Saddam sentenced to hang for war crimes

[DarkTemplarZero]

Hahahah Rudy I'm officially entertained. Apparently idiots like you are good for something. And yeah, I was kidding, I wanted to make the point that they are both guilty of crimes against humanity. But one point, I'm not flinging insults because you disagree with me, I'm flinging insults because Mewtwo-D2's being a bitch and you're just obnoxious because you refuse to believe that anything that disagrees with you is reliable.

Second of all, I agreed with Roy that I knew of no completely conclusive evidence for torture at Guantanamo Bay, other than documents authorizing the use of "alternative interrogation methods", the Military Commissions Act, and the testimonies of people who were actually prisoners there. I dropped the point because there was no point in arguing any further, there were good points and sources for both sides, and so whatever. However, the point is irrelevant, my point was that Bush is guilty of crimes against humanity under international law, which is not a debatable point. The existance of secret prisons (admitted publicly by the President himself) and the fact that he authorized the imprisonment of people without the right to a trial (well documented, public knowledge) is a crime against humanity.

I won't argue Wikipedia with you anymore, but I'll admit my example isn't that valid, because who would bother vandalizing an article about simulated annealing? But whatever, I won't bother anymore. From the points you make, it's obvious that everything that doesn't agree with you is obviously not a reliable source. Hail Rudy!

Next, yes, I was 5 years old when I moved from the former USSR to the states. However, when did I say I lived in fear? I said two of my great-grandparents spent decades in the Gulag, which is quite true. I didn't see them taken away, true, but if you're raised being told first-hand accounts of people disappearing in the middle of the night it does stick with you. Now, I could tell you to STFU, but I prefer to think of myself as above that.

[Master Rudy]

Hahahah Rudy I'm officially entertained. Apparently idiots like you are good for something...........I'm not flinging insults because you disagree with me, I'm flinging insults because Mewtwo-D2's being a bitch and you're just obnoxious because you refuse to believe that anything that disagrees with you is reliable.

Good job proving that you can't make a valid point without insulting someone......bravo......

Now where did I outright say that anything that disagrees with me is unreliable? Just because I have my own opinion on things that doesn't mean I totally blow it off. Let's use 24 as an example. For the longest time I felt that the first season of the show took place in 2004 which at the time was the future. Things that supported it were the fact that 2004 was an election year in real life and David Palmer was running for the Democratic nomination therefore placing an unnamed Republican in the White House. Assuming that Bush is the unnamed Republican that places the show in 2004. However there has been plenty of evidence to prove that the show's timeline begins in 2002:

David Palmer is seen wearing a pin which didn't come into use until after 9/11/01.
This year places Operation Nightfall in 2000, when Slobodan Milosevic was still in power.
Findings at CTU places Day 1 in April. Day 1 7:00pm-8:00pm shows Jack's watch with a date of "23" on it. April 23rd, 2002 was a Tuesday.
According to Findings at CTU, Mark DeSalvo began working as a warden in 2002.
In Day 3, Kyle Singer's driver's license is visible. It gives his date of birth as being in 1987. His age is mentioned in another episode as being 19, placing Day 3 in 2006.
The racing game Countdown takes place in December of 2004, between seasons 2 and 3.
In Trojan Horse, the 24 novel, Operation Proteus was just getting started two years before the novel. Operation Proteus took place in 2000, placing Day 1 in at least 2002.

Other things not mentioned in this list are the fact that the report by the House Special Subcommittee's report and investigation into day one was dated August 26th, 2002. In addition the Tuesday mentioned is Super Tuesday and if there is one thing many writers like to do with their fictional PotUS it's make up election dates. West Wing also did it so I'm sure 24 and the West Wing won't be the last. And despite the fact that I feel 2004 fits better there's all the evidence straight from the show's creators so who am I to call them unreliable?

My point now is this: just because something or someone disagrees with me I don't instantly think that their opinion has no merit. You however have a history of refering to things that are known to be unreliable in the first place. Don't make an ass out of yourself by assuming everything Zero. Just because I don't agree with you, Wiki, the Daily Show and the Democratic Party that doesn't instantly mean I disagree with anything and everything that does not share an opinion with me.

Anyway none of this crap is important to the subject at hand. This was a discussion about Saddam. Your welcome to your opinion about if he should have been killed or not but remember this: the risk of Saddam alive far outweighed the possible risk of him dead. And I've a strong feeling that if he was given life instead and somehow managed to escape you'd be screaming bloody murder over how incompetant the prison guards must have been. Why let him rot in jail, potentially escape and start this shit all over again? Anyone that has lost a loved one due to violent acts knows that it's hard to rest until those responsible are also dead. Yes there may be violent acts over his death towards US troops but personally I think this is more of a real moral breaker for supporters of Saddam's regime. If you want to call hanging him barbaric go ahead but keep one thing in mind. Despite what you say he got a fair trial. There are terrorists out there that have captured independent contractors, beat them and then beheaded them in front of the world. The way you speak it's as if your comparing this to that. The true barbarians do shit like that.......if it was barbaric to give a man a fair trial then I suppose we should have discussed his actions at a jovial dinner party instead, told him it's all in the past, gave him a slap on the back and let him go home a free man.

