Saddam Hussein is caught!

Chris OConnor · Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2003 6:23 pm Post subject: Re: Saddam Hussein is caught!

I had always heard that Germany was the primary supplier of Iraqs military weaponry, but I don't know this for sure.

Chris

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward,for there you have been, and there you will always want to be." -- Leonardo da Vinci

sandor at the zoo · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:49 am Post subject: Re: There are real tyrants!

Niall says:

Quote:
Why is it that Brutus considers bribery to be bellow him, when he is willing to use the profits of bribery to form an army? What difference is there between taking bribes and taking the money made from bribes? Is Brutus not as guilty of bribery as Cassius?

The answers are:

1) I have no idea why Brutus thinks what he does.

2) Very little or none.

3) Yes, he is.

In what way does this pertain to the discussion above? Is it a (very) roundabout way of saying "we all bear responsibility for the actions that our leaders undertake in our name"? If so I agree - up to a point.

All of us who support the war in Iraq share responsibility for dead Iraqi civilians, dead American soldiers, and billions of taxpayer dollars spent to liberate and rebuild the country. We will also share responsibility for the free and prosperous Iraq that will emerge in 20 years. This is similar to the way in which those who supported FDR during World War II shared in both the blame for 200,000 incinerated Japanese civilians but also in the post-war success of both Japan and Germany. Only a fool believes that great achievement comes without great cost ... yet that is exactly what most far-left liberals seem to be demanding (get Saddam but don't invade Iraq, sign the Kyoto accord but don't hurt the economy, protect us from terrorists but don't take a single innocent life in the process).

The other side of this coin is that we are not responsible for every past depredation an American leader has made. I feel no responsibility for slavery; I despise the fact that it happened, but my ancestors were Lithuanian coal miners during that era. I've never received a single penny of "slave money" or had one ounce of work lifted off my back by an oppressed black man. I therefore feel no need to give reparations to black folks living in America today.

Which collective sins we are responsible for and which we are not must be taken on a case-by-case basis; there is no all-inclusive rule that tells us when some of the blame rightly falls upon our shoulders. Not even Brutus and Cassius can give us such absolutisms.

S

Niall001 · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 1:09 pm Post subject: Why talk straight?

well it really was a round about way of asking a question but not the one you thought it was.

The US used Saddam. The knew what he was. They knew what he did. They did not care. So are Rumsfield, Regan and Wolfowitz responsible for his actions?

Thats what I was wondering. Like Brutus, none of them would have commited the atrocities that Saddam commited but nonetheless they used the murdering tyrant.

So sandor, do you believe that those who supported Saddam were guilty of murder?

sandor at the zoo · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:30 pm Post subject: Re: Why talk straight?

Niall asks:

Quote:
So sandor, do you believe that those who supported Saddam were guilty of murder?

No. I believe Saddam himself was guilty of both murder and attempted genocide. Many members of his regime as well.

I believe you could make a case that Rumsfeld, Regan, Wolfowitz, their counterparts in the French government, their counterparts in the German government, their counterparts in the Soviet government, every member of the Baath party (in Syria as well as Iraq), and every last Iraqi civilian that paid taxes to support Saddam were, to one degree or another, his accomplices.

If you successfully made such a case (and that'd be quite a job), I think that all of the accused should show up before the court and explain themselves. Some would have good excuses (I don't think any of us would actually hold the average Iraqi taxpayer responsible for Saddam's predations) and others none at all (Baath party officials would have lots to answer for). Men like Regan and Rumsfeld would fall somewhere in the middle: Plenty suspicious, but also quite deserving of being heard out. Their defense would amount to something like the following:

"US policy of the era was to oppose America's enemies by supporting their rivals. Iran was our enemy, so we supported their rival, Saddam. Such policy was instituted during the cold war by both the US and the Soviets, because both knew that to fall into direct conflict would lead to nuclear war. So until the fall of the Soviet Empire, the policy was simply necessary. In Iraq, the policy was mistakenly applied; Saddam pulled a fast one and revealed he was loyal to no one but himself. The 1991 Gulf War, all of the sanctions which followed it, and finally the invasion of 2003 was our attempt to clean up the mess we inadvertently helped to create".

In my opinion, this just barely squeaks by as a legitimate excuse for their actions. It smacks of the "I was just following orders" mentality - which, by the way, is not an excuse for committing war crimes in the US military - but I also understand that in war you use what has been shown to work. Iran was a scary fundamentalist theocracy that had plenty of military and technical support from the USSR. They had also held our diplomats hostage for well over a year. Simple prudence demanded we do something to oppose them. Regan applied the strategy of the times, and it blew up in our face.

