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.

 

"The Butcher of Bahgdad" Innocent or not? Here are the Historical Facts. You decide

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Who the hell is the creepy guy on the video claiming "I am just a normal guy, maybe like you."

The video is clearly designed to just say hey look this is why we invaded Iraq, it was right! Everyone else shut up and let's pretend we didn't say all that stuff about WMDs, which incidentally proved to be a load of lies.

I am not defending Saddam in any way. But i am sure a video on the subject could have been made in a better way, without having some creepy used car salesman banging on about how he is an average joe who just wants the facts like everyone else.

Using Saddam's brutal regime as justification for invasion is just trying to cover up the real reasons for invading and doesn't really hold much water when you consider all the other mad dictators and maniacs who are in power or were supported by the U.S.




posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


I agree with you, but once you get about 10-15 min in to the video it starts getting to the meat and potatoes of what a douche bag saddam was. WATCH ON MY FRIENDS AND SEE HIM FOR WHAT HE IS!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePeoplesSoldier
reply to post by December_Rain
 


How is this a biased thread when I use nothing but facts to support it? I suppose instead of saying post what addons you want but not biased ones I should have said, please don't post facts that are on blogs or your best friends face book. I want only links to sites that have historical facts on them. Thats all I ment by that.


Oh you want link to websites such as wikipedia, okay

I may not be aware of further technicalities but when even the UN General openly stated Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan will I believe him or believe Bush regime and Blair's advocates who even "fabricated" the reason of the whole war.

Can any of you deny this and say with a straight face the war was not a "illegal conspiracy" right from the start?
*Bush Advisers Planned Iraq War Since 1990s
*Bush Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' Before Becoming President
*Bush 'plotted Iraq war from start'
*Wolfowitz Admits Iraq War Planned Two Days After 9-11

This was nothing except Criminal Conspiracy with intent to cause destabilization on a major scale in Middle East. It was Bush & Blair's "Final Solution" just for profits and business interest, nothing more and nothing less. The greed of money and power covered their eyes soo much they continued committing
* War crimes (Mass murder of civilian population & POWs, rape, looting)
* Crimes against humanity (On Civilians and POW aka Abu Gharihb and other black sites)
* Crimes of Genocide (Intent to destroy in whole or in part)
* Crimes against peace (Waging war of aggression and violation of international treaties)
* Crime of torture (planning, authorizing torture,deliberately disregarding their duty to take adequate steps to prevent atrocities)

Sure many people can, but when the "whole world says it's illegal then the whole world is not wrong".



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by December_Rain
 


As I have stated earlier this thread isnt about the US involvment in Iraq. Its about Saddam being a monster and the fact he diserved what he got.

Go post your anti war propaganda somewhere else. It's not the point being made here.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier
 


As I stated earlier you cannot justify playing God on any country or a person, you have NO RIGHT to do so.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by December_Rain
 


That I disagree with. He committed genocide and deserved to die. I'm sure millions would agree as millions would not. No matter, hes gone. No more gassing is own people for him!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier
 


I will post right here because it is related to topic. You are free to post on some other forum where you won't have to disagree. And what is your point here? You want accolades for Bush stating the war was not illegal or immoral and how you got rid of the Boogeyman Sadaam whose boogeyman's image was created by no one else except US? Keep dreaming !



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by December_Rain
 


You obviously didn't read past the title of my post. I said this thread isnt about the US involvment it was about the people saying that Saddam was innocent! THATS IT! No hidden agendas! I promise! Think what ever you want about the US I don't care. Matter of fact I couldn't care less. This thread was directed at the people that say he was innocent of genocide. THATS ALL. Sorry if you thought it was somthing else, and you wasted your time here.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier
 


Oh not at all, I did not waste my time at all and I read whatever you wrote and my response to you is according to that.


[edit on 12-12-2009 by December_Rain]

[edit on 12-12-2009 by December_Rain]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier
 


I understand what you're trying to do with the thread, but you're going to get people saying things about the war and the U.S.A etc. Just like i did.

Also i think people who claim Saddam was "innocent" need their heads checking.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


A suggestion, as per the thread title the Butcher of Baghdad! That is Bush because his numbers of slaughter are more, if you want to purely talk about Saddam make a thread with title Saddam Hussein and do not talk about anything in it which is related to USA ..heh which is extremely hard or maybe impossible to do(in anyway at all, Bcoz you see it will again drag your beloved Bush in it..the darn guy is allover Saddam's life) in any way along with "facts" so someone does not mistake it for Bush thread.


[edit on 12-12-2009 by December_Rain]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


Hey not at all, I hope you are not stating that to me. I agree he committed or have been part of crimes but he was nowhere close to the crimes committed by Bush/Cheney. Under Bush term if office the whole world witnessed hanging of Saddam (which was disgusting), just imagine what should be done to Bush/ Cheney/ Rumsfield who have committed far more heinous crimes in comparison.

