It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

what is saddam up to???

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I suspect he's trying to put together a Stalinist regime among the rats that live in his cell, having some of the rats kill the other rats for his amusement and empowerment.

Of course that's just speculation




posted on May, 3 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
I suspect he's trying to put together a Stalinist regime among the rats that live in his cell, having some of the rats kill the other rats for his amusement and empowerment.

Of course that's just speculation


Hussein isn't a Stalinist though. He is a capitalist. One of the reasons the U.S. supported him for so many years. Iraq had a lot of privately run businesses and corporations under Saddam Hussein.

Ironically, it is the Kurds who have been linked to communism and Marxism in the past.

[edit on 3-5-2005 by Hajduk]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
It's not that I think Hussein was a communist, or for that matter a close adherent of any particular ideology. He was a Ba'athist, but that does not seem to be more than a vaguely socialist Arab nationalism

But the man is known to have idolized Stalin, not as a communist, just as kind of a personal role model.


Sep

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Moe Foe
I don't suppose you've heard that the US Army War College did an investigation and came to the conclusion that Iran had actually gassed all those people? The chemicals used by both Iraq and Iran killed people two entirely different ways. The bodies revealed that most were indeed killed by the gas Iran was known to have used, and not Iraq. Not to mention the Kurds were never "his own people.


So are you saying Iran broke the peace deal and went into Iraq and bombed their former allies, just for the fun of it? Can I ask when this investigation took place because politcs sometimes play facts and during the late 80s and early 90s US and Saddam were fairly good freinds.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 02:42 AM
link   
I actually read that also and stated it in another post.
Saddam always said it was IRan that gased halajabala,
and it was thought it wasnt just an empty pilgrim town, but a soilders point before a front.

The gas used there was something that IRAN had used previously, and NOT iraq.


Wouldnt surprise me at all if it were true.


Sep

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by GlobalDisorder
I actually read that also and stated it in another post.
Saddam always said it was IRan that gased halajabala,
and it was thought it wasnt just an empty pilgrim town, but a soilders point before a front.

The gas used there was something that IRAN had used previously, and NOT iraq.


Wouldnt surprise me at all if it were true.



As much as I would love to believe Saddam, amnetsy international and human rights watch both agree that it was infact Saddam who did it.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sep


As much as I would love to believe Saddam, amnetsy international and human rights watch both agree that it was infact Saddam who did it.


It's not Saddam. The CIA under the Reagan administration believes it was Iran. There is lots about it on the internet - just look around. I'm not about to do the research right now.

The type of gas used based on exhumed bodies suggest it was British manufactured and sold to Iran. In fact, blaming Saddam for the act didn't become common until after the invasion of Kuwait.


Sep

posted on May, 5 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hajduk
It's not Saddam. The CIA under the Reagan administration believes it was Iran.


Back then facts changed depending on the politics of the time. Iran wasnt a good friend of US so US blamed Iran. Later Iraq became the enemy so Iraq was responsible. Because of that I'd say the CIA information is wrong so I go to a neutral party like amnasty international and they maintained their view that it was Saddam.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Amnesty International usually just takes the mainstream opinion. They are a good organization, but rarely do enough actual research other than anecdotal. It's no different than Bush getting intelligence information from people with a personal vendetta like Chalabi. They (Amnesty Int.) ask American politicians and separatist Kurds, many who were too young to remember what happened, and they say it was Hussein so that is what Amnesty International goes with.

I'm not saying they are wrong, just that nobody knows because history has been revised and rewritten on the subject. If people say things enough, it becomes accepted as truth.


[edit on 5-5-2005 by Hajduk]



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 07:03 PM
link   


Back then facts changed depending on the politics of the time. Iran wasnt a good friend of US so US blamed Iran. Later Iraq became the enemy so Iraq was responsible.


Back then?
Nothing has changed.

When we needed propaganda against Iran, we claimed it was Iran; now that we need propaganda against Saddam, we claim it was Saddam. The truth doesn't matter at all to the people in control, what matters is simple expediency: which explanation serves best to increase their power?

These people couldn't give a damn what the truth is. It simply isn't a factor in their considerations.

[edit on 5/5/05 by xmotex]


dh

posted on May, 5 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Whatever you would wish for Saddam wont happen
Get it into your heads straight
THEY HAVEN'T GOT HIM
Sorry for the capitalisation
All they've got is some snaggle-toothed substitute
The majority of the Regime went down
Not their boy
He was flown out
Don't be deluded



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
I just called him and said "Yo Saddam wut up?"
He Replied "Ya know, chillin, watchin the game having a bud"
I replied "True True, yo where's Noriega?"
Then he says "Yo Manuel pick up da phone"
and Noriega picked up the phone and says "Yo what up"
and I says "Waaaazup"
and Saddam said "Waazzzup"
and Noriega said "Waaaazuuuup"
and then I asked Saddam "Yo Saddam wut up?
He replied "Ya know chillin, watchin the game having a bud"
I replied "True True"

Sorry, couldn't resist, ever since he was 'captured' I've had a "vision" of that scenario.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:02 PM
link   
``

Saddam is in some prison in Iraq, so they say, and heres a link to
a Saddam/Rumsfeld meeting article... www.fpp.co.uk...
---> note the 2 URL sources at end of page



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
I'm sorry but I don't remember mentioning the gassing of the Kurds. If you knew anything and actually took the time to do anything other than defend a mass murderer/dictator/tyrant, then you would know that there are countless mass graves throughout Iraq that contain the victims of all kinds of horrible deaths. They are not only Kurds, either. They are Shiites, even Sunnis, Iranians, and so on. But I guess in your eyes since Saddam wasn't responsible for the gassing deaths of over 5,000 people that he must be innocent of the murder of the hundreds of thousands of others.

That's really logical. Talk about propaganda...

So, how do they know who these dead people are? Really, all you have to go on is what you've been told. Or do you have some first hand personal evidence? It's obvious that Saddam has been demonized as much as possible. Sure, he was no saint, but either is Bush.
You want to talk about mass graves? Where are they burying all the dead Iraqis we're killing?
The accusations against Saddam are pretty ridiculous, if you study real history. America bends, or leaves out parts of every story to justify their agenda. Mass graves don't prove who killed anyone. They just prove where the dead were buried.



Originally posted by Hajduk
The type of gas used based on exhumed bodies suggest it was British manufactured and sold to Iran. In fact, blaming Saddam for the act didn't become common until after the invasion of Kuwait.

Exactly! They're really good at rewriting history, aren't they? People just can't wait to jump on the phony history wagon, when it suits their needs.


[edit on 10-5-2005 by Moe Foe]




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join