BS: Saddam's Boys

Subject: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 04:09 PM

Haven't seen a posting regarding the demise of Qusay and Uday (did I miss it?) but I was wondering what time will make of their death? It has been reported that these two "famously cruel" men refused to surrender and were killed by 200+ American troops. What will the Iraqi folk songs look like compared to Western versions of events? Was it the crushing of cockroaches or an Iraqi Butch and Sundance?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 04:24 PM

See the "Aces Wild" thread for discussion of their purported demise.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Dead Horse
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 02:43 PM

I wonder if Saddam hisself will go to the funeral?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 02:52 PM

Good riddance factor applied, who gives a fuck?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 02:55 PM

It just proves that "civilization" is a thin veneer..The sight of our so called Christian leaders Glorying in death and blood makes me sick.
Sometimes rogue elements need to be removed but the nudge nudge didnt we do well mentality is disgusting..What about the 14yr old boy who was roasted with the tyrants has he been convieniantly forgotten

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 03:06 PM

akenaton...We are all sure they would have left a long time ago if you had just been allowed to ask them.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 03:19 PM

You can destroy a mad or bad animal with out glorying in "the kill"

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 03:24 PM

As God created us all(according to the Christians)Shurely it must be wrong for devout christians like Bush and Blair to Glory in the deathsof his creations

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 03:41 PM

akenation...Don't use Christianity as a club to beat up Christians. It make you look even more pathetic than you did before.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 05:20 PM

The photos were released. Here they are in the Kansas City Star. They arranged it so innocuous x-rays are on the main page, and you're warned that the photos are graphic. They're also convincing. Since this is in the category of "breaking news" the link might not stick around long. I found this at Google News.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 05:50 PM

Guest... The pathetic people are those who use their religion for political ends...

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 06:48 PM

Too often, events of this Iraq war have been reported as if they were a sporting event. Many people I know have bought into the Bush Administration's propaganda, and they seem to be able to rejoice in all the death and destruction that has taken place. I suppose that killing must happen at times, but can it ever be cause for rejoicing?

I suppose it's to be expected. Bush liked to boast about how many death row prisoners he killed when he was governor. Can he really believe that the Almighty views him as somehow superior to Saddam Hussein?

Tyrants are all the same.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Gareth
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 07:12 PM

Joe - I have no doubts as to the vain glory that GWB would wish to attatch himself to, and personally I see the difference between him and Saddam Hussain as minute in principal, but vaste in terms of what the electorate can deal with.

War is Bloody, War is Evil - But unfortunatley sometimes War is the lesser of two evils.

I concur that it would have been better to have taken the Saddam's alive, after all they would have talked, eventually, and that is without physical torture.

But the choice was casulties amongst your own unit, and alow the chance of escape or use of fire power.

I will not revel in thier deaths - but as sure as hell I wont lose any sleep.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 07:37 PM

akenaton...oh pathetic one, then why do You do it?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 09:23 PM

Mr. Offer...Texas Gov. Bush never boasted about any such thing. He said that capital punishment was the will of the people and stayed out of the way. You are a bald-faced liar and anything else you say is suspect. Liars are all the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 09:42 PM

Word on the street is that Bush is gonna have Saddam's kids heads removed, shrunken and stuck on sticks in front of the White House...

Boy, mankind has really progressed under Bush.

And, GUEST (9:23), while you are most certainly techinically correct about Bush not boasting of the number of folks who were executed in Texas while he was governor, he certainly made no attemptes to correct a terribly flawed system that sent innocent men to their deaths...

And that ain't no bald-faced lie, just bald faced truth...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: mack/misophist
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 10:44 PM

I hate defending the bush, but publishing those pictures was the correct thing to do. Arab papers often show the dead. Arabs will expect to see this. I don't know a thing about how they feel when they look at them but the pictures are shown.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jul 03 - 10:54 PM

But not *shot-to-Hell-an'-back* pictures, Misophist....

Surely, you understand the difference...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 01:21 AM

OK. I misspoke. What I meant to say is that Bush seemed to celebrate the execution of convicts in Texas. Never once did he express any regret about the death of so many.
And that's the truth.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: mack/misophist
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 01:37 AM

Yes, Bobert, 'shot to hell and back' pictures. Saadi at the corner store subscribes to several Arab papers and the pictures are quite obvious. I've seen them.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 02:15 AM

"Word on the street is that Bush is gonna have Saddam's kids heads removed, shrunken and stuck on sticks in front of the White House...