I don't like the way it happened, but I'm not willing to hang anyone out to dry for it because I honestly believe the men involved were doing what they though was best. Hindsight is 20 / 20, Niall; it's easy for you, looking back on the whole thing from 20 years in the future, to point your finger and say "Your fault! Your fault! Look what those evil men did!". But if you were actually there at the time, with that decision to make, are you sure you would have done so much better? If a different decision had been made, what makes you think we'd be better off today because of it? Things might well be worse.

And what about France, Russia, Germany, Syria, etc...? Do you harp and pester them about their role in the affair as you do the US? They were motivated merely by profit, not security. Are you as willing to see European and Arab heads on the platter alongside Regan and Rumsfeld's?

S

Niall001 · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 3:42 pm Post subject: Hmmm

But there are some important things that should be held against those who supported Saddam.

When they knew that Saddam was an evil murderer, when they knew that he slaughtered civilians, they continued to support him.

THe Iraqi people didn't know what Saddam was doing. The American people didn't know about the atrocities. Most members of the Bathist party didn't know. The US government did. Others also knew, buts lets face it, the US has almost always been the leader on all issues for Europe and the other ex-colonies. I hold those who knew, but who did not speak out responsible, but to a lesser extent than I hold the US responsible. The US could have made a difference. Few other countries could have.

You agreed that Brutus was guilty of bribery (didn't you, I may be wrong) so why aren't the polititions who were around at the time, who knew what Saddam was doing, but who ignored his actions, also guilty of murder?

You see what made Iran scary, what made the USSR evil, was not what they were, but what they did. I could live under communism. I could live under a theocracy. They aren't bad by nature. What made those regiemes evil, was their actions. People can say that you have to fight fire with fire, but if you do, what makes you any better than the enemy you are trying to fight?

Saddam's sin was not his betrayl of the US, it was his actions. He murdered. The West handed him the gun, loaded it and watched him shoot down innocents in cold blood. That made them guilty of bad judgement. What makes them guilty of murder is the fact that after they had witnessed the bastard's actions, they handed him more bullets.

I believe our systems have failed because those same people that made those descisions are still in power today and we still use those same tactics. And whats most disgusting, is not even the fact that such tactics are used, but that lies are still used to justify these actions. :rolleyes

Chris OConnor · Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:44 pm Post subject: Re: Hmmm

This thread has been one of the best we have ever had here on BookTalk. I just want those of you that are contributing to know that your opinions are being read and considered heavily. Many conversations have been fueled in my private life by what I am reading/contemplating here.

I'm going to have to make this thread our "featured member contribution" on our home page sometime in the next few days. Right now my computer is broken down due to the fact that I am doing some remodeling. I'm sitting at my fathers house using his computer tonight.

Anyway...good stuff guys. Seriously.

Chris

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward,for there you have been, and there you will always want to be." -- Leonardo da Vinci

sandor at the zoo · Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2003 12:22 pm Post subject: Re: Hmmm

Niall, that's a damn good reply. Some of your points I can volley back over the net at you, but a couple of the others I'm going to have to research a bit before responding (for instance, I'm not familiar with exactly how much Rumsfeld knew and when he knew it).

I hope it's okay that I get back to you in a couple days. I'm not trying to dodge your questions - on the contrary, I find them intriguing and want to respond - but I won't have time to look into this stuff before Sunday. Look for something on Sunday evening or Monday morning.

S

Niall001 · Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2003 2:17 pm Post subject: ..

Thanks Sandor, I appreciate the effort. Take as long as you want. I'm going to be seperated from the net for at least a week at any rate.

Dissident Heart · Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2003 9:01 pm Post subject: Chomsky on the Capture of Saddam

"What's revealing and important to the future is that Washington's display of contempt for democracy went side by side with a chorus of adulation about its yearning for democracy.

To be able to carry that off is an impressive achievement, hard to mimic even in a totalitarian state.

Iraqis have some insight into this process of conquerors and conquered.

The British created Iraq for their own interests. When they ran that part of the world, they discussed how to set up what they called Arab facades - weak, pliable governments, parliamentary if possible, so long as the British effectively ruled.

Who would expect that the United States would ever permit an independent Iraqi government to exist? Especially now that Washington has reserved the right to set up permanent military bases there, in the heart of the world's greatest oil-producing region, and has imposed an economic regime that no sovereign country would accept, putting the country's fate in the hands of Western corporations.

Throughout history, even the harshest and most shameful measures are regularly accompanied by professions of noble intent - and rhetoric about bestowing freedom and independence.

An honest look would only generalize Thomas Jefferson's observation on the world situation of his day: "We believe no more in Bonaparte's fighting merely for the liberties of the seas than in Great Britain's fighting for the liberties of mankind. The object is the same, to draw to themselves the power, the wealth and the resources of other nations.""

