?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Saddam Hussein

Saddam Hussein

While Saddam Hussein was in power, all he had to do was sign a few scribbles on a sheet of paper to have whomever he pleased, including his own men, murdered.

Now that this man has been caught, hiding in a hole, he surrenders while making sure his pleas are heard by his captors, that he's unarmed and will not fight.
Saddams son's preferred fighting to the death, than being captured alive.

Saddam could have done the same, or could have shot his brains out before capture. After all, he did have a gun and the silver bullet in his possession for this exact purpose. As Zapata once said, "Vale mas morir de pie que vivir de rodillas toda la vida." "It's better to die on your feet, than to live forever on your knees." One would have thought that this 6' 2" amazon of a man, with his big big wide shoulders, who committed such atrocities, for so many years, through his heinous crimes, and who held no value for other's lives, would readily choose death, like a MAN, when captured. I hope that all who lived in terror of this dictator, can now see what a disgrace he turned out to be. The final hour eventually came for this monster to show his true colors to his own people and to the world, by showing how DEAR his own life is for him.

Comments

( 21 comments — Leave a comment )
talking_monkeys
Dec. 17th, 2003 07:56 pm (UTC)
Well put.
playgirl
Dec. 30th, 2003 04:58 pm (UTC)
Thank you Talking Monkeys.
darkphoenixrisn
Dec. 17th, 2003 08:49 pm (UTC)
Well said.
playgirl
Dec. 30th, 2003 04:59 pm (UTC)
Thank you Darkphoenixrisn.
guirex
Dec. 18th, 2003 06:16 am (UTC)
I just love it when western people puke in SH's face, he was such a bad boy. He wasn't such a bad boy when he provided oil for France and USA though, he was a marvelous president when he was buying our "Mirage F2" fighting airplanes to go to war against Iran. He was an example of laicity when he invited american commandos to train his troops.
Don't forget one thing : WE PUT HIM IN POWER, AND WE MAINTAINED HIM IN POWER.
Sure now his good looks are ruined because the media puts emphasis on all the murders and atrocities he s done (which is right). But most of the Irakis who died for the 12 last years hace died because of the blocus we imposed. We, western countries, are responsible for the death pf hundreds of thousands of children due to the lack of medecines and food.
So yes, this asshole was an horrifying dictator, but it's OUR fault, we made him.
sakiroa
Dec. 20th, 2003 10:08 pm (UTC)
I just love it western people assume that world hunger and death can be solved by shipping money and food across the world. Let me clue you in:

The world is goddamn overpopulated, jackass. It's been over populated since the late 19th century, and the population of the Earth has grown ten fold since then. Overpopulation is a scientific equation balancing resources and population; if any species go over their economic balance line then the species will naturally starve and die easily at disease outbreaks. Sorry, but Americans aren't the cause of starvation and disease. Bottom line: you can't fix starvation. You just can't. It's impossible. If you try, more people will die in the next generation. If you magically find a food source which grows 30 times quicker than, say, bamboo, then you've just successively ignored every other factor that overpopulation contributes to (and probably completely misbalanced the natural energy flow of the world, causing it's assured destruction hundreds of thousands of years before due.)

The perfect solution is cannibalism. The population goes down, people eat! Everyone wins. Well, except for the people who got eaten. So, next time you think of world hunger just remember how yummy orphans could taste in your tummy.