Boy, mankind has really progressed under Bush."

Another sensationalised, emotive outburst from Bobert - which is as usual totally baseless, with Bobert in his final sentence using that falsehood as substantiation to create a fact - Typical, nonsensically pathetic, but typical.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST,Jeger
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:07 AM

Then there are the are victims, at least those who survived. They
celebrate the demise of these cruel and wicked men. They need to have closure.   Yes there is celebration together with the victims as well if you have a heart at all . . . Knowing that they will no longer terrorize men women and children. It is just that these things are not close enough to home for you so you are full of lofty thought castles. We hear about trauma for way lesser things than what these creeps have done.   
Why, why such an outcry of sympathy for the criminal and the wicked? Where are the sounds of concern about the thousands of victims of these men and the long term scars they have left on thousands and thousands of lives. Why not jubilation on behalf of all the thousands who will now be spared from their further evil.
I happen to have personally known a couple of people who languished in Baghdad prisons. One who was tortured got out later but died prematurely due to injuries from the tortures. Where are your tears and where is your outcry on their behalf?
And c'mon! Where is your sympathy for all the victims of base criminals who end up on death row in the US and are stopped from continuing their brutal crimes? Whether or not a person approves of capital punishment you HAVE TO SAY that those that are executed have a powder puff death by comparison to those they have raped killed, mangled, and compared to those they would continue to brutalize if they were not stopped.
Jeger

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 06:13 AM

guest....The answer to your question is that I have no religion..Whereas B+B use religion to influence simple people...Though I must say this tactic seems to be more prevalent in America.I hope you dont need to stoop to further personal abuse if you post again as this is usually a sign of a shaky argument
       Best wishes...Alex...

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Pied Piper
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 06:39 AM

I don't enjoy looking at pictures like this, but this is the reality of war.
Films and TV generally give a sanitised view of war.
Which is the most obscene, the truth or the lie?

Fuck W*r

PP

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 07:11 AM

Unlike the Arab news agencies, the coalition countries did not release pictures of dead combatants such as would cause distress to families who might see them.
With these two, the people needed the reassurance that they were dead.
There is fear that the regime will rise again.
They are used to being lied to.
There is some doubt that Chemical Alli is dead.
Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 01:35 PM

akenaton... The fact that you have no religion need not be said. It is self-evident from your statements. Your last post implies that people who follow their deepest convictions are using "tactics" and that religion is a way to control "simple people". Again, pathetic hateful bashing of people who wish you only the best.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 04:00 PM

Well, here is my favorite quote so far on the controversy over the identity of those men in the photos, from today's Washington Post:

"As grim as the photos were, all the debate about the status of the brothers brought to mind a line sung by the Munchkin coroner in "The Wizard of Oz" regarding a wicked witch who had been crushed by a house: "She's not only merely dead, she's really most sincerely dead."

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 04:06 PM

I would prefer it if you would refer to them as electroencephalographically challenged, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 04:48 PM

Ya know, being shown the photos without the sense of self-righteous, in-yer-face arrogance would have made me less critical of this whole stupid, sickening futile display of American triumphalism. But this report from the Associated Press of the display of the mutilated and made up bodies, pretty much nails the coffin shut on any credibility the US had in this debate. This reads more like the FBI displaying the bodies of Bonnie and Clyde, doesn't it?

From AP:

"The images of Odai and Qusai Hussein published Thursday had raised criticism by showing only the brothers' faces and upper chests - the faces obscured by heavy beards, blood and gashes - and giving no indication of height.

By contrast, the military showed journalists, including an Associated Press reporter, the autopsied bodies covered only by sheets and presented identifying evidence, including dental records and a rod from Odai's leg.

Odai's beard had been trimmed to the length he had worn it in life. Qusai's beard was shaved off and he had only a mustache, his trademark. The faces appeared waxy and heavily made up.

Morticians removed a large gash that had cut across the middle of Odai's face. Odai's abdomen had been riddled with bullets, and the torsos of both brothers bore large Y-shaped incisions.

Autopsy incisions were also visible on Odai's left leg, where doctors removed the 8-inch long bar inserted after a 1996 assassination attempt. A piece of leg bone taken out with the bar was wrapped in plastic and lying next to his body on the gurney."

Mind, I know these men were butchers, but what does that make us for engaging in this sort of macabre exercise?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:03 PM

I'd have expected that the expressions of rejoicing at the death of Saddam's sons would have been accompanied by at least a token expression of regret at the death of his fourteen-year-old grandson Mustafa. (Maybe Bush and Blair did express regret, and it's been cut out of the media reports. Maybe.)

