, were in the Mosul area, and the official added: "We didn't just stumble across them."

Two-hundred members of the 101st Airborne Division also joined the assault, and no one was captured:bugeye: , a U.S. official told CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr.

A senior Pentagon official said one of the other two bodies appeared to be that of a teenage boy. U.S. officials noted that Qusay has a teenage son. The other body recovered appeared to be that of a bodyguard.

A U.S. official said Saddam was not among them.

The initial White House reaction was cautious, although one official said confirmation that the two sons were killed would "brighten" spirits after recent criticism that the Bush administration exaggerated the former Iraqi regime's threat.

Mosul is a Kurd-controlled city about 110 miles (176 kilometers) from both Syria and Iran.

(Wrong Mosul is a mostly Arab city, yeah the Hussiens would be in a Kurdish city.:rolleyes: )

Should the bodies prove to be Saddam's sons, intelligence officials said they are looking at the possibility that Uday and Qusay were attempting to find a way out of Iraq.

The hunt for Saddam in Iraq is led by a U.S. Special Operations team -- code-named Task Force 20 -- with support from the CIA. The task force, which also took part in the rescue of Army Pfc. Jessica Lynch,

(shooting into the air, yes those Phantom Iraqi's ohh so scary)

includes covert special forces from the various U.S. military services. (Lynch homecoming)

Qusay has been the son widely perceived as most likely to succeed Saddam

Uday has a reputation for violence that included torturing Iraqi athletes who did not meet expectations. He ran the dreaded Saddam Fedayeen security force.

He was also in charge of the nation's Olympic committee, edited a leading newspaper, Babel, and was head of Youth TV, the country's most popular channel.

Just before the war, Uday warned that Iraqi troops would make the mothers of U.S. soldiers "weep blood instead of tears."


Well the Hussein dynasty is truly over, now the questions arise. Was it wise to kill both sons? If anyone knew of possible WMD, or where daddy was hiding it was them. Uday could have been Saddam's weak card, neither of them liked each other. Is this the end of Bath'ism in Iraq or just a big knock?

Was it wise to kill both sons?
Course it was - couldn't have an embarressing trial where they go "WMDs? What are you on about, you knew we had none!" on live TV, now could we?

Should the bodies prove to be Saddam's sons, intelligence officials said they are looking at the possibility that Uday and Qusay were attempting to find a way out of Iraq.Hold your applause until the DNA evidence is in.

:m: Peace.

From the reports it seems his sons were pretty sick and twisted individuals. One of them, I read, raped women whenever he pleases and whomever he disliked he would put throuhg paper shredders or something.

No I think it is quite nice that they are dead. :)

It is a shame they came to their end by amerikan zionist hands .

US confirms Saddam sons killed (http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=254796&lang=e&dir=news)

Well time in coming wouldn't you say, but Saddam is still on the loose, but the noose is surely tightening around him. The Hussein dynasty seems to be broken, no inheiritance for the Iraqi throne.

Saddam would surely find somebody else . But no I dont think that he's been tightened in as he might not even be in Iraq . Hes an old man who doesnt go around shooting amerikans with militias , so if he is in Iraq (I say Dubai) , he wont be captured any quicker because of this incident with his sons .

I wonder , would Sadam care his boys are dead ? I mean any other than military loss .... I think so though

intelligence officials said they are looking at the possibility that Uday and Qusay were attempting to find a way out of Iraq.


I dont think so , if they would want to leave Iraq they (themselves) dont have to go fight zionists for 4-6 hrs .
They are far too rich for that .

I say they're nutters who think they can play out historical battles , something like what those lunatic amerikans do with their yankee-rebel playes of the civil war ..... I say that hilarious shit is an active consciousness in those boys minds as well .

Was it wise to kill both sons? If anyone knew of possible WMD, or where daddy was hiding it was them. Uday could have been Saddam's weak card, neither of them liked each other.

As there were no reasons to be revealed by either of them , nothing one could betray the other with at all , why keep them alive ? All they will do is make peoples look like a dick on TV as Sparky-boy says ...... remember Slobo going on about Clinton & Srebrenica ? No all of that just doesnt look to good on TV .

Other then WMD something like : "UBL ? Hey YOU were the one with supporting UBL and his fanatics to take us down remember ?

Is this the end of Bath'ism in Iraq or just a big knock?

I see its a big knock for that family really , fortunatly Ba'ath is a bit bigger then that . Also Ba'ath transformed itself .... some went into USA collaboration , others went/are going into resistance . Weither this is under Saddams command (no) or not .

No I think this is rather independant for the consequences of Ba'ath as a whole in Iraq . But it is pretty hard on their family if it turns out that was them . They're the richest outthere . Im sure though they still manage to split the money , with or without our boys .

General Sanchez announced that the bodies are Uday and Qusay Hussein.

They're dead.

Now on to the old man.

Did it occur to you Crazy Gaza Occupant that they put up a four hour long firefight so capturing them wasn't an option?

Oh wait more Zionist conspiracy!!! lol.

It is a shame they came to their end by amerikan zionist hands .

Don't use Appeal to Emotion fallacies here that just pisses people off.

It bothers me that most people are cheering these deaths. Go and ask the average person who is cheering this what the sons did. I'm willing to bet that they can't name anything you would consider killing someone for.

Not to say that they didn't deserve this... just that most people don't know anything about it, and just follow the line.

Originally posted by Persol
It bothers me that most people are cheering these deaths. Go and ask the average person who is cheering this what the sons did. I'm willing to bet that they can't name anything you would consider killing someone for.

Not to say that they didn't deserve this... just that most people don't know anything about it, and just follow the line.
here or there? i think plenty here know from the media , it was a good story; as gory as a Grimm's.

there, i'd think they have a pretty good idea of how criminally repulsive they were, or a pretty good inkling, since they lived under it. hell, they should be forced into re-education camps to teach them, if they don't.

i hope they dont give them a decent burial.
sayonara! burn in hell, f-ckers.

I'd say here most don't know much beyond "his sons are dead"

Originally posted by Persol
I'd say here most don't know much beyond "his sons are dead"
i really dont know if its the majority. the story really got around. anyways, it's the same % of the population that never pay attention to the news. ever.

btw, NPR reported celebratory iraqi gunfire at the news.

curly
Did it occur to you Crazy Gaza Occupant that they put up a four hour long firefight so capturing them wasn't an option?

A fire fight of 4 hours doesnt indicate no possibility for capturing .
Question was rather weither they would care .

Oh wait more Zionist conspiracy!!! lol.

no thats you with those imaginations

WCF
Don't use Appeal to Emotion fallacies here that just pisses people off.

Was it an argument for it to be such a fallacy ? No rather it was the statement that they died by the hands of them and not Arab .

Also weither peoples are content with it or not is not my problem especially when they are dealing with imaginary fallacies without arguments to find them in .

Persol
Not to say that they didn't deserve this... just that most people don't know anything about it, and just follow the line.

I think I agree on your point , most peoples rather have no idea of them other than sons of Saddam and judge them by that rather than that they have genuine arguments against them personally .

But from a perspective of an Iraqi I hope you can understand how this specific thing becomes a bit less relevant , I hope .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ghassan KanafaniI think I agree on your point , most peoples rather have no idea of them other than sons of Saddam and judge them by that rather than that they have genuine arguments against them personally .
[QUOTE]

nobody called for the deaths of any of OBL's sons & americans have a bigger beef with OBL than saddam.

so what if some % of the public is knee-jerk ignoramuses?
so is the most of the arab street--they just barf up the usual crap they infer from other ignoramuses, too.

Ghassan Kanafani,

A Appeal to Emotion fallacy is more of a tactics: you make evil what your against with very negative words, it does not make your statement, claims or argument any more true or any less false.

A Appeal to Emotion is more commonly associated to the opposite: using positive emotions to make things seem better, such as placing beautiful women on car ads, politicians kissing babies and trying to look nice despite their political stance, government big brother propaganda, ect.

LMAO! Nico, I got the OMA part of the title ;)

I don't trust anything until DNA proof is given. How exactly can they "confirm" it with no "hard" evidence? Also, I find it funny how Saddam's SONS go down so easily.

By the way, WERE THE HELL IS SADDAM!

I find it sad that people actually applaud the murdering of anyone. It is a sure sign of today's mentality. No wonder humans fight wars constantly, we seem to enjoy it and go looking for a reason to kill somebody.

I personally don't know the people so I couldn't say exactly what type of boys they were. Do you know them? What is your basis of knowledge? U.S. media, hehehee, give me a break.

Furthermore, speaking of media, as goofyfish said, "wait for the DNA evidence."

Saddams sons were sadistic, depraved, and megalomaniacal and I am most happy that they are dead. Nobody as evil as they were should be allowed to exist.

In fact I would have no problem at all with putting the heads of Saddam's sons on poles and mounting them in the middle of Baghdad. That might not be the right message though.... Too much like the old regiem...

Now if only we could get the big cheese, Saddam. Shouldn't be long.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4196.htm

Give that a read.

Also, I find it funny how suddenly, among all the Democrat pressure, lowered ratings, etc etc we manage to "kill Saddam's sons".

Also:

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=254774&lang=e&dir=news

However, this may be false.

Also, I find it funny how suddenly, among all the Democrat pressure, lowered ratings, etc etc we manage to "kill Saddam's sons".
i feel it too, just bad feeling based on previous offenses. its not a 6th sense, its just expected to be a sham or a set-up now.
THAT's depressing. not getting happy over the evil kid's deaths. people have been rejoicing over bad men dying since forever.
they deserved the most ignamonious of deaths.

Suh-WEET!

'Fetus:
A Appeal to Emotion fallacy is more of a tactics: you make evil what your against with very negative words, it does not make your statement, claims or argument any more true or any less false.

You sick fuck, why don't you go back to taking candy from babies or pulling the wings off flies. Using logic around Ghassan Khandaffi?
Oh man. :p

Using too much logic around Ghassy might make his head explode... that is cruel. I LIKE IT.

Seems like Bush's Texas justice is now extended to the military branches. They raid a house and kill two guys who were originally not part of the evidence presented by the US for invading Iraq. This overwhelmingly seems like a ploy to bulster moral for the American soldiers and to score points for Bush on the popularity polls. The soldiers out in Iraq are fighting a demoralizing battle with the on and off again quick attacks. They are also made to police an entire country. That was not part of the patriotic message that was drilled into them during training. "You will not only defend freedom and your country! You will be serving your duty to civilize the ones who we give freedom! OORAH!" And back home, there is the bad press with the false information about nukes as well as the reality of our military being in Iraq for more than a few years....or maybe it's the reality that the liberal-media will be watching Iraq for more than a few years, who knows. The Whitehouse needs some good information to give to it's military and it's people.

Just like it was mentioned, why didn't the military capture these guys? They are the in the "top 10" aren't they? They know more than our brilliant NSA and CIA. They were in a house, most likely UNARMED, and from General Sanchez's briefing a reporter said there was a 14 year old boy who was killed during the raid....of course the General couldn't say "Yes, the military went in firing and shot whoever was in the building." He opted for the always evasive "We are looking into that at the moment" answer. They soldiers went in and took pot shots....I wonder where that superb military order originated

The reasons for killing these guys are because they have committed crimes against humanity, they have done Saddam's dirty work, they rape women, they kill people for stupid reasons. These men are not capable of organizing another government, they were Saddam's henchmen...they are not leaders. So, Texas-justice came to the military today and shot these two "just because." These two guys death's would be comprable to Osama Bin Laden blowing up all of the CIA and NSA. Would it be right that he killed these organizations? Yes, because they promote killing people for inane causes. But would you feel safer, that these organizations were gone? Nope, they don't affect my daily life. Out of sight, out of mind. These guys were nobody before the Iraq occupation, and all of a sudden everyone is supposed to be cheering that these people are dead. They were of no threat to US freedom or its democracy and they were incapable of leading an organization to reclaim Iraq's government and threaten their soon-to-be freedom, democracy, and other liberties. Has anyone heard differently?

I've got no time for this phoney war but I gotta admit that America finally did something right. Like Goofy and others I'd like to see some DNA evidence just to be sure (They both had a number of doubles as I understand it) but still this good news.:)

Drinks all round.
Dee Cee

No, wait, we should have captured them....

We could have tortured them till they told us of the WMD....

Then afterwards we could arrange for public executions... beheadings or hangings? Maybe boil them!

Oh, sorry, that would be considered cruel and unusual punishment and would be against Geneva Convention. Twas much more humane to blow their heads off!

Like I said, you are sick people to be actually HAPPY about someone's death.

No, wait, we should have captured them....

We could have tortured them till they told us of the WMD....

Then afterwards we could arrange for public executions... beheadings or hangings? Maybe boil them!

Damn, you're turning me on.

Like I said, you are sick people to be actually HAPPY about someone's death.

You're right. We should be like you and be overjoyed to know that these fucks are alive and making other humans miserable.

Yeah you got to love how that brave old battalion risk their lives the first time to rescue jessica lynch from all those evil doctors and nurses firing at pretend Iraqi Special forces.

And now it took 200 of them to raid them and kill one of Saddams Son's who is confined to a wheel chair and their teenage sons as well omg so brave.