Selective Memory and False Doctrine by Noam Chomsky www.zmag.org/content/show...temID=4736

Meme Wars · Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2003 1:33 pm Post subject: United States & Iraq

I believe all participants are right to some point on this discussion.

I will try to place my position in a nutshell:

There was a secret energy meeting in early 2001. In the meeting, what was shared was a current map of Iraq and its known reserves. Also included, was Saddam's plea to other nations to place bids on repairing his neglected oil wells and delivery systems, to search for additional new reserves of oil, and to build new oil wells. United States and Britain need not apply.

The oil supply within the next year and half proved unreliable due to Venezuela and Nigeria political upset. Our oil prices spiked. We rely almost exclusively on our Saudi friends to supply the shortfall and stabilize oil prices. But the Saudi's are embarrassingly not democratic at all and do not represent American values. Embarrassingly, three quarters of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens. Money that financed that terrorism and other Osama Bin Laden activity came from the American dollar purchasing Saudi Oil for our hungry gas guzzling and utterly unnecessary SUVs. We were strapped we could not pressure the Saudi's too much without them responding by cutting back on oil shipments to us. That could bust our economy. Also, at the rate we were drawing down Saudi oil reserves, this relationship could have a very short life. There are also hints that Iraq may be sitting on more oil than we thought and may actually have the largest reserves in the world. The other nations that assisted Saddam, would in the end, be the economic winners securing cheap oil while U.S. and Britain would be exempt and see their energy prices sore and create a massive depression in those two economies.

To make matters worse, Saddam was planning on wrecking our economy within a year by making agreements with many oil trading partners to make the Euro dollar the means of exchange for oil rather than the current U. S. dollar. It is this oil/U.S. dollar relationship that has stabilized the value of our currency worldwide and gave us many years of low inflation. If the Euro was accepted, it would devastate the value of the dollar as many countries try to unload it as they could no longer use it to exchange for oil, the lifeblood of all civilizations.

Well, that was NOT going to happen, and we had no time to waist! We were going to correct this, even if we had to go it alone. In fact, we HAD to go it alone to guarantee that the Euro would not be used as the new exchange and this also gave us the opportunity to rip up all of those contracts with Russia, France, North Korea, and, etc., who had won favor with Saddam to do oil business with him.

We could not let the small prehistoric raptors enjoy the feast of Iraq. The Tyrannosaurus U. S. of A lurched in for the kill, causing all the raptors to flee in squelching protest and sit on the sidelines to regroup.

By holding on to Iraq, we have secured ourselves, the most hoggy energy consumers of the world, the last bastion of cheap quality oil. We will be able to ride the downward oil supply curve right down to the end; we will not be the ones caught running out of cheap oil first.

And, once we repair the oil structures of Iraq and get the oil flowing at a secure rate for our consumption, the Tyrannosaurus Rex, can turn its gaze back on the Saudi's, no longer afraid of Saudi reprisal for our call of retribution for the 9/11 attracts by Saudi citizens. We can force reform upon the Saudi government, and our little buddy carnivores of capitalist opportunist and fundamentalist predators will be breaking down the doors to get into that country to ravage their small population. It will be like a domino effect.

Now that our hands are dirty, I do agree for the sake of the Iraqi people that we stick it out a full generation (12 to 18 years of occupation) to secure a true democracy as we have done to Japan and Germany. Unfortunately, we live in a different world; it may not succeed. And hopefully, we will give a fair price for the oil.

Our only threat will be the pack of disorganized small raptors from Europe, if they truly unite, and start building up their military, kick our military bases out, and then force their presence back into the middle east. If the group of raptors could stay organized, they could actually take down the U.S. Tyrannosaurus, and force it to agree to a future Kyoto protocol and world courts.

It is our policy to use up other people's oil first and save our known reserves for national emergencies or for future oil embargoes (that we will militarily resolve in the future.)

So when the world energy problem goes global, we will ease ourselves off oil, using our reserves at the very end while the rest of the world goes into massive depression; The resulting disaster will be a boom to U.S. corporations. It will be a killing field of opportunity.

I would have been more supportive to go into Iraq if our position from the start was the same as our approach to Yugoslavia, that we wish to go in and capture Saddam for his crimes against civilization and to try him, and then assist in developing democracy.

I also would be less upset if Bush and Team went along with the Kyoto protocol and voted on tougher emission standards for our vehicles, to eliminate the SUV, truck, and mini van exemption from those standards and bring them on board with the rest of the automotive fleet that must meet improved gas mileage standards.

But, alas, that is not the case! I am eager to replace Bush.

Monty Vonn
Meme Wars!

Edited by: Meme Wars at: 12/22/03 1:34 pm


	HOME	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT