Saddam's Dead Sons.....

Now that Saddam's sons are dead, how do you think Saddam himself is taking the deaths of them? And what do you think he thinks about it?

Originally posted by (Insert Name Here)

Oh yeah? That's pretty interesting. I was thinking the same thing too!.....

Well I think saddam is overjoyed, after all with his sons gone he can now rape and murder as many people as he likes without having to share them any more.

Also less mouths around the table is always a good thing in this time of economic uncertainity, and he's probably excited that they are no longer spending his money like water and upsetting the neighbours by raping their daughters.

All in all I am sure that Saddam feels this is a positive step forward in the Hussain household and can only be bettered by the death of his wives, girlfriends, and mistresses, to make a nice clean up of the whole mess.

Eventually the entire line of Hussians should be killed and tidy up the entire family tree.

Saddam has been known to undertake this personally, having shot his brothers in law, and so he is glad that the US spent its time, weapons, and energy in killing the sons, saving him from having to do the job sometime in the future.

[Edited on 30-7-2003 by Netchicken]

I think it interesting that Iraq population is classified as Secular. One would think that with all those images of Saddam Hussein all over the country the emphasis was more than just to relate him as a mere hero.

The of course there is the matter of him portraying himself as a reincarnation of Babylonian royalty.

My impression is the Iraqi people were infused with the idea that not only was Saddam a God but his sons the sons of a God.

I would be nice to capture Saddam Hussein alive

I don't think Saddam will be captured alive, because if the U.S. is about to capture him, I'm sure he'll just commit suicide or have someone w/ him kill him. Cause then he can say he's a "Martyr" or whatever that gay # it that he talks about.....

One thing to note, though:

Wasn't USA going nuts after their soldiers were shown in Al-Jazeera, as it would suppose a Geneva convention infringement?

Lots of words were written here on the issue, citing torturees in Guantanamo base.

Now, we could forget the writtings: USA posting the images of Saddam's sons broke the Geneva convention and no one cared.

Was the difference being that the Geneva Convention covers military personnel being shown...not civilian? I dunno....just asking? I could look it up but was wondering before I did.

regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Was the difference being that the Geneva Convention covers military personnel being shown...not civilian? I dunno....just asking? I could look it up but was wondering before I did.

regards
seekerof

Do you call Saddam's sons civilian?

Just doing a light search, I think the Geneva Convention (aka: laws of war) pertain mainly to POW's, etc.
Might be wrong here but I didn't do a through "sit down and analyze":

slate.msn.com...

regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Just doing a light search, I think the Geneva Convention (aka: laws of war) pertain mainly to POW's, etc.
Might be wrong here but I didn't do a through "sit down and analyze":

slate.msn.com...

Right, there is a differenc: they never were POWs, they were directly shot down.

Civilian...no. I think they would be classified (?) as combatants.
Also found this:

www.unhchr.ch...

regards
seekerof

Originally posted by MakodFilu

Originally posted by Seekerof
Just doing a light search, I think the Geneva Convention (aka: laws of war) pertain mainly to POW's, etc.
Might be wrong here but I didn't do a through "sit down and analyze":

slate.msn.com...

Right, there is a differenc: they never were POWs, they were directly shot down.

There is a couple threads on this very subject dealing with the "brothers" "being shot down"...............

regards
seekerof

Saddam's sons and Saddam's grandson are relatives of a nation leader, Saddam himself, and are therefore protected by the assassination ban on political leaders and their family. Now argue if it was an assassination .. i don't know .. we don't even know the real story (Were they killed by a hellfire rocket or by 20 bullets each ?)

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
Saddam's sons and Saddam's grandson are relatives of a nation leader, Saddam himself, and are therefore protected by the assassination ban on political leaders and their family. Now argue if it was an assassination .. i don't know .. we don't even know the real story (Were they killed by a hellfire rocket or by 20 bullets each ?)

Moku....no disrespect.
This was already discussed in a couple threads on this topic of Saddam's sons deaths. They were discussed in detail. Their deaths being covered by "assassination laws" is quite debateble. May want to check those other threads and you will see the arguments given.
I did an indepth look at the "assassination laws" and presented my arguments in one topic, I believe.

regards
seekerof

This is the thread were the subject of the "assassination laws" was brought up....I think my indepth response was on page 2.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

regards
seekerof

One would think that with all those images of Saddam Hussein all over the country the emphasis was more than just to relate him as a mere hero.

One thing you'll find in almost any Middle Eastern country....LOTS of posted images of the current rulers....and LOTS of institutions named for them. They are extremely big on this....

Saddam will be thinking "Death to America" as his pal Bin Laden says