Assasination?

zarathustrazarathustra
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Just heard, then read:



<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57969-2002Jun15.html"; target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57969-2002Jun15.html</a>;



I have no axe to grind with killing this guy. It may or amy not be 'right' but it does seem to be in the best interests of Bush (perhaps USA?). But the doublethink is mindboggling.



1. You can't assasinate the man you want dead.



2 You can assasinate people under him to get at him to capture him.



3.You cant invade/get inserted into his country to kill him.



4. You can invade/get inserted into his country to kill others to get to 'capture' him and then 'defend' yourselves with lethal force...



Maybe I'm reading it wrong but this is as f****d up as Clinton's assertions about sex.



People who are Pro/Anti USA in their views might appreciate a little honesty (even if they disagree with the actions) Such as:



"We think that this action is in the best interest of our people, we are the most powerful nation on earth so thats what we're going to do"



BTW How long 'til Blair agrees?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    mozillamanmozillaman Posts: 76member
    What, you mean Blair hasn't agreed yet?



    All I care about is the lifting of the sanctions on Iraq. More than half a million people have died as a direct result of not only the civilian infrastructure damage we inflicted during the Gulf War, but the arcane trade embargoes placed on Iraq.



    I say, do what you have to, Georgey, and then afterwards get those sanctions off like a motherf*ck. Too many innocent children are dying there every month.



    Nomatter how we fool around in Iraq, we're gonna lose Arab support in the war on terrorism and will definitely hurt tensions in Israel and occupied Palestine.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    spaceman_spiffspaceman_spiff Posts: 1,242member
    [quote]Originally posted by Zarathustra:

    <strong>

    I have no axe to grind with killing this guy. It may or amy not be 'right' but it does seem to be in the best interests of Bush (perhaps USA?). But the doublethink is mindboggling.



    1. You can't assasinate the man you want dead.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yep. That's the law. Until Congress changes the policy this is the box we're in.



    [ 06-16-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
  • Reply 3 of 10
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Couldn't he have a little "accident"? The mafia does it, and I'm sure we've done it on numerous occasions.



  • Reply 3 of 10
    zarathustrazarathustra Posts: 264member
    Then didn't the announcement seem....less than honest?



    Sending special forces, armed to the teeth, into Sadaam's lair to 'defend' themselves sounds like an attempt to kill him to me.



    Not much point having a law which says one thing if you just change what you call what you're doing to get round it is it?
  • Reply 5 of 10
    mozillamanmozillaman Posts: 76member
    We'll probably just find a corrupt general in his military and pull a coup, just like we did in Chile. Well, this time we're doing it in the War on Terrorism, instead of the War on Anything That Remotely Smells Like Communism, back in 1973.
  • Reply 6 of 10
    jrcjrc Posts: 817member
    They should capture him, then put his execution rights on eBay. Highest bidder gets to flip the switch.



  • Reply 7 of 10
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    I say, do what you have to, Georgey, and then afterwards get those sanctions off like a motherf*ck. Too many innocent children are dying there every month.



    Why do you think there are sanctions on Iraq? Obviously if Saddam is toppled and a more friendly regine is in place there will be no reason to continue with the sanctions. Except of course to give people something to complain about.



    OH, PLEASE! WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!
  • Reply 8 of 10
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Saddam is a real problem, but unfortunately we (we because US and Europe where both involved) did not remove him of the power. Eleven years have passed since, and he is still at the power, still dangerous , still the same guy ... but it have becoming more difficult to remove him.



    I think it was a big mistake to not remove him years ago, the politic of embargo was bad, no effects to remove him from the power, but great sufferings among the Iracqs people.



    In one way the embargo is evil due to human consequences. In another way we have to fight this man who have only one goal : the revenge.
  • Reply 9 of 10
    digixdigix Posts: 109member
    If Â?theyÂ? want Saddam Hussein dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want Usama bin Ladin dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want Fidel Castro dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want George W. Bush dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.





    But Â?theyÂ? don't want all of the people to be dead, sinceÂ*Â?theyÂ? putted those people there in the first place and those people still have some uses for Â?themÂ?, so those people will stay in their positions. But don't be mistaken, if George W. Bush try to spill the beans on what really happened in 11th September 2001, he probably end up like some of his predeccesors.





    What should be noted though is that, life (and everything else) is in the hand of God, so... no matter what Â?theyÂ? want, if a person isn't supposed to be dead, Â?theyÂ? can't do anything.
  • Reply 10 of 10
    noahjnoahj Posts: 4,503member
    [quote]Originally posted by digix:

    <strong>If Â?theyÂ? want Saddam Hussein dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want Usama bin Ladin dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want Fidel Castro dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.



    If Â?theyÂ? want George W. Bush dead, Â?theyÂ? probably already doing the plan for it and there's a good chance that he's already dead.





    But Â?theyÂ? don't want all of the people to be dead, sinceÂ*Â?theyÂ? putted those people there in the first place and those people still have some uses for Â?themÂ?, so those people will stay in their positions. But don't be mistaken, if George W. Bush try to spill the beans on what really happened in 11th September 2001, he probably end up like some of his predeccesors.





    What should be noted though is that, life (and everything else) is in the hand of God, so... no matter what Â?theyÂ? want, if a person isn't supposed to be dead, Â?theyÂ? can't do anything.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Sorry, this is wayyyy off topic but everythime I hear Digix speak of "them" this quote comes to mind.



    Charlie's father talking about the Pentaburate:



    "The queen. The vatican. The Getty's. The Rothschilds. AND Colonel Sanders before he went teats up! Oh, I hated the Colonel with his wee BEADY eyes! and that smug look on his face, 'Oh! You're gonna buy my chicken, OHHH!"

    Charlie: "Dad, how can you hate...the Colonel?"

    Charlie's Father: "Because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes you crave it fortnightly, smart ass!"

    From: So I Married an Axe Murderer <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    He said who he thoeught them was, Digix, do you know who "them" is, or do you just know that there is a "them" and that is good enough for you?
Sign In or Register to comment.