Yes Zero I too possess the ablility of sarcastic remarks

[DarkTemplarZero]

And torture is backed up by countless other websites, including Wikipedia, CNN, etc. So the point is that both theories have their sources and evidence and are both possible, let's leave it at that, k?

And second of all, Irene Kahn, the extremely short Secretary-General of Amnesty International was the one who first made the Gulag quote. Let's take it in context, shall we? "Guantánamo has become the gulag of our times, entrenching the notion that people can be detained without any recourse to the law. If Guantánamo evokes images of Soviet repression, "ghost detainees" – or the incommunicado detention of unregistered detainees - bring back the practice of "disappearances" so popular with Latin American dictators in the past. According to U.S. official sources there could be over 100 ghost detainees held by the U.S"
As you can see, she never even mentions the mistreatment of prisoners, but simply the fact that people are imprisoned without the right to a trial. Bam. Insant Gulag.

"The offenders of International Law are not in the U.S. they live in the Gettos of Iraq and Iran."
So you deny the existance of US secret prisons and the fact that about 10 of the 700+ held at Guantanamo have actually been charged with a crime? Because those are offenses under International Law. And if we don't stick to International Law as one of the countries primarily responsible for it's existance, why should anybody else? What's to stop another Holocaust or another Rwandan Genocide or another Darfur? If the United States, the land of the free and the home of the brave, doesn't follow it's own laws, why does Iran need to comply with International Law?

Rudy, I love to see how you attack my sources when your favorite source is a fictional TV show. CNN, NYTimes, Wikipedia, The Daily Show, Al Jazeera (yes Anti-American, but still an established news source), etc. are all less reliable than fiction. Wow man. That is just remarkably stupid. I've heard of Bible inerrancy, but 24 inerrancy is something new. I really won't bother replying to your post because it is such a load of crap I honestly don't want to waste my time reading it. I know reality has a well-known liberal bias that's worse than the New York Times, but next time try to stick to reality please? I love you man, <3

Oh and a happy early New Year to all!

[Master Rudy]

Rudy, I love to see how you attack my sources when your favorite source is a fictional TV show. CNN, NYTimes, Wikipedia, The Daily Show, Al Jazeera (yes Anti-American, but still an established news source), etc. are all less reliable than fiction. Wow man. That is just remarkably stupid. I've heard of Bible inerrancy, but 24 inerrancy is something new. I really won't bother replying to your post because it is such a load of crap I honestly don't want to waste my time reading it.

And how in the blue hell did the fictional anti-terrorism missions that CTU undertakes become a source as to this whole Saddam thing? Where did I say the word of Jack Bauer and Tony Almedia was more reliable than say Jon Stewart or CNN? There was not a single point I used it as a "source" in this debate. I was mearly making a point which you totally 100% missed and that point was I don't disagree with everything that disagrees with me. I felt season 1 took place in 2004. The writers and evidence over the first and third seasons said otherwise. Seeing that they wrote the damn thing that means they can't be unreliable. Let's use Lord of the Rings instead. I could quote things from the film all day long but if I'm trying to have a debate about the actual book with the film as my only source material then I'm fighting a losing battle aren't I? Movie was great but in the end Tolken's words are the boss. The way you put it if I said I prefer the film to the book that would be like me saying Tolken's original story is unreliable. However I'm not saying that. I'm saying Tolken wrote it and while the book obviously doesn't match the movie in some places since it came first the book is the end all be all if your having a debate about LotR and is therefore NOT an unreliable source dispite the fact that things in the book disagree with things in the movie and I prefer the movie. I'll forgive you Zero. After all you yourself said you didn't bother to read my last post. How can I expect you to understand the point I was trying to make if you didn't even read it? No hard feelings.....things like that happen.

As for Roy well said. That reminds me of something I said in an earlier post. Yes war is ugly and yes there are times where your going to do things you don't like. However in war if you don't do them many more people could die in the long run. Who remembers World War II? Yeah those two nukes were terrible but think of the manpower required for an invasion for the Japanese mainland. In the long run it would have at least drawn that war out for another year or two and cost so many more Allied and Japanese lives over that period than the two bombs did. It's not an easy choice but it was one that needed to be made: let the war drag out and kill many more in the long run in a push towards Tokyo or nuke two cites and threaten Tokyo with a third in an attempt it end it now. The Saddam situation is the same thing. Kill him now and let it be over with or put him in prison and risk an armed group loyal to him busting him out of jail resulting in the deaths of Amercians in the process. Then following that how about Saddam goes underground and plans attacks or maybe even a possible take over of Baghdad? Can you imagine the field day reporters would have had if Saddam would have busted out of prison and then several months later planned a successful assassination attempt on the Iraqi president......yeah that wouldn't have been pretty would it?