This was not a successful outcome. Once they were trapped in the house there was no way out, and it should have been possible to capture them - after all there weren't any hostages involved to complicate the process of the house siege.

It is probabaly true that this could encourage people who might have been frightened of Saddam coming back to power, for example through some kind of deal with the occupiers. That might seem a ridiculous idea to us, but I'm sure people in Iraq remember what happened in 1992.

However this could in fact have some unfortunate consequences. One might be could be that people who don't like Saddam, but don't like the occupying forces either, will feel freer to resort to violence against the foreign troops.

And I suspect that the story of young Mustafa, fighting on after his father and uncle were dead, and, by reason of his age, without any responsibility for what his family had done to Iraq, could be very dangerous indeed. It could act as a bridge between Saddam loyalists and Sadddam opponents. More especially if Saddam gets killed next in some similar operation. Much more of a threat dead than alve.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:07 PM

Lokks as if it's just a fdew of us, GUEST, that see this as a barnaric display of chest thumpin' on Bush and Rumsfeld's part. Guesds there are a lot of folks who need their morbid curiousity scratched. As fir me, I think it was terribly juvenilish and base.

And as fir being squeemish about seeing a dead body, that ain't me. My late wife, Judy, died 6 years ago died of cancer in our home and spent the next 3 hours with her body waiting for the morticans.

One last thought, this act may have been intended to assure the Iraqis of the death of these two, but for many it will be viewed as an in-your-face taunting. Should there be a retaliation, do you folks want the Iraqi's to make those pictures public?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:13 PM

Not only is this latest version of "She's not only merely dead, she's really most sincerely dead", but how on earth is ANYONE going to believe, after already seeing the still photos, that a SECOND set of photos showing the bodies differently, are going to convince anyone of anything, besides the US can't be trusted to tell the truth about the death of the two sons?

I mean c'mon!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:15 PM

This is apparently what was said before the various media spin doctors started doing their thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:27 PM

This wee part is revealing...

"Q: Thank you. General, I'd like to try and see if you could address more of the first question which we had from our colleague up front. The Americans are specialists in surrounding places, keeping people in them, holding up for a week, if necessary, to make them surrender. These guys only had, it appears, AK-47s, and you had immense amount of firepower. Surely, the possibility of the immense amount of information they could have given coalition forces, not to mention the trials that they could have been put on for war crimes, held out a much greater possibility of victory for you if you could have surrounded that house and just sat there until they came out, even if they were prepared to keep shooting.

GEN. SANCHEZ: Sir, that is speculation.

Next slide (sic).

Q: No, sir, it's an operational question. Surely you must have considered this much more seriously than you suggested.

GEN. SANCHEZ: Yes, it was considered, and we chose the course of action that we took.

Q: Why, sir?

GEN. SANCHEZ: Next slide -- or, next question, please. "

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST,Jeger
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:31 PM

Something is wrong with this picture.

Regrets for his 14 year old son
Who most likely was carrying a gun?
And yet where's your concern for the evil they have done!
And whether or not he did fight side by side with his father, STILL no real regrets are being voiced by those of you who show concern for this boy, for the thousands who have died in silence. The things endured under their reign and in the prisons could not be retold by those who got out because those still in prison would be tortured all the more. Pretty cleaver. Their tactic worked pretty well didn't it. You whine about the son but not about the untold evil that has been done to the silent thousands including, no doubt many many many children of these people!
Jeger

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:46 PM

As the old saying goes Jeger, two wrongs don't make a right. Because someone is guilty of war crimes and human rights abuses, doesn't justify another wrongdoing, just for the sake of political expediency. Also, I don't think it is accurate to assume that because we are critical of the ways US CentCom and the Bush administration have (mis)handled events in post-war Iraq, that it means we are defending the Hussein regime, or suggesting that the sons weren't criminals.

I think many an American and British citizen would much rather have seen the sons taken alive, so that they could have been tried, and we could have gotten more information out of them. Like where all the money is that they looted, which could be returned to the Iraqi people, and aid in the reconstruction of the country. Or that they might have been able to provide information about the whereabouts of other "high interest targets" as US CentCom refers to the other wanted members of the regime.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 05:51 PM

What's the big fuss over a buncha dead sand niggers? Ain't like they're human.

God Bless America!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 06:31 PM

Those questions General Sanchez refused to answer are not going to go away. It seems to me that this was a very serious mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 06:51 PM

I've visited the photos Reuter's has of the two sons in their "repaired" state. There is a mixed message delivered, aspects probably not intended along with a couple of main agenda items. These are meant to speak to the people who actually knew the men--word will filter out from them concerning the veracity of the claim that these are Saddam Hussein's sons. And the signs of tampering--clear, gross autopsy incisions--there to inflame Saddam Hussein himself, perhaps to tempt him into reckless behavior to give away his location?

The entire nation of Iraq must feel like it's lying on an autopsy table, giant gashes carved into it as the U.S. pokes around. Bush and Rumsfeld just can't cram the mortuary putty in fast enough to hide the damage

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 25 Jul 03 - 06:59 PM

Surely you, so many of whom are brilliant military strategists, have considered the probability of a tunnel network. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: X
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 02:08 PM

You folks would be crying over Hilter if we took him out in 1940.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 02:18 PM

If there'd been a tunnel network they wouldn't have been lkely to stick around to get blown up.

The assumption that the only Iraqis who are likely to be gunning for the occupying forces are fans of Saddam beggars belief.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 02:20 PM

The Banjoest is sure not wrong about that. Back when Hitler had his pact with Stalin, Pete Seeger and his leftwing folky friends were vehement opponents of America joining in the war against Hitler's Nazi regime. The current leftwing arguments against the war with Saadam Hussein's mass murdering regime are almost identical to those used by lefties in the early days of WWII.

But then, when Hitler turned on Stalin, his fellow mass murdering dictator, Pete and his folky friends were enlisting in the army and singing "Round and Round Hitler's Grave."

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 02:38 PM

Gets confusing with GUEST don't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Gareth
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 02:45 PM

Ah Yes - A thought to be a true story - 1941 And the British Communist Party Conference. Harry Pollit, the "premature anti-facist" is making a speech.

Predictably Harry is condeming this "Capitalist War".

Harry is handed a note saying "Hitler has invaded Russis", and without breaking he stride he immediatly launched into a tirade on how it was the duty of every working class man to oppose Hitler etc.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 07:39 PM

Rather similar to the way Saddam turned from being Washington's loyal agent to being a loathsome enemy.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: X
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 08:17 PM

Booo hoo hooo.

You guys at the "Cat" are too pink for me. I'm out of here!

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Jul 03 - 11:56 PM

To call this threads "Saddam's Boys" makes them seem like they were small children -- they were not, they were grown adults (maybe not very mature, but adults all the same). It should be called "Saddam's Sons."

As for the pictures, I've finally seen them. They're not very gruesome, at least in my mind. You've got two dead guys who have been punctured by bits of metal. I've said it before and I'll say it again: bits of metal don't care, they'll rip into anyone in their path.

If you want gruesome, consider someone dead of a shotgun wound to the head. Someone with their throat cut so deeply that they are nearly decapitated -- or someone's head thrown through the windshield in a car crash. Ride with a cop or a paramedic to a bad crash -- or sort through a fire that killed a child.

Or consider what those sons of Saddam did to others.

I'm sorry they're dead -- I'd rather they stood trial -- but I can't say that I feel a sense of loss, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: Gareth
Date: 27 Jul 03 - 06:18 AM

Ah yes Kevin, but at least the US of A removed Saddam, so why criticise the US of A ?

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Saddam's Boys
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 03 - 12:40 PM

To criticize with the right intention, which would include but isn't limited to getting at truth, learningt from past mistakes, setting things aright, improving conditions sorely in need of improvement--that is why people criticize, Gareth. All of those intentions are noble and positive. Most of us aren't naive enough to believe that just because our intentions when criticizing someone, something, some nation, etc. are good, that means that the outcome of our examining something critically will be positive, or even what is hoped and longed for, but that doesn't mean we should sit back and allow our thinking to be determined by the propaganda the US government attempts to feed us, especially through the mass media.

When you live in a democracy, the government and all it's proxies are constantly being scrutinized and examined critically. That is THE MOST POSITIVE aspect of being a US citizen, and having the privlege of living in a democratic society. You aren't guillotined for expressing a negative opinion of the government, or demanding an inquiry, or critically examining the policies the government is carrying out in your name.

I have to wonder about the mental state of any person who lives in a democratic society, and whines around about people being critical of the government. As citizens, it is our job and our responsibility to examine the actions of the government critically, and overthrow the government when it oversteps it's bounds. In a democratic society, we overthrow the government with ballots instead of bullets. But that doesn't make the contest any less intense and passionate.