As per this thread Saddam was responsible for 106k deaths.
As per the Iraq War casulaties Bush and his admin. is responsible:

U.S. Troop Casualties - 4,366 US troops
Non-U.S. Troop Casualties - Total 316, with 179 from the UK
Journalists killed - 140, 93 by murder and 47 by acts of war
Journalists killed by US Forces - 14
Iraqi Police and Soldiers Killed - 9,315
Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated - A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported. Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place Iraqi civilian casualities at over 600,000.
Iraqi Insurgents Killed, Roughly Estimated - 55,000
Non-Iraqi Contractors and Civilian Workers Killed - 569
Non-Iraqi Kidnapped - 306, including 57 killed, 147 released, 4 escaped, 6 rescued and 89 status unknown.

Source: usliberals.about.com...
+ counting....................................

and this has not stopped yet, all the daily bombings and other deaths these days are still result of the Shock and Awe!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by December_Rain
 


No no that wasn't aimed at you at all.

I totally agree with the points you've made.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier
 


You want someone to defend Hussein, I got the guy for you Jude Wanniski.
Wanniski had done extensive research into Saddams guilt and has found the evidence wanting.

Unfortunately, all of your "facts" come from the MSM, the Bush administration and political foes of Saddam. Other sorces tell a different story.

Saddam Suddenly Looks Innocent



If you think about it, 18 months ago Saddam Hussein was sitting in his office, the duly constituted president and prime minister of Iraq, minding his own business. The United States did not have diplomatic relations with Iraq and so did not formally recognize him as head of state. But most of the rest of the world did, and Iraq had a seat at the United Nations and in its proper rotation could even take a seat on the Security Council. It was at this point that President Bush decided Saddam had weapons of destruction and was conspiring with Al Qaeda to menace peace-loving nations like the United States. He took his assertions to the UN Security Council and the Council agreed by a 15-to-0 vote to demand Saddam permit UN inspectors back into Iraq to search for the WMD. If you followed the U.N. proceedings over the following months, you will find that Baghdad fully complied with every demand made upon it by the Security Council.

Even if you missed the TV coverage, if you read the papers carefully you would find no instance where Saddam thumbed his nose at the Council. When he read of accounts from President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Powell that he was still hiding stuff from the inspectors that our CIA knew about, he said he would invite the CIA to come and look in every nook and cranny. Remember? And when the UN inspectors were given tips by the CIA on places to search for WMD, they did so and found no traces of WMD. Not a teensy weensy bit of evidence. So when President Bush asked the Security Council for a resolution backing a war with Iraq, the Council turned him down. The other members pointed out that U.N. diplomacy had indeed worked and that the inspectors could clean up the last bits and pieces in a few months and certify that Iraq was absolutely clean.

To tell you the truth, John, as far as I can recall, there have been no assertions of the “brutality” of Saddam’s regime from anyone but the Iraqi exiles associated with Ahmet Chalabi or those Kurds who fought on the Iranian side in the Iran/Iraq war. There are all kinds of anecdotes about Saddam doing dreadful things, entire books written about them, but the source of all of them is the same pool of people who have been feeding faked “evidence” of WMD and Al Qaeda connections to our government. Can it be that there is nothing that Saddam has done all these years that cannot be justified as the permissible acts of a head of state acting in defense of his people. Yes, he invaded Kuwait in 1990, but in retrospect that was a really easy war to justify, given the economic warfare being conducted against Iraq by the Emir of Kuwait. I mean easy in relation to now having to justify this American invasion and destruction of good chunks of Iraq, on false premises.

President Bush still has it in his head that Saddam tried to assassinate his father in 1993, but if you did the smallest bit of digging you would find this was a hoax perpetrated by the neo-cons. The President also has it in his head that Saddam committed genocide against the Kurds in 1988, killing tens of thousands of them with poison gas and/or machine guns. If you lifted a little pinky to get to the bottom of this story, you will find it is also made of neo-con whole cloth. I’m not making wild assertions, John, because I have spent countless hours on this subject and find no loopholes left. Just call Human Rights Watch and ask if they have yet found the mass graves of those tens of thousands of Kurds and they will sheepishly admit they are still looking.


As for the charges of genocide, they were dropped for lack of evidence.

Genocide Charges Dropped

The oft-repeated charge "he gasses his own people" seems to be factually inaccurate as well;

Did Saddam Gas His Own People?




In September 1988, however — a month after the war had ended — the State Department abruptly, and in what many viewed as a sensational manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemicals against its Kurdish population.
Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds — in Turkey where they had gone for asylum — failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, the Congress was influenced by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another Iraqi-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing a great many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation, and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.



Saddam was definately not a kind and gentle ruler and probably used police state tactics to keep his people in line but, as usual, most of the allegations of brutality come from the Bush Administration, the MSM and political opponents of Saddam.

A people usually get the rulers they deserve. In light of the sectarian violence that broke out in Iraq after "liberation", it seems to me Saddam was the man for the job.

During Saddam's reign, moslums, jews and christians co-existed in peace. A strong hand was necessary to enforce this peace, Saddam's hand.

[edit on 12-12-2009 by FortAnthem]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join