Whilst i've heard all that Urday etc did and i will shed no tears over his death it still doesn't supprise me the Americans went in again and shot everything that moved including some 12-13 year old kids and a cripple.
I know a lot of people will go mad at me for saying this but it just irks me when people applaud mindlessly this overthe top action and especially the fact that no prisoners were taken as if it was some kind of macho movie thing that is "cool" "Take no prisoners" so cool.
I wouldnt be supprised if from what i heard of Urday that he would go down fighting but i'm sure 200 marines could of supprsed them enough to capture some of them alive and gotten good intellegence out of them
Didnt it occour to them they may know where there father is?
Or do the US Forces already have him or know hes dead but can blame him if they say he is still on the loose the same as OBL.
Was it neccessary to shoot a cripple and his young teenage sons?
Was that cool to? did it make them feel like big men?

ffs.
Whilst i appreciate the US forces over there have thier lives at risk courtesy of "bring em on" bush and are pissed off i wouldnt call such a slaughter a sucesful mission.
Surely the mission would of been to capture such important intellegence sources alive if possable and killing them all would be a primary failure though a sucess in its own right perhaps.
How many Iraqi's were there versus the 200 odd Marines?
Do you belive that when the slaughter started not a single one tried to surrender or run away? even the kids and the cripple?
or did they just "Get in the way".
I suppose "these things happen in war" "Collateral damage" right?
Pah call me a sissy whatever but it just pisses me off when people all around me are going yeah they killed them all well done.

Let's just do the "math" here, shall we?
Uday and Quasay were in positions of power for what, a combined total of nearly thirty years?
That's thirty years of suffering, torture and death.
What did the rest of Iraq get from it? They were scared for four hours and then *wallop* a bullet through the head and a near-painless death.

So why are the right-wing "hang 'em high" crowd cheering so loudly?

I knew id find the link somewhere

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3140783&src=eDialog/GetContent

The brothers had been hiding there in a villa which 200 U.S. soldiers, backed by helicopters, attacked with machinguns and rockets on Tuesday.


200 Marines backup by Rockets and Attack Helicopters on a Villa.
Not taking any chances were they.
Shock and Awe?

We got those sons... Now to bag dad.:p

IMO it was foolhardy to kill the sons, I mean if anyone had a clue about WMD it was them, if anyone knew where papa Stal.. Saddam is it is them. To kill them succeded in what some celebratory gun fire, and a temporary upswing in morale amount Americans? But overall the war is still being fought, Al Qaeda had installed itself in Iraq now, and the mosaic of hate against the US is growing reguardless of faith, ideology, or race. The US better get ready b.c if Papa is still around he is out for revenge big time.

hoeny
nobody called for the deaths of any of OBL's sons & americans have a bigger beef with OBL than saddam.

point ? relevancy ?

so what if some % of the public is knee-jerk ignoramuses?

some % = vast majority
so what = shows your stupidity as a peoples

so is the most of the arab street

Yes most of the Arab street is just as stupid . Point ?

they just barf up the usual crap they infer from other ignoramuses, too.

Read Plato-Thaetetus

Difference is between truth with knowledge truth without knowledge .

WellCookedFetus

Thank you for explaining me the fallacy but I have already had my Logics Intro 1 2 and 3 , so I kinda knew that already ;)

However you did not to seem to get the point . You did not use this as a logical fallacy .

It is very much indeed a tactic as you say , however it is considered merely a logical fallacy when it is used within an argument . That was not the case , therefor your entire accusation is based on 0 .

it does not make your statement, claims or argument any more true or any less false.

false can only be the argued containment , and that has not followed yet . See you mistake the mere expression of a zionist as a logical fallacy , while the fallacy is to be look within the argument defending why they are indeed zionists .

You can say may statement is false , that is very nice . However it is not false based on logics as the argument proving the fallacy does not exist .

A Appeal to Emotion is more commonly associated

..............

Do we change our accusation ? Is it now an appeal to emotion and not the logical fallacy ? That is argueable , however emotional appeal in general is found with not just the one typing the words but also with the one reading them .

Perhaps you are to emotionally damaged and consider appeals emotional others with a less damaged emotional status would not .

I am sure you would rather focus on my socalled appeal and negelect your reception , wich is fine with me as well .

Tell me then , how do I intend to import emotional bias or what you wish to clal it , into the sentence that is in discussion ?

WERE THE HELL IS SADDAM!

Dubai . Mecca is also a very good possibility .

Clockwood

I would have no problem at all with putting the heads of Saddam's sons on poles and mounting them in the middle of Baghdad

Neither do I , great idea Clock ...... never new that your emotions could be so helpfull . Be sure to tell all your friends .

That might not be the right message though.... Too much like the old regiem...

Yes it is , go convince .

Now if only we could get the big cheese, Saddam. Shouldn't be long.

So u gonna invade Dubai & Mecca ?

He's too rich and not a lunatic like his boys to get cought like that .

GuitarToadster

Do you know them?

Enough not to tear for them . If you would bring them to me in a context of possibility Id love to shoot them myself really .

I find it sad that people actually applaud the murdering of anyone. It is a sure sign of today's mentality. No wonder humans fight wars constantly, we seem to enjoy it and go looking for a reason to kill somebody.

That conclusion is easy drawn if you have lived in peace all your life . Human life is overvalued and I think peoples have a serious issue counting and adding up .

How is applauding in innocense any worse than condeming with blood on your hands .

We could have tortured them till they told us of the WMD....

No they would made you look like a dick , that would never be an option .

Then afterwards we could arrange for public executions... beheadings or hangings? Maybe boil them!


Aside the "afterwards" part I think boiling would be a kick-ass for those Shia , yes good very good plan boil them , lol .

you are sick people to be actually HAPPY about someone's death.

Well torture is one thing , but death ? Come back from disneyworld buddy if you care for death somuch go and cry for 35.000 peoples that starve to death PER DAY .

Come on now ..... human life is worth just as much as any other human life and in todays disney society dying is just like pooping babies , complete WORTHLESS .

Hey we got keep things in good balance here , if you're not falling apart every day for 35G (that both you and me hold certain responsibility for) we whine for Uday ?

Im sure your heart is at the right place man , but if you wanna be a hippy then at least be a good one and consider all worlds misery and dont discriminate because someone happens to talk about Uday .

wait for the DNA evidence

They say dental evidence has shown 90% & 100% certainty .
I have no opinion on this .

10-10-220

http://www.informationclearinghouse...article4196.htm

Yes nice article , has some interesting things to say .

The two men obviously fought fiercely against the 200 American troops who surrounded the house.

Were they alone ? I cant believe that . How many corpses do they have ?

would Uday and Qusay really be together? Would they allow themselves to be trapped. The two so-called "lions of Iraq" (this courtesy of Saddam) in the very same cage?

Why not ? Would they let themselves get killed in any way ? They're lunatic and careless ways surely would allow it , but would that go for both ?

Even if DNA testing proves that the corpses are those of Saddam's sons, will Iraqis believe it?

DNA tests are not ulitmate evidence for a person who cannot validate the tests , their corpses are .

And will it bring the guerrilla war to an end?

Not one bit , chances are it can fuel it .

Take a look at this video with Abdul Bari Atwan from Al Quds paper about what he believes the effects are of the death of the punks on : CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/videoplayer/newVid/video_display_new.html?clip=/media/2003/07/23/video564619.rm)

The United States believes that the entire resistance to America's proconsulship of Iraq is composed of "remnants" of Saddam's followers, "dead-enders", "bitter-enders" - they have other phrases to describe them. Their theory is that once the Hussein family is decapitated, the resistance will end.

But the guerrillas who are killing US troops every day are also being attacked by a growing Islamist Sunni movement which never had any love for Saddam. Much more importantly, many Iraqis were reluctant to support the resistance for fear that an end to American occupation would mean the return of the ghastly old dictator.

If he and his sons are dead, the chances are that the opposition to the American-led occupation will grow rather than diminish - on the grounds that with Saddam gone, Iraqis will have nothing to lose by fighting the Americans.

Has similiraities with the video no ?

First about the resistance :
* They're not just Ba'athists
* They're not just Iran
* They're not just Al Qaida

All of them have small groups growing who ally with them and share support of the peoples of Iraq . The longer this goes on the more peoples' resistance the resistance becomes , and not just in the minds but by action .

A Shia uprising was promissed (not good at all) after that incident 3 days ago : http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26008

Secondly (and thats what that video is about) , is how the deaths of these punks can encourage the peoples (pro and anti Sadam) . The scum is gone , so what now ?

However, this may be false.

Why what is the problem you have with that article on those hits on amerikans ?

PsychoCannon

How many Iraqi's were there versus the 200 odd Marines?

Yes thats what I want to know as well .

Nico

Al Qaeda had installed itself in Iraq now

Yup
:)

So it's okay for the US to release photos of the dead bodies, but if the Iraqis were to do so for dead US/K soldiers, it's a crime against humanity?
:rolleyes:

And just as a small question - where are the US getting their DNA and dental x-rays to compare against the bodies?

So it's okay for the US to release photos of the dead bodies, but if the Iraqis were to do so for dead US/K soldiers, it's a crime against humanity?


Well Sparks I am just as disgusted as you, but the war is officially over correct, and these people are now as the US calls them "enemy combatents. Also it is a sad fact that the US is the hyperpower who is going to question her? :(

the war is officially over correct
No, it's not. Hence the phrase "major combat operations".
Technically, the war is still ongoing.
Hence the lack of release of POWs, the lack of any Iraqi government and so on.

I think we have come to a sad and pathetic point in our civilization when we start feeling joy and happiness at political assassinations of leaders (whoever they are and whatever they’ve done). The US has a policy (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030723/ap_on_go_pr_wh/assassination_ban_5)
against political assassinations which is being ignored as time goes on. I think it is disgusting how the government openly talks about “capturing or killing”.

Ahh yes, sorry forgot. But nevertheless the US will not consider these Iraqi's are POW's, I am shocked that they aren't going to Guantanimo!

Ahh yes, sorry forgot. But nevertheless the US will not consider these Iraqi's are POW's, I am shocked that they aren't going to Guantanimo!
I'm not - Guantanamo has a lot of press these days. Camp Cropper (no, I'm not kidding, that's the actual name) is the new Guantanamo, dontca know...

Amnesty International called on the United States today to give hundreds of Iraqis detained since the beginning of the occupation the right to meet families and lawyers and to have a judicial review of their detention. The organization also called on the US to investigate allegations of ill-treatment, torture and death into custody. (http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/2003/iraq06302003.html)

Amnesty International today accused the US-led occupying forces in Iraq of failing to uphold human rights in their treatment of Iraqi civilians. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1004538,00.html)

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqis detained by U.S. troops have complained of torture and degrading treatment, Amnesty International said Wednesday. (http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3139847)

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Amnesty International accused U.S. troops on Sunday of "very severe" human rights abuses in Iraq and complained that it had been denied access to thousands of prisoners held without charge in "appalling" conditions." (http://asia.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=3121815)

Ghassan Kanafani,

Your statement was exaggerated in an appeal to emotion, live with it. True as I said without an argument it is not a “fallacy” per say but your just strawmaning my point. Which is that your emotional exaggerating your point, if you wish to make a statement that you want others to take more seriously your must remain neutral.

Who would cry over the death of these two men. Better these convicted arbitrary murderers and rapists are dead than two dozen American soliders trying to capture them.

Did it ever occur to anyone that they wouldn't probably be taken alive anyways? They would have killed themselves rather than be taken by the U.S. and executed later on.

You forfit your right to be captured when you start shooting at someone.

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani

point ? relevancy ?

you said this of people rejoicing on the deaths of U/Qday:
" most peoples rather have no idea of them other than sons of Saddam and judge them by that rather than that they have genuine arguments against them personally . "

er duh...this isnt paint by numbers, but here goes again:
no one knew anything about OBLs sons or called for their deaths even though they hated the father, so why would anyone 'judge' saddam's son IF THEY DIDNT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THEM TOO?

jeebus, id be here all day picking out the sematics of your posts, ghassy: "...rather than that they have genuine arguments against them personally . "
...because what ghassy? how many people do you think knew them personally??


some % = vast majority
so what = shows your stupidity as a peoples
no, shows your lack of the elliptical in the english language.
i don't have to point out to others that what i meant was it bears no importance, what the majority of people on the street think, because they are a constant & generally don't make an impact on anything, & especially not in minor affairs like killing 2 repulsive people we thoroughly identify as the enemy.
is that clearer? probably not, oh well...



Difference is between truth with knowledge truth without knowledge .
only in your brain, ghassbag, do you make relevant points, are logical, & the master of the universal truth.

Originally posted by thecurly1
Who would cry over the death of these two men. Better these convicted arbitrary murderers and rapists are dead than two dozen American soliders trying to capture them.

Did it ever occur to anyone that they wouldn't probably be taken alive anyways? They would have killed themselves rather than be taken by the U.S. and executed later on.

You forfit your right to be captured when you start shooting at someone.

didnt it take 4 hours? oh, yeah. 4 hours to "murder" "unarmed" men in that house, ...yeah right.....& who really believes they wouldnt have had at the very least guns on them? yeah right, that fits in with their way of life, & the situation of peril they were in. sheesh.

& btw, presenting corpses wouldnt matter to these idiot arabists & fundamentalists, etc, with their conspiracy theories...please.

This just goes to show how america is getting more primitive by the day. They have reverted to pre-roman revenge killings, and burried the finally deceased carcas of modern justice.

