Saddam: The Butcher of Baghdad and the Shame of Mesopotamia

Re: # 28
Two wrongs don`t make a right.

Saddam`s crimes do not justify the invasion of Iraq and the lies propagated by the neocons.

And the argument works the other way also.

Just that some people do not have the honesty and/or the moral courage to apply the same rules to themselves that they want to apply to others.

This is called hypocrisy.

Re: # 18

``Do the lies of Bush and Blair wash away Saddam`s crimes?``

may I ask -- do Saddam`s crimes wash away Bush and Blair crimes?

-- so why that pathetic puppet hangman Maliki -- the `sovereign` ``prime minister` of `sovereign` Iraq -- did not ask his foreign masters -- may I put the same noose around you two criminal`s necks sirs -- for massacring MY fellow Iraqis -- destroying MY `beloved` country?

if that quivering quisling Maliki had an iota of Shia shame and national and ethnic pride in his own Iraqi people and Iraqi land -- he would have told the Americans

---

thanks for delivering Saddam but no thanks -- our bruised national pride -- as a foreign occupied and foreign enslaved country -- would require us to keep our native tyrant in jail -- TILL you occupying bastards -- get off of OUR Shia/Sunni/Christian/Kurdish back – go home and leave us alone.

.......when WE are TRULY MASTER of our own free land, our own free government, our own free judiciary, our own free police, our own free army and our own free to choose destiny -- THEN & THEN ONLY -- the TRUE undictated accounting of our own tyrants -- all by OURSELVES will begin -- not before -- NOT as long you two foreign criminals are parading as the Supreme Masters of our country -- in glittering uniforms and dazzling armaments -- invading the sanctity of our homes at midnight -- covering the shia nakedness with a cruel joke of fig leaf of a pathetic ``shia sovereignty`` -- with an occupying army of 150,000 foreign soldiers. What a denigration of Shia martyrdom!

Re: # 4

Saddam was friendly towards India because he perceived Pakistan to be stooge of USA and Saudi Arabia. Why is so hard for Pakistanis to accept that once upon a time they were lap dogs for Uncle Sam ?

As far as Saddam attacking Iran - The Iran under Shah did support the Kurds and undermine the Iraqi state.

Re: # 8

Saddam was not a stooge of USA. He was on ``US State Department terrorist list of states`` in 1983. Fearing an Iranian victory USA decided to support Saddam against Iran. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Soviet Union, France, Germany threw their lot with Saddam. His military was primarily equipped with Soviet and French military hardware. USA provided him with intelligence. So did the Soviets.

``The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is raising a hue and cry about the majority shia ruling the country?``(Bushollah Arjun)

The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is NOT raising a hue and cry about the 1% minority shia ruling the majority 88% sunni country syria -- either......:)

Re: # 23
Oh come on! The Islamic World has more important things to be outraged at. Like some cartoons in an obscure newspaper in a tiny European country.

#17 by nasah on January 16, 2007 8:37am PT


in order to hand over a native Sunni tyrant to a bunch of puppet Shia hangmen



The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is raising a hue and cry about the majority shia ruling the country?


p.s. Not directed at you personally(I know you`re more a worshipper of mao than mo)..

#19 by Urstruly on January 16, 2007 9:16am PT


has turned into another human tragedy like holocaust


Hmm..So you`re saying most of the jews killed during the holocaust were killed by other jews..

you do know that most of the 600K iraqis have been killed by..sit down for this...sunni wahabis or shia militias...like the 60 or so killed today...

Poor chap. They tore his throath apart. Thats the dawn of Democracy

Re: # 19
Read my post again. The invasion of Iraq was illegal, wrong. However, this does not justify the crimes of Saddam. Let us show some moral courage and condemn evil irrespective of who commits it. Selective criticism is hypocrisy, called munafiqat in Arabic and riyakari in Persian.

A, B or C are not responsible for Muslim on Muslim violence. Muslims themselves are. And if they kill each other at someone else`s behest, that makes them both murderers AND stupid.

Re: # 18

The alleged ``crimes`` of saddam and the invasion of Iraq are either irrelevant to each other or they are relevant to each other. They cannot be both at the same time; neither you should make them relevant when it suits your agenda nor vice versa.

The fact of the matter is that one of the pre-text under which the invasion of Iraq was conducted was that of alleged crimes of sadam against his own people, hence, the character of judge, jury, and executioner is aboslutely subject to scrutiny; especially now when this so called ``justice`` has turned into another human tragedy like holocaust or invasion of vietnam. Which brings us to question the allegations against the condemned.

As far as violence of ``Muslim upon Muslim`` is concerned every Muslim is concerned about it; yet every Muslim also knows that if this violence is a serpent then the head of this serpent lies somewhere else.

Re: # 14
Urstruly, does the illegality of the American invasion of Iraq lessen Saddam`s crimes?

Do the evil designs of the neocons for world domination justify Muslim hypocrisy in keeping quiet over Muslim on Muslim violence?

Do the lies of Bush and Blair wash away Saddam`s crimes?


The problem with ideologues, Islamist and of the neocon variety, is that they go to any extent to prove the other side wrong without considering the possibility that both may be equally wrong.

And by the way, the study from which you quote the figure of 650,000 dead also says that 30% of these deaths are attributable to action by occupation forces. The rest, 70%, are a result of Shia-Sunni violence (started by Sunni Jihaids). That comes out to 455,000 Muslims killed by fellow Muslims.

for the spin doctors of Bush`s new puppet Maliki -- just a reminder -- Saddam was also once the puppet of the United States. For the hangman`s noose the new neck could be Malikis own -- for helping the USA to bust Iran just like Saddam -- which is in the pipeline right now.

-- let me ask the racist sectarian apologistas of Bush`s Irak invasion an equally racist sectarian question -- what right a born-again evangelical Christian buffoon foreigner -- has to kill and maime more than 2 million Iraqis -- send a beautiful country back to stone age -- in order to hand over a native Sunni tyrant to a bunch of puppet Shia hangmen -- that a native Sunni Saddam does not have to kill native Iraqi Shia or a native Shia Assad of Syria doesn`t have to kill native Syrians Sunnis in Hamma......?

By Bush`s standards of equal opportunity tyranny -- THEY HAVE AS MUCH RIGHT AS BUSH HAS........so quit your puerile partisan pandering for selective US puppetry.

Re: # 15

Thank you.

There is no doubt that Islam is anything but a pacifist religion. As a matter of fact it portrays pacifism as the opium of the hypocrite; the malaise of deadwood, which is eaten by termites and cannot do anything about it.

Here is something Qateel Shifaii said about malaise i.e. pacifism:

Duniya main Qateel iss saa munafiq nahin koi
Jo zulm to sehta hai baghawat nahin karta