Saddam Hussein arrested

[Sava]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Tried at the Hague? He'd have to be imprisoned for at least a while in the Netherlands then right? How do you think the growing Muslim population of Europe is going to take that? Can you visualize the PM of the Netherlands proudly proclaiming: "BRING IT ON" as angry Muslim suicide bombers vent their ire on the streets of Rotterdam?

well if The Hague doesn't want him, then throw him into a box at Gitmo... but I think Europe will most likely want him tried at the ICC.

[Spiffor]

Sava:
I could not care less about the US arguments for war and the US credibility. The credibility of the US in this whole affair is zero anyway: anybody that has been interested in the issue knows that all public arguments for war made by the Bushies are mere excuses intended to get support in the public opinion.

And I'm sure the average Iraqi couldn't care less about the US credibility either. Ths US should accept the thanks, and shut up while the Iraqis deal with their past despot as they please.

The capture of Saddam is a grzat opportunity for Iraqis to clean their old demons. Let's not steal it for something as unimportant as the already dead "US credibility"

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Tried at the Hague? He'd have to be imprisoned for at least a while in the Netherlands then right? How do you think the growing Muslim population of Europe is going to take that? Can you visualize the PM of the Netherlands proudly proclaiming: "BRING IT ON" as angry Muslim suicide bombers vent their ire on the streets of Rotterdam?

I don't think that he would have much support in the Muslim community in Europe. Most Muslims pretty much hate him, don't they?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

How dare you diss the Coolition!

I'm not dissing them. I think they did a good thing. However, the Coalition is multi-national, not international.

Main Entry: 1in·ter·na·tion·al
Pronunciation: "in-t&r-'nash-n&l, -'na-sh&-n&l
Function: adjective
Date: 1780
1 : of, relating to, or affecting two or more nations
2 : of, relating to, or constituting a group or association having members in two or more nations
3 : active, known, or reaching beyond national boundaries

the coalition IS international... DUH!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by PLATO
Who cares where he is tried? The f**ker will no longer be involved in the death of innocent people.

I care--I hope he is tried in Iraq for the crimes he committed against Iraqis. I don't see any other alternative being as satisfactory.

[Verto]

I think the US has made it clear he'll be tried in Iraq.

[Pekka]

Sava, I know what you mean, problem rises when for example many Euros don't share the same view, even if they support the war. Other guy says 'you don't support, you're against' other guys says 'I don't support, I'm not against you though'.. I don't know different ways of thinking.. most people want the same results, most people wanted Saddam out, people just disagree with the methods. But now when that part of the mission is total success, people turn to congratulate, and I don't think they should be turned down, they should be tried to be recruited to the winning team! The ones that are not happy about this, they are true bastards though

Now if the resistance starts to considerably weaken, Saddam would brake down and give some new info, Iraqis would truly get freedom, reconstruction would start well, somehow OBL would be catched in the process.... that would be total victory, terrorists 0 people of the world and allied forces 100. But this is a victory in my eyes already. What I'm saying is, if things starts to get bad again and no new victories are in our near future, the people who now congratulate the troops today, will again start bashing Bush gov. But let's remember today anyway for a day, the 'free world' was victorious and everyone agreed for once in their lives.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Sava:
I could not care less about the US arguments for war and the US credibility. The credibility of the US in this whole affair is zero anyway: anybody that has been interested in the issue knows that all public arguments for war made by the Bushies are mere excuses intended to get support in the public opinion.

And I'm sure the average Iraqi couldn't care less about the US credibility either. Ths US should accept the thanks, and shut up while the Iraqis deal with their past despot as they please.

The capture of Saddam is a grzat opportunity for Iraqis to clean their old demons. Let's not steal it for something as unimportant as the already dead "US credibility"

as long as the bastard suffers, it's good with me... but the sole purpose of the ICC is to prosecute cases like this. If you don't think the ICC is legitimate, that's fine. Argue that.

But regardless of what most people think about US credibility and how this is Bush's war... it's still an American operation... and it should be handled by the book.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Sava:
I could not care less about the US arguments for war and the US credibility. The credibility of the US in this whole affair is zero anyway: anybody that has been interested in the issue knows that all public arguments for war made by the Bushies are mere excuses intended to get support in the public opinion.

And I'm sure the average Iraqi couldn't care less about the US credibility either. Ths US should accept the thanks, and shut up while the Iraqis deal with their past despot as they please.

The capture of Saddam is a grzat opportunity for Iraqis to clean their old demons. Let's not steal it for something as unimportant as the already dead "US credibility"

BS Spiffor. All the French need to wake up and realize that they are the ones who screwed up. Its funny how they just keep rattling the same mantra hoping it will be true. I guess France's "credibility" would be to still be supporting Sadaam's regime and "inspections" while the killing fields continued? What a load of crap.

[Lefty Scaevola]

A lot of you seem to be clueless on the issue of warcrime jurisdiction. The vast majority of warcrimes and crimes against humanity have been and will be tried in national jurisdictions. The ICC by its design is for when there is a lack or other competant (legal meaning of that word) forums WILLING to try a case. Its purpose is to try thoses who are otherwise skating on charges, not to provide a neutral forum for thoses that many other courts want to get their hands on. There is no such lack or forums willing to try Saddam. Iraq has the most charges and damage to deal with, followed by iran and Kuwait, and then many of the coalition members of the 2 gulf wars have a bone or two to pick with him.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sava




the coalition IS international... DUH!

i think hes trying to say that coalition doesnt constitute world wide effort.

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by oedo
I also see nothing that could justify judging him in Hague. the UN completely failed in Iraq since 1991 (and probably even before). I fail to see, how the Iraqi population would accept this.

Oedo hit the nail on the head here. The United States is fighting a guerilla war on the ground in Iraq, and our future has a heavy stake in how the operation in Iraq goes. It would be best for our relations with the Iraqi people to give Iraqis the satisfaction of trying him in Iraq, and letting his punishment be meted out by Iraqis. Gaining goodwill among Iraqis is more important then the finer points of international law.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


I care--I hope he is tried in Iraq for the crimes he committed against Iraqis. I don't see any other alternative being as satisfactory.

Actually I agree. The really important thing is that he is now impotent.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Pekka
Now if the resistance starts to considerably weaken, Saddam would brake down and give some new info, Iraqis would truly get freedom, reconstruction would start well, somehow OBL would be catched in the process.... that would be total victory, terrorists 0 people of the world and allied forces 100. But this is a victory in my eyes already. What I'm saying is, if things starts to get bad again and no new victories are in our near future, the people who now congratulate the troops today, will again start bashing Bush gov. But let's remember today anyway for a day, the 'free world' was victorious and everyone agreed for once in their lives.

Of course... but there's nothing wrong with praising the troops and the admin for this victory but bashing them for something else. Getting Saddam is good, but that doesn't mean that all is forgiven... Halliburton is up to its old tricks, overcharging tax payers and the military (which is treason IMO)... the Bushies still misled the public about the reasons to go to war. And I still don't believe they are on the right track of turning Iraq into a stable country.

Saddam's a nice trophy, but there are still blemishes on Bush's record.

True pragmatics praise Bush for the good and attack him for the bad.

[Zero]

well looks like we're gonna hear this one for a reaaaaally looooooooong time with reelection coming up and all. Im already tired of this >24hr old news. :-p