Oh, yeah, not to mention the obvious hypocrisy in your post. We have no right to put someone in power and maintain them, but we are morally obligated to feed the starving countries? It's eerily ironic that once we follow the suggestion to feed everyone humanly possible, and the world becomes even more of an overpopulated mess that lacks any sort of fresh water or soil, we can tell ourselves, "It's OUR fault. We made it."
guirex
Dec. 21st, 2003 05:02 am (UTC)
Your argument aboutr starvation doesn't stand, Irak should be one of the richest countries in the world, due to it's huge petrol ressources. It's the blockus imposed by YOU americans that killed the poeple there, nothing else.
I totally agree that SH was a sad ass dictator and i m happy he's stopped now. But if you don't admit that western countries put him in place, maintained him placed, armed him, regarless of the human rights there. Everybody accuses him of the worsts atrocities, which are true, but they didn't seem to bother us when he provided the OIL.
On top of that, the picture we get from Saddam hussein has been provided by USA's army, which is, we all know, the best proof of objectivity, isn't it ? This guy looks more drugged than a rasta band.
But anyway, you can feel good, you live in a country where you shouldn't suffer hunger, like me. Just don't be surprised when someday they they ll get back on us.
guirex
Dec. 21st, 2003 05:06 am (UTC)
Your argument aboutr starvation doesn't stand, Irak should be one of the richest countries in the world, due to it's huge petrol ressources. It's the blockus imposed by YOU americans that killed the poeple there, nothing else.
I totally agree that SH was a sad ass dictator and i m happy he's stopped now. But if you don't admit that western countries put him in place, maintained him placed, armed him, regarless of the human rights there, then you e just blind. Everybody accuses him of the worsts atrocities, which are true, but they didn't seem to bother us when he provided the OIL.
On top of that, the picture we get from Saddam hussein has been provided by USA's army, which is, we all know, the best proof of objectivity, isn't it ? This guy looks more drugged than a rasta band.
But anyway, you can feel good, you live in a country where you shouldn't suffer hunger, like me. Just don't be surprised when someday they they ll get back on us.
sakiroa
Dec. 21st, 2003 07:01 pm (UTC)
Noted hypocrisy in preceded post:

You say SH is a "sad ass dictator", and admit that what he's been doing was indeed wrong and immoral, yet you point out that this opinion is objectified by the U.S. Army and it cannot be trusted. Your arguments are very obviously confused and muddled, as evident by you contradicting yourself in an attempt to discredit facts that you agree with; facts that are the very basis of the reason why we went to Iraq.

Because of your muddled point, I don't quite understand what you're trying to say. I'm assuming that, whether you're for or against the war, you've got something major confused here. Maybe I should note why we got involved in the first place? Seems pretty fair to me.
guirex
Dec. 22nd, 2003 08:16 am (UTC)
No, my point isn't muddled, it s quite clear, to me at least.
My point is that our western countries supported SH for years when he provided oil, that the human rights there didn't matter at the time, and SH was quoted as an example. My point is that your country went to war "to find mass destruction weapons" regardless of the international laws, that this quest was lost, and everybody agrees that there wasn't any left there after the first gulf war. My point is that the US government tries desperately to show the people they arrested SH when english reporters say it s the kurds who found him and left him drugged to hell to be found. My point is that Halliburton is making billions out of this war, and day by day it s shown it s the only purpose of this conflict. My point is that your so called free media is a LIAR, as ours in France, and i don't trust what is on tevee, almost when they say that SH didn't fight, maybe he didn't but that doesn't mean much to me. And final i think it s easy for us western people to give out lessons of democracy when we can't handle our own ones, you didn't elect your president, ours got his mendate with the help of heavy propaganda of friendly and corrupted media. git it ?
ankh156
Dec. 22nd, 2003 08:47 am (UTC)
The icon says it all.
CNN is a dangerous class-1 drug, and our dear friend is clearly under the influence.

She'll wake up soon enough, either with a headache, or with Bush for another 4 years (which will provoke a pain at the other end).

Have nice hols. get back to ya next year.
sakiroa
Dec. 30th, 2003 03:12 am (UTC)
Oh, I get it. Your point is that Fox News, infamous for their biased right winged misinformation, are lying idiots who pretend they represent everyone so that more idiots can feel smart and rebellious by having enough common sense to realize they're full of crap while still being dumb enough to fall into their "WE ARE AMERICA" jive.

I'm glad this silly little misunderstanding is all ironed out.

Dumbass.
guirex
Dec. 30th, 2003 03:50 am (UTC)
i am not america.
America is the worst thing that happened to the world since Hitler.
sakiroa
Dec. 30th, 2003 05:38 am (UTC)
Really? Well, even if we were the most vile country to ever grace God's green earth, the French were the ones who intimidated Britain out of sending more soldier over to the Americas during our revolutionary war. So, by way of proxy, you're technically worse, bucko.

Not that, in all fairness, your opinion really matters. The French have more or less boiled down to a state of indifference these days, only hidden by the fact that they've somehow maintained the right to questionably compare people to Hitler or flowerpots or something. Which is just as well considering, you know, their track record and all. The only badass thing the French ever did was The French Resistance. Not that it really mattered; the Americans had to bother liberating France from the Germans anyway. I'm pretty sure that Roosevelt- occupied with, you know, winning- said something like, "You can thank us later." Good results that had, apparently.
guirex
Dec. 30th, 2003 06:53 am (UTC)
laughable
this point about americans freeing europe, Roosevelt sent his boys to war when he was his back against the wall, and refused to send the army to support the effort against nazism in the early times of the war, which would have saved millions of jews.
Talking about history, if us french hadn't sent our troops to help your against the brits there wouldn't be such a thing as USA. You would have remained subject of his gracious majesty and fought nazism in the first days of the conflict. So, i guess we are the ones to blame.But, apparently, the fact that the us army taking positions all around the world provided good logistics for your companies to spread your ultra liberalism across the world is just a coincidence, isn't it ?
sakiroa
Dec. 30th, 2003 08:11 am (UTC)
Even more laughable
I admit it. You're right. We may have saved more Jews if we've gotten involved earlier. Of course, it's a moot point, because America and the mass of Europe never knew about the persecution of Jews until long after we've gotten involved.

That, and you're telling me that taking positions is wrong yet that's exactly what we should have done sooner with WW2 and Iraq. Another muddled opinion.

Oh! And why don't you completely forget the fact that it's the UN who involve themselves into worldly disputes, not the United States. In the UN, need I inform you, the US, Russia, Britain, China, and France all have equal power as the only five permanent members, each one having the power of veto. If we do -anything- you find inappropriate, you can stop it. No exceptions. Not a single one. But instead, your president decides to be indifferent while people like you whine and pretend we're unstoppable monopolizing bullies.

I'll repeat myself: Your opinion is completely, thoroughly, exhaustively, and excessively a meaningless indulgence of poorly constituted and ultimately wasted ill will. From my experience, blaming others for something that can otherwise easily be fixed is one of the most annoying and pointless wastes of time and energy humanly possible, and it's just too bad that the French seem to be very good at it. That's all they seem to do now adays, after all. So:

# Argument function

void argue($opinion)

{
 if ($opinion = "completely, thoroughly, exhaustively, and excessively a meaningless indulgence of poorly constituted and ultimately wasted ill will.")
 {
  Ignore();
  Print 1, "Ignore function called.";
 }

 else
 {
  randnum = Randrange(1,10,1);
  if (randnum = 1)
  {
   Converse();
  }
  else if (randnum = 2)
  {
   Insult();
  }
  else if (randnum = 3)
  {
   Lurk(20,1);
  }
  else
  {
   Ignore();
  }
 }
}
guirex
Dec. 30th, 2003 02:50 pm (UTC)
Re: Even more laughable
We voted against your attack on Irak, but the UN doesn't count unless it's on your side, apparently.
Second, it s proven that USA, Sweden, Great britain, (and facist france in 1942) knew about the persecution on the jews at the very first times, but P12, the pope of this time turned his head on the ohter side ^^
guirex
Jan. 1st, 2004 05:09 am (UTC)
anyway
We may never reach a common ground,
We may be at the very end of opposite sides.
But i wish you a XXXXL happy new year 2004 :)
pggmilltn
Dec. 19th, 2003 02:08 pm (UTC)
Maybe it is the flu talking, but that picture put the mental image of either saddam saying "I have no son" or "ENGELS!"
playgirl
Dec. 30th, 2003 05:00 pm (UTC)
Your mention of the flu, well, I caught it! Oh my goozzenezz!
sakiroa
Dec. 20th, 2003 09:15 pm (UTC)
So, apparently, you feel that lifting a pen to sign papers so that his enemies will die by hands he only owns by proxy should make Saddam brave, sacrificial, and honorable?
( 21 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com