And just as a small question - where are the US getting their DNA and dental x-rays to compare against the bodies?
Hahaha! They don't have them! Isn't that funny?

Good question, EI. Because I remember before the war, the media and government were saying they didn't have DNA samples of Saddam or his highups, so even if they were able to recover a body, they would have no idea if it was the real guy. But I'm sure the US has it's ways of pulling it off the deaths of the most wanted men................by the way, where's Osama and his threat to US security now? Oh, the US never caputured him and never killed him and security seems to be fine......and where are those color coded warning levels now?..........and in a few weeks, everyone will be asking, where are those DNA samples now?

Of course, there will be another news story to detract from all the bad press about what the Whitehouse is doing and that question will be put aside.

WellCookedFetus

Your statement was exaggerated in an appeal to emotion, live with it. True as I said without an argument it is not a “fallacy” per say but your just strawmaning my point.

Your point was that it was logical fallacy wich it wasnt . As I said exageration of my statement in appeal for emotion can be debated , it does matter that there are 2 sides of the story , the intention and the reception . Can you live with that ?

Which is that your emotional exaggerating your point, if you wish to make a statement that you want others to take more seriously your must remain neutral.

Why should I maintain neutral ? I offer a perspective , surely Im not in political games here so I dont see it other than a rehtorical tool what you advise , dealing with the art of persuasion . I care little for that in this point , the point made was they should have died by Iraqi hands and not Amerikan .

hoeny : seek help .

grazzhoppa :

They don't have them! Isn't that funny?


So whats up with this claim of dental evidence ? They say now that they're identified , so they're lying ?

It would really make them look like an ass if they turn up again . Also it really doesnt help the situation there to have these boys dead , would that be worth less than their Public appearance in USA ?

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
Im sure your heart is at the right place man , but if you wanna be a hippy then at least be a good one and consider all worlds misery and dont discriminate because someone happens to talk about Uday .

Hey man, for your info, I AM a hippy... long hair and all.

I was speaking in general terms, if you noticed. I said I find it sad that people are happy about ANYONE'S death. Wasn't focused specifically on just Saddam's two son's.

It is actually what is wrong with our society as a whole... on one hand we run around murdering people for any old reason (their beliefs, the way they dress, their money, etc) but on the other we devote so much time and effort into trying to preserve people's lives and allow them to artificially live many years past their "normal life span."

Doesn't it seem... a bit odd?

Here people will applaud and hurray at an Iraqi's death (again I am speaking in general terms, not about Saddam or his family) and yet if an Iraqi were to kill an American it would be horrible. The opposite is possibly true over there (in Iraq).

I just personally find it the sickness of society to have such a deep love for the morbid. We sit glued to the TV to watch Cops beat the crap out of blacks or hispanics, gotta catch some glimpse of our "war heroes" blasting rounds at Iraqi's... maybe we'll see some blood! Also, just like the bad accident on the highway, everyone has to slow down and get a good look at the mangled car and bodies....

I say, if you are so fascinated by it, why don't you run yourself through a meat grinder and save the rest of us some time....:m:

'Fetus:
Your statement was exaggerated in an appeal to emotion, live with it. True as I said without an argument it is not a “fallacy” per say but your just strawmaning my point.

He's not going to be able to handle much more of this.

Bets on how much longer Ghassan Khandaffi can stand 'Fetus' use of logic/debate terms.

Ghassan Kanafani,

Actually you use the appeal to emotion fallacy all through out that post on parts with a definitive premises and conclusion, thus making it a fallacy. So I stand by my original observation.

No your argument do not need to be neutral at all (how could they) but you do not need to add in emotionally negative and many times incorrect words like “Zionist” and “Amerikans” Last time I look the USofA armed forces are not Israeli Jewish fundamentalist and America is spell with a “C” in it either showing that you can’t spell or you are misspelling the name in a sign of disrespect. Try to make all wording in a statements neutral and factual, people won’t look at the first sentence and ignore the rest or attack you blatantly because they now think you just another Muslim Troller.

Xev,

When is blood curdles I will leave him be.

I'm glad we are all so comfortable talking about death this way.

Mmmmm.....death........(gurgling slobber)

They should be glad Bush is president and not me cause I am NOT a nice person at heart. (though I keep myself under control most of the time) I would personally want to throw those two in a machine that slowly vivisects them but also keeps them alive for 99 years.

Like I said: I'm NOT a nice person.

Xev : seek help

Fetus :

Actually you use the appeal to emotion fallacy all through out that post on parts with a definitive premises and conclusion, thus making it a fallacy. So I stand by my original observation.

merely stating that you consider them being there and valid by the relation premis/conclusion doesnt make them be there .

1)please point them out , and distinguish premis from conclusion .
2)please explain the emotional appeal intention .

No your argument do not need to be neutral at all (how could they) but you do not need to add in emotionally negative and many times incorrect words like “Zionist” and “Amerikans”Last time I look the USofA armed forces are not Israeli Jewish fundamentalist and America is spell with a “C” in it either showing that you can’t spell or you are misspelling the name in a sign of disrespect.

1)Zionists : pro-Israeli forces . not Jewish-Israeli fundamentalists .

2)Amerikan : thats how I distinguish between the country and continent , sometimes I try to watch for it , but i do admit I couldnt really care based on :
* irellevance of spelling to understand what we talk about .
* arrogant hijacking of 2 continents into one nation wich proper name is USA .

people wonÂ’t look at the first sentence and ignore the rest or attack you blatantly because they now think you just another Muslim Troller.

Who are these peoples you talk of ? There are view peoples that I have been/am in certain conflict with that I would care to see different other than them to simply be shut .

Surely the future might prove different , but history surely has not . Im not trying to sell a story , thus Im not subject to rthetorical rules on debating like political correctness .

Logics is only whats necesarry , and you have untill sofar faild to show me any logical fallacy .

Good luck .

GuitarRoadster

I said I find it sad that people are happy about ANYONE'S death

There I can agree with you . That is rather sad and most of all disturbed .

Doesn't it seem... a bit odd?

It is , its rather hypocrtical , but thats how the world turns .

Here people will applaud and hurray at an Iraqi's death (again I am speaking in general terms, not about Saddam or his family)

I was not aware of that , I certainly havent really seen it on these boards (well for some exceptions) . Thats quite sick why ? What reason do they have to be glad an Iraqi died ?

The opposite is possibly true over there (in Iraq).

The thing is that we could give you quite some reasons why their deaths should be applauded : they should leave .

I just personally find it the sickness of society to have such a deep love for the morbid. We sit glued to the TV to watch Cops beat the crap out of blacks or hispanics, gotta catch some glimpse of our "war heroes" blasting rounds at Iraqi's... maybe we'll see some blood! Also, just like the bad accident on the highway, everyone has to slow down and get a good look at the mangled car and bodies....

Yes i can understand , its indeed disturbing peoples find some sort of fulfilling situation is seeing somebody ANYBODY die or being hurt .

Well a least its not rational or conscious but reactionary and emotional ....... or is that a bad thing ?

Ghassan Kanafani


You do your namesake a disservice with your idiocy.

Right, right, he tells Xev to seek help. :rolleyes:

If you tried to give her "help", she'd rip off your dick and dance around whipping you with it. Hm, that is a sort of a turn on.

Gassy, so let's hear your opinion on the death of Saddam's sons. Were you happy when they died or not? Why?

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
GuitarToadster


PsychoCannon

How many Iraqi's were there versus the 200 odd Marines?

Yes thats what I want to know as well .

:)

4.
200 Marines with heavy calibre machine guns, and rocket launchers.
Backed up by HumVee mounted TOW Missiles and Attack hellicopters

Versus

Sadams 2 sons one of whom is wheelchair bound
His 14 year old son and one body guard with an AK.
Apparanrtly Uday managed to get his hands on some kind of gun as well before it was all over but still.

Makes you wonder 200 hundred people and all that armour couldnt take 4 people only 2 of whom could fight alive?
Did you see the news footage of the villa?
The entire front face of the building had been blow off the vila and the room behind it walls celings and floor was covered in bullet holes and blast marks.
Litteraly you couldnt find an unmarked spot on that entire wall.
The amount of fire power used against these 4 was unreal.
There would of been no chance for any kind of surrender or survival.

Aparrantly to further insult your intellegence they claim they werent told they were attacking Sadams Sons until after the attack had finished.
Why would they be told to launch an attack to kill or capture (Aparantly the option to capture came in the form of a single call to surrender by Loud hailer 2 minutes before they opened fire with the rocket launchers) the occupants of the villa when they represented such major and important intellegence and strategic targets?

As for the "They fought back hard for 4-6 hours" having seen the amount of fire power unleashed by the damage done to the house and the numbers versus only 2 or (if you want to stretch it 4) people fighting back, i find it hard to belive they really Fought back and if they did how would you tell over the noise of 200 marines, Attack hellicopters Humvees and TOW missiles peppering the entire building that there were a few AK's popping back a few rounds in your general direction without hitting anything?
I find it hard to belive that they were even anywhere near to the front of the building to be able to fight back or they would of been slaughtered in 4 seconds as the walls were destroyed under the power of the assault and even the inner walls were peppered all the way through.

What happened to the old American ideology back from WWII and the trail of the NAZI Leaders where the US were the most adamant that they MUST be captured alive to be tried and executed in front of a court of law rather than be "Summarily executed" or assasinated so as to set precedence and to allow the world to see that even in the face of attrocity they act fairly and to make sure that everything is set down in stone every action we take and everyone we judge the process and cause and reasoning is set down and recorded so that no one in the future will doubt or judge you wrongly and to show you are right?

Ghassan Kanafani.

I dont think so , if they would want to leave Iraq they (themselves) dont have to go fight zionists for 4-6 hrs .

Conclusion: "I don't think so"
Premise: "if they would want to leave Iraq they (themselves) don’t have to go fight Zionists for 4-6 hrs"

The USofA military are not Zionist

How do you know the USofA military is a pro-Israel force do they support Israel take over of Palestine?

USofA would be a far better interpretation of America then Amerikan, people would understand what your talking about.

Sorry my mistake the injured 4 soldiers aparently.
And they also say the last one alive was the 14 yr old but he insisted in shooting back from the top of some stairs near the top of the villa so they shot him too.....

This pics aren't pretty,alive or dead:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/world/0307/gallery.hussein.bodies/gallery.split.qusay.uday.ap.jpg

Dead, morte, fin!

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/world/0307/gallery.hussein.bodies/top.1.sons.jpg

That is a pic of the Slain Qusay Hussein.

And:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/world/0307/gallery.hussein.bodies/top.2.sons.jpg

Freako Uday.

I guess RIP. :bugeye: (moral conflict wouldn't you say)

Isn't it kind of weird how CNN had all this complaining about showing dead USofA soldiers while now their showing Uday and Qusay dead bodies for seemingly hours at end... especially at breakfast :bugeye: what wrath will this bring, and if not is the USofA’s public hypocritical? I think the Daily Show is now my #1 source of news: I am still laughing about Uday’s projected eulogy: “Seldomly raped the disabled.”

Releasing photos of dead iraqis is a mistake. This will enrage the iraqi population more against the US.

These two are dead
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/saddamboys.jpg

But the daughters are still alive in the UAE

Originally posted by dsdsds
Releasing photos of dead iraqis is a mistake. This will enrage the iraqi population more against the US.

actually some iraqis want the bodies dragged in the street or hung on some public square for display. they say photos are not enough.

If they were civilized like Americans they would identify their penises through medical exam and past girlfriends like they did to Clinton.

Originally posted by otheadp
actually some iraqis want the bodies dragged in the street or hung on some public square for display. they say photos are not enough.

yes some.. but not all. Just keep in mind who the enemy is. USA attacked Iraq. Parading dead Iraqis (even hated Iraqis) on TV and in public could have the same effect as staking the American flag everywhere in Bagdad.

potentially.
but remember,
1) the majority HATES the brothers and wants them dead
2) traditionally in the arab world that's what they do to "traitors"....dragging them in the streets and all that... making it very public
3) they won't believe it till they see it. even photos are not enough. those 2 freaks are not distinguishable at all on those lovely photos Nico posted

http://billmon.org/archives/000394.html

Deepuz

Your post should be deleted
Go barf elsewhere

Zero

Xev is frustrated , and my opinion on the boys I already gave .

Go read again if you wish to know .

WellCookedFetus

Conclusion: "I don't think so"
Premise: "if they would want to leave Iraq they (themselves) dont have to go fight Zionists for 4-6 hrs"

There is logical error indeed here , as I now know better . However its not what you are talking about :

The USofA military are not Zionist

yes they are :
* as under command of the USA zionist government .
* as on a mission for zionist aims and goals .

How do you know the USofA military is a pro-Israel force do they support Israel take over of Palestine?

* military has no opinion on matters they are institution and a tool , not representatives . Therefor their personal opinion weither there is support for Israel is irrelevant , as such opinion isnt amongst possibility (hey its not Turkey ;) )

* zionist doesnt mean takeover of Palestine , as Palestine is today . zionist means existance of the state of Israel as it is . If there is support for ANY state of Israel (and in this relevance on the "holy" land) we speak of zionist in a political context of todays actuality .

USofA would be a far better interpretation of America then Amerikan, people would understand what your talking about.

But as we are still stuck on this emotional appeal (surely toward that you point with the previous exmaples and this one as you mentioned in previous posts) , I think you are not really worried weither peoples dont understand me , but rather that they do and by emotional base agree with my definitions , is it not ?

* There is no logic in the fact that you call USA America , America = 2 continents and not 50 united states in one continent . As its commonly used to say American , and the pronounciaton is the same , I think it is sensible to change the c into the k to distinguish .

Psycho-Cannon

* Its strange that they were alone
* based on your arguments I agree there was no intention to capture alive . I do believe they fought back , they're hardcore boy they dont just die like that . There were also situations were army got in and got out 2 times or so (after being under attack) .

My question would be , what if it wasnt them but a house full of regular peoples ? I dont think they take the chance to find out as there is no care , in regular operations they enter and razzia regardless who's in the house anyways .....

As for the boys ...... Ive seen perfect footage of the bodies . They both looked real , and its not unthinkable they're indeed dead .

Some Iraqi believe it , others dont .

Who cares? I think we are all overestimating the significance of the dead sons or even the capture and/or death of Saddam himself. Does anyone really think that killing the former leaders will make Iraqis friendlier to US? Many Iraqis are still very upset (understatement) that their mothers, fathers, brothers were killed by the invading Americans in both gulf wars. And many Iraqis blame the UN and US imposed sanctions for the 10+ years of suffering between the 2 wars (1/2 million dead kids under 5) – whether or not it was actually the Saddam regime’s fault.

Have you checked that video I linked on the previous (or one before) threads ?

There is enough relevance to care , in various perspectives .

"Deepuz

Your post should be deleted
Go barf elsewhere
"

The palestinian whose name you chose to emulate would turn in his grave at the thought. Surely give the man some respect in your discourse. Or quiet down like the inferior being you have proven yourself to be.

Then who would you be to make such judgement in his name ?

Mumkin tukareer haza lau samaaht ?

Allah Faqaha wa Faqiha !!

now go sit in the corner .

Is it just me or do those pictures not resemble those boys at all?

Has anyone yet explained why Uday (who was confined to a wheelchair) was killed by blunt force trauma, and Quasay (who supposedly shot himself) had two bullet wounds behind his ear?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/resetcookie/front.htm

Why is my brain thinking back to the stories of Jessica Lynch's brave battle with her captors, where she fought to the last bullet, enduring bullet wounds and stab wounds, before being brutally dragged off into captivity by big ugly Iraqis who then tied her to a hospital bed and tortured her?
:rolleyes:

Dental prints show its them; the serial number of a metal rod extracted during autopsy show its them. In a few days DNA will come back that no doubt show its them. Naw, it couldn't possibly be them. *SARCASM ALERT*

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/25/sprj.irq.sons/index.html

Dental prints show its them; the serial number of a metal rod extracted during autopsy show its them. In a few days DNA will come back that no doubt show its them. Naw, it couldn't possibly be them. *SARCASM ALERT*

Gee, I wonder why the US has a credibility problem?

I must admit curiosity though clockwood - Where did the US get the dental and medical records and the DNA samples to compare against the bodies?

We had ties with iraq in the past, we have a buttload of spies, we captured huge amounts of records when we took Baghdad, and possibly even their dentists & doctors.

Okay clockwood, but DNA samples?

If you could get that close, you can't claim that you had to invade to kill them. End of story.

What do you want to bet Saddam kept DNA samples so HE could identify his sons if as assasination attempt ever worked. Anyway all you need are a few hair folicals from a brush, blood from a cut while shaving, or some semen from one of their many wild nights. The latter is quite likely actually.

We can check their residences after the invasion and check. All we have to do to figure out if they are at least in the same family is to compare their dna with that of a relative we do have a sample from.

What do you want to bet Saddam kept DNA samples so HE could identify his sons if as assasination attempt ever worked.
Not a lot.
DNA samples aren't like tinned goods, you need to have a specific environment to keep them in or they degrade past usefulness.

We can check their residences after the invasion and check.
"A-ha! A DNA sample!"
"Whose is it? Uday's? Quasay's? The maid? A bodyguard? A chef? One of the thousands of women they're meant to have raped in here?"
"Erm, I dunno sarge, I can't read the label"
...

All we have to do to figure out if they are at least in the same family is to compare their dna with that of a relative we do have a sample from.
Still not definitive. Not that it matters from the "is it really them" point of view, but it does matter from the "if you could get that close to them, why not just shoot them" point of view.

the thing that amazes me about this operation and also makes me roll on floor laughing is that against the 4 men one of which was a 14 year old boy there were 200 american soldiers with grenade launchers rockets and even a battle copter with rockets. but of course this isn't on the fox news - *Avatar remembers all the hollywood movies with american superheroes :rolleyes: 50:1 lol

btw- why didn't they release the picture of the dead 14 y old boy. I'm sure his teachers or parents could do the identification

GRENADES, MACHINEGUNS, MISSILES

Sanchez said Uday and Qusay were holed up on the fortified second floor of the villa with two others, who U.S. officials say were a bodyguard and a teenage grandson of Saddam.

Armed with AK-47 assault rifles, they wounded four soldiers trying to detain them and held out for hours against a devastating array of U.S. weaponry. Sanchez said 200 soldiers pounded the house using grenades, rocket-firing Kiowa attack helicopters, heavy machineguns and anti-tank missiles.

He said 10 anti-tank missiles were fired at the villa. A-10 Warthog tankbuster ground-attack planes, Apache helicopters and even a psy-ops team were on standby to help if needed.

Sanchez said the three adults inside were probably killed by the missile strikes, leaving only the teenager, who was killed making a last stand when he fired at troops who burst in. He may have been Qusay's 14-year-old son, Mustapha.

Iraq's U.S.-appointed Governing Council welcomed the deaths but said it would have been better had they been taken alive.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/030723/3/11lc9.html

this just is too humurous

six hours, 200 men, an attack chopter, rockets, grenade launchers against 4 people on of which was a 14y old boy

bravo for the great american fighters, true heroes

A-10 Warthog tankbuster ground-attack planes, Apache helicopters and even a psy-ops team were on standby to help if needed. :D can't take it.....it's just too....... *bursts in laughter*

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/AcronsFall-X.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030724/cagle00.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030724/smith.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030724/britt.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030723/rogers.gif

Good stuff, Sparks, that's about what America has resorted to. We have gone back to the Wild West mentality, only now it is done against other countries in mass warfare instead of by some Sheriff in a small town.

Originally posted by GuitarToadster
Good stuff, Sparks, that's about what America has resorted to. We have gone back to the Wild West mentality, only now it is done against other countries in mass warfare instead of by some Sheriff in a small town. Those pesky Sheriffs, hunting down outlaws!

Those pesky Sheriffs, hunting down outlaws!
Yes, because we all know sherrif's always have the best interests of the people at heart...

http://freespace.virgin.net/nicola.bailey/gary2.jpg

What gets me is that this was started by Afghanistan attacking America. America then invade Iraq ( :confused: ), declare that they are going to set the Iraqi people 'free' by installing democracy, and then they kill Saddam Husseins sons. Weren't they supposed to be after that Osama bloke in a completely different country??

What gets me is that this was started by Afghanistan attacking America
:bugeye:
I really can't think of anything sufficently sarcastic to adaquately reply to that...

Originally posted by Sefter
What gets me is that this was started by Afghanistan attacking America. America then invade Iraq ( :confused: ), declare that they are going to set the Iraqi people 'free' by installing democracy, and then they kill Saddam Husseins sons. Weren't they supposed to be after that Osama bloke in a completely different country??Protip: Regime change in Iraq was a policy by the United States since October of 1998, when Congress passed the Iraqi Liberation Act following Iraq's failure to comply with the Gulf War cease fire agreement.

But America are not complying with Iraq's efforts at war (well they are now but you can see what I mean). This has only come about because of 9/11, you must agree! It's bollocks!

Saddam would have been deposed had 9/11 happened or not.
Washington — As members of the 107th Congress prepare to debate what sort of resolution they should provide the Bush administration in its confrontation with the Baghdad regime of Saddam Hussein, it recalls a similar situation in September 1998 when the 105th Congress dealt with Iraq's threat to international order.

In that mid-term election year, Congress passed the Iraq Liberation Act, calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime. http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/0919cngr.htm

And an act passed by the US congress has international jurisdiction, does it?
What was that every right-wing nut in the states was screaming about the "Universal Jurisdiction" of the belgian courts when it came to war crimes?
:rolleyes:

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030727/cagle00.gif

Yeah! America has no right to impose their rules on another country! It's another country ffs! :)

(Is that Robin Cook walking past the gates in that picture?) I used to know a Robin' Cook. A right thief he was. :rolleyes:

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030727/danziger.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030727/benson.gif

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
And an act passed by the US congress has international jurisdiction, does it?
What was that every right-wing nut in the states was screaming about the "Universal Jurisdiction" of the belgian courts when it came to war crimes?
:rolleyes: International law remains relevant only when adherence to it is more advantageous than violation of it. That, and it's also marvelously ambiguous and subjective. The war was legal in the same way Desert Fox was in 1998.

Stokes
International law remains relevant only when adherence to it is more advantageous than violation of it. That, and it's also marvelously ambiguous and subjective. The war was legal in the same way Desert Fox was in 1998.

* International law becomes very relevant when USA is no longer the authority .

* International law is less subjective than USA's law

* I dont consider Desert Fox in any way justified , however dont let that stop you explaining exactly why they were the same according to you .

Saddam would have been deposed had 9/11 happened or not.


Ehm , yes ........

Originally posted by Ghassan Kanafani
* I dont consider Desert Fox in any way justified , however dont let that stop you explaining exactly why they were the same according to you.That's fantastic. I'm glad you have your opinion. However, as odious as it may be, Desert Fox and Iraqi Freedom were both not only viable, but also mandatory actions according to the United Nations.

Desert Fox was enacted in 1998 by President Clinton in response to Iraq's recidivous and flagrant violations of UNSC resolution 687, the Gulf War cease fire agreement. Iraq had agreed, upon their unconditional surrender on April 4th of 1991, to allow UNSCOM/IAEA inspectors unfettered access to their weapons caches, laboratories, and personnel. By 1997 the inspection process had been repeatedly stalled and undermined by the Iraqi government that they were making no headway at all. Iraq had recurringly stalled or completely halted the inspections process that they had agreed upon, and it was concluded that further inspection activities without a new tack would be fruitless. On October 29, 1997, the UN inspection teams withdrew from Iraq.

Because Iraq's sovereignity was on the line at the date they signed they surrendered, the cease fire stipulated that breach of agreement would be tantamount to resumption of hostilities. Thus, on Oct. 29, 1997, the Gulf War started again by Iraq's own doing. In 1998 President Clinton ordered strikes against key Iraqi facilities which were known producers, keepers, and distributors of weapons of mass destruction.

The legal justification for this operation stems from a caveat at the end of UNSC resolution 678, the original Gulf War commencement resolution, which effectively authorizes all members of the 1990-91 allied coalition to use "whatever means necessary" to enforce resolution 660 (demand Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait) and "all subsequent, relevant resolutions".

In short, all original members of the 1990-91 allied coalition had carte blanche to use any means necessary, be they embargos or military strikes, to ensure Iraqi compliance with the Gulf War cease fire. The UN never amended that resolution, so it stuck. It was Clinton's justification then. It was Bush's this time around. And it was perfectly valid and legal in both instances.

It's late here and I don't care to cite my sources at the moment but I will later if anything needs clarification.

Originally posted by Stokes Pennwalt
International law remains relevant only when adherence to it is more advantageous than violation of it. That, and it's also marvelously ambiguous and subjective. The war was legal in the same way Desert Fox was in 1998.
It's no more ambiguous than the US constitution. (And yes, I realise that the constitution is interpreted continously, that's why I chose it...). The fact that you see it being abused by the PNAC crowd is not a condemnation of International Law, but of the daft gits running the US at present.

That's fantastic. I'm glad you have your opinion. However, as odious as it may be, Desert Fox and Iraqi Freedom were both not only viable, but also mandatory actions according to the United Nations.

Thats great but very irellevant when it comes to the legitimacy given by the peoples who ought to be the most relevent elements in Arab affairs , wich is Arabs .

It not more than natural for you to dispose my opinion in that way .

As long as UN has its doodoo in NYC its irellevant anyways , nomatter what affairs are on the table .

And besides , since when does anyone care for UN ? Is that back in fashion now ?

It was Bush's this time around. And it was perfectly valid and legal in both instances.

looks like cause-effect to me :rolleyes:

Thats great but very irellevant when it comes to the legitimacy given by the peoples who ought to be the most relevent elements in Arab affairs , wich is Arabs .

The Arabs are/were incompetent in this and many other affairs.
Many of them admit that. Those who don't are liars.
If only Arabs DID get involved in Arab affairs.
I'm glad you are doing your misguided part, oh you of another's name.

The Arabs are/were incompetent in this and many other affairs.


With the Arabs you mean who ? The Arab regimes ? There is/was plenty of competency in the Arab world however when interests & power is at stake , few care for an intellectual approach that provides development and self-improvement .

Indeed if Arabs only would get involved in Arab affairs , but thats not really possible now is it in todays political situation . They key-element belongs to a sellout monarchial dynasty .