for once, Iraq had no WMD's when you went to war with them, and even if they did previously, it was probably because the US ( among others ) supplied them when the Iraq was still an ally against Iran. Funny how history turns out sometimes...ATG wrote:
It was a mob spectacle. I generally don't like state run killings but sometimes it is clearly justified, as with Saddam.VagrantSoldier wrote:
btw, how was that execution grotesque. You seem to be able to tolerate death, but you can't watch someone you probably despised die? What the hell do you think executions are for? They are not punishment, it is a form of payment to the people the guilty has hurt.
But,
1) if you are okay with the spectacle that was Saddams death I submit you at heart, may be as cruel and viscious as the terrorist.
2) Government run executions should be as emotionless and clinical as possible.
3) We lead by example, and turning a former head of state over to a mob is a piss poor example.
Vagrant, your obviously new here, and so I understand your hackles getting raised over this thread; just gotta understand I am trying to make a larger point, and to see how many people read the OP before posting. Every person who posted something to do with auto accidents did not read the OP and are hereby busted.
Part of the larger point is that you don't go into a foreign land, kill their people, prison their leaders and expect anything other than a fight. And if you are going to put my fellow countrymen in that kind of meat grinder you better damn sure have thought it all through and fight to win.
To do anything less is to encourage voting in America from the roof tops and with explosives.We are going to stay in Iraq and expand operations elsewhere because these people cannot be trusted with WMD's. It's not about damage control, it's about inflicting enough damage on them for us to maintain military supremecy.VagrantSoldier wrote:
You can not call me ignorant for not examining the damage control argument. That is the only argument anyone ever puts up for staying in Iraq. I should not have to try, you should know. You are the ignorant ones and I don't care if you don't believe me. I know I am right and I know I will lose this argument, but "force can oppress the truth" F. Scott Fritzgerald or some other smart person.
Also, the concept of military supremacy looks a bit out-dated in this day and age, wouldn't you agree ?
At least the insurgents are not buying it. You had military supremacy over Iraq well before the war started, there was no doubt about that. You crushed Iraq's regular army within days.
But since then, the war in Iraq has turned into a stalemate at best. You are exchanging body bags for little to no considerable progress. Damage control ? euphemisms ftw..
I wonder for how long the american public will stand and watch more and more of their sons and daughters walk into this meatgrinder some call a "success"...