Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

On CNN da other day, they were talking about if Saddam was executed, how it would effect Iraq. Should he?

Yes. Mass murder , rape , genocide and putting political opponents in industrial shredders all qualify you for the death sentence. Any so called martyrs who want to get us back can bomb us here in England for all they like. Us and the Americans are gonna kick their asses eventually. It will cost lives but we will have vengeance. And asking why Saddam should get the death penalty is like asking why Bin laden should get it when he's caught. There both mass murderers.

Keep reading...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051205/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_trial_29

Anyone read that Room 63 article? A human meat grinder?

Originally posted by Imagawa666
Any so called martyrs who want to get us back can bomb us here in England for all they like. Us and the Americans are gonna kick their asses eventually. It will cost lives but we will have vengeance.

Possibly....no, definitely...THE stupidest post I have ever seen on KMC.

If you wanna volunteer your family for death, do it. I don't personally hold the "They can bomb us all they like." mentality, or lack thereof.

-AC

Originally posted by WindDancer
Keep reading...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051205/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_trial_29

Anyone read that Room 63 article? A human meat grinder?

Saddam trying to act tough

I'm agitated by the thread title. Should Saddam get the death penalty. And i'm not intentionally volunteering my family. But many people are gonna die before this war on terror is over. It may come down to me losing someone. I have to be prepared. I love my family and would never wish harm on them. I'm just gesturing at the futile attempts of the terrorists to bring down our governments. And I've seen stupider posts.... Someone was trying to concoct a way to get back at someone in real life.

Originally posted by Imagawa666
I'm agitated by the thread title. Should Saddam get the death penalty. And i'm not intentionally volunteering my family. But many people are gonna die before this war on terror is over. It may come down to me losing someone. I have to be prepared. I love my family and would never wish harm on them. I'm just gesturing at the futile attempts of the terrorists to bring down our governments. And I've seen stupider posts.... Someone was trying to concoct a way to get back at someone in real life.

Thats not that stupid

here is what saddam should get: he should be executed by the same torture he inflicted on others

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Possibly....no, definitely...THE stupidest post I have ever seen on KMC.

If you wanna volunteer your family for death, do it. I don't personally hold the "They can bomb us all they like." mentality, or lack thereof.

-AC

we don't live in a eutopia. we have enemies and we have to face them head on rather than waiting for another 9/11

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Possibly....no, definitely...THE stupidest post I have ever seen on KMC.

If you wanna volunteer your family for death, do it. I don't personally hold the "They can bomb us all they like." mentality, or lack thereof.

-AC

for death? it's for freedom. so the people of Iraq can be in freedom like we are. is that a terrible cause

That aside, it's idiotic and utterly moronic to say:

"Any so called martyrs who want to get us back can bomb us here in England for all they like. Us and the Americans are gonna kick their asses eventually. It will cost lives but we will have vengeance."

No debate necessary. It's this mentality that makes the world a shit place and puts people in danger. Because Bin Laden is probably thinking the same thing.

That's a terrorist mentality. Sacrificing innocents for vengeance and welcoming hostile attacks.

-AC

I foresee Saddam & Co. being found Guilty and excecuted in 2006.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That aside, it's idiotic and utterly moronic to say:

"Any so called martyrs who want to get us back can bomb us here in England for all they like. Us and the Americans are gonna kick their asses eventually. It will cost lives but we will have vengeance."

No debate necessary. It's this mentality that makes the world a shit place and puts people in danger. Because Bin Laden is probably thinking the same thing.

That's a terrorist mentality. Sacrificing innocents for vengeance and welcoming hostile attacks.

-AC

i agree with that

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That aside, it's idiotic and utterly moronic to say:

"Any so called martyrs who want to get us back can bomb us here in England for all they like. Us and the Americans are gonna kick their asses eventually. It will cost lives but we will have vengeance."

No debate necessary. It's this mentality that makes the world a shit place and puts people in danger. Because Bin Laden is probably thinking the same thing.

That's a terrorist mentality. Sacrificing innocents for vengeance and welcoming hostile attacks.

-AC

Or a New york state of mind

Or stupid pacifistic state of mind

WARNING!! WARNING!!
THREAD IS DETERIORATING INTO FLAME WAR!!
MODS!! MODS!!

If he's killed he'll become a martyr to every dysfunctional would be terrorist on the planet. Leave him in jail to rot. He's no spring chicken and will no doubt meet his maker fairly soon enough.

IMO, if Saddam were to be executed all the Gorillas/Saddam supporters are most likely try to get back at the US

IMO, as long as US gets out of Iraq, they should not worry about that. There is a difference between an Insurgent and a Terrorist.

Originally posted by GCG
IMO, as long as US gets out of Iraq, they should not worry about that. There is a difference between an Insurgent and a Terrorist.

we can't leave now. the terrorists would rise to power

Exactley

Originally posted by cheldon
we can't leave now. the terrorists would rise to power

Public execution, two bullets to the head. Pan the cameras out as everyone cheers.

Though I think he probably deserves hanging. No, hanging is too quick and too merciful of a death for him.

Flogged to death... with a whip wrapped in razor wire...then hung with barbed wire when he's nearly dead.

Originally posted by cheldon
we can't leave now. the terrorists would rise to power

So the who should rise to power ? "You" ?



Between 27354 and 30863 civilians have died since the 2003 invasion.
30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.
Killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise over the entire period.


Before the war there was a strong government; strong security. There were a lot of police on the streets and no illegal weapons. Now there are few controls, a lot of crime, revenge killings, so much violence.

Under Saddam, there was order in Iraq. Under the US occupation there is Chaos and so much civilian death. Iraqis are finding it hard to earn a living. These kidnappings that you see, arent really terrorists. Most of them are done for ransom cause there is no money.

I find it ironic that Saddam is being tried for Civilian killings in Dujail and Halabdja, when under US occupation those civilian deaths are dwarfed by the greatest American Blunder in 'freeing' people.

That really is the most stupid post on KMC...Saddam is evil dictator. Better that many die so he is removed from power so that future generations are better off. Have faith in coalition and be rewarded.

Originally posted by Imagawa666
That really is the most stupid post on KMC...Saddam is evil dictator. Better that many die so he is removed from power so that future generations are better off. Have faith in coalition and be rewarded.

I dont think most people share your optimism.

I was saying that under Saddam there was a form of order.

The wok over there took it as if i condone his actions. HE DIDNT EVEN read the post twice and automatically dismissed it as the stupidest post on KMC. (at least not the internet). Clearly he misunderstood.



Knock knock; Saddam is not in power any longer....since......2 years. Where do you live ? Do you read news ? Do you know he was captured a looooong time ago.

As long as its not happening in your country, you feel that comment was appropriate. Do you really think that US cares about the Iraqis ? No. The negotiation of Iraq's reserves. Yes. More like it.

Originally posted by GCG
I was saying that under Saddam there was a form of order.

The wok over there took it as if i condone his actions. HE DIDNT EVEN read the post twice and automatically dismissed it as the stupidest post on KMC. (at least not the internet). Clearly he misunderstood.



As long as its not happening in your country, you feel that comment was appropriate. Do you really think that US cares about the Iraqis ? No. The negotiation of Iraq's reserves. Yes. More like it.
If it makes you feel any better, I've stopped caring altogether.

Thats not directed at you. I am refering to the wok666 who said that saddam has yet to be removed from power so therfore he considers the deaths of Iraqi civilians still expendable under the coalition occupation.

And then dismissed my post as stupid ?

Shoot the ****er.....better yet make him run over some claymore mines. That should just about do it (oh and make sure these miens dont kill him outright , just leave him their oozing all over the floor when his wounds get infected and he dies a horrible pain filled death)

The worst thing to do to Saddam is to psychologically break him until he loses that pride and arrogance of the dictator he once was because if hes executed with his head held high it would be quite a rousing image to his supporters.

Yeah, they should definitely kill him! Then, while he's frying, they should round up all the people who were involved in the genocide he directed and fry them too! That'd show people that killing is wrong! Yeah!

Originally posted by grey fox
Shoot the ****er.....better yet make him run over some claymore mines. That should just about do it (oh and make sure these miens dont kill him outright , just leave him their oozing all over the floor when his wounds get infected and he dies a horrible pain filled death)

If you believe a human deserves this kind of treatment then you're no different to Saddam.

-AC

I'm against the death penalty for anyone so also against this one.

Now all that stuff about the 'war' on terror and ending it => LOL, Fat chance. Seriously anyone who thinks that 'war' can be won is dreaming
There will always be people who consider themselves to oppressed or wronged by some state or another. Terrorism is here to stay.

You know, some of the people in here simply boggle the mind with their stupidity....I was trying to avoid this thread altogether but Fire told me to read it

The war on terror is a joke. You cannot 'war' on a state of mind. You cannot 'destroy' terrorism, and our war on Iraq is NOT going to stop or even diminish the amount of terrorism. More likely it will increase it.

As much as he deserves to die, executing him might be far from wise. First of all, resolving to killing him is a solution from the same manner of thinking and acting as the terrorists uphold. Doing so will only justify death as a means to them, as they live more by the eye for an eye code.
Keeping him alive but imprisoned shows a more civilised solution, hopefully putting us above them. Simultaniously one of their main peons turns in to a prime example of their venerability as he is kept caged.
But I'm just speculating on how the end of Saddam would affect the terrorist society. I can't tell for sure how they will react on any outcome of his trial. Unhappy with all of the possibilities, I guess.
My main concern is that we have high-ranked and powerful political extremists on both sides here, who act vigorously on economic and/or religious motivations, while the innocent population on both sides bite the bullets as the 'great leaders' sit in their bombshelters.

Originally posted by GCG
Thats not directed at you. I am refering to the wok666 who said that saddam has yet to be removed from power so therfore he considers the deaths of Iraqi civilians still expendable under the coalition occupation.

And then dismissed my post as stupid ?
I know, I was joking .
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you believe a human deserves this kind of treatment then you're no different to Saddam.

-AC
He has a point.
Originally posted by Lana
You know, some of the people in here simply boggle the mind with their stupidity....I was trying to avoid this thread altogether but Fire told me to read it

The war on terror is a joke. You cannot 'war' on a state of mind. You cannot 'destroy' terrorism, and our war on Iraq is NOT going to stop or even diminish the amount of terrorism. More likely it will increase it.
SpellJammer started a war on liberalism...wonder how that's going.

Anyone here ever read Asimov? The real way to get rid of him would be to make him work for you. Take away his ability to be a symbol. Killing him would make him a martyr; imprisoning him creates the possibility of escape, thus leading to him possible creating another army. If the US or any of their allies could get him to cooperate and help Iraq, there goes the figure of the old Iraq.

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
On CNN da other day, they were talking about if Saddam was executed, how it would effect Iraq. Should he?
I'd kill him if I could get a gun into the courtroom.

Originally posted by grey fox
Shoot the ****er.....better yet make him run over some claymore mines. That should just about do it (oh and make sure these miens dont kill him outright , just leave him their oozing all over the floor when his wounds get infected and he dies a horrible pain filled death)

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you believe a human deserves this kind of treatment then you're no different to Saddam.

-AC

Then he doesnt deserve to die for all his crimes? Funny that. How come Its ok to execute murderers in the USA, but when its a war criminal whos commited genocide its not ok? I'm boggled with the stupidity....

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you believe a human deserves this kind of treatment then you're no different to Saddam.

-AC

Whaaaaat? That pinche puto does deserve it because he inflicted it on others, ese.

You totally missed the point. He inflicted it on others, if we were to do it to him WE'D be inflicting it on others. Making us no better than he.

I don't believe in the death penalty. I honestly believe that were he to be executed it would cause more problems than if he was to be imprisoned for life.

Don't care. Kill him right now, throw him in prison and let him live 60 years behind bars. Makes no difference.

Originally posted by Imagawa666
Then he doesnt deserve to die for all his crimes? Funny that. How come Its ok to execute murderers in the USA, but when its a war criminal whos commited genocide its not ok? I'm boggled with the stupidity....

Read my post again.

BackFire, it does quite clearly make a difference. Him becoming a martyr or him not becoming one.

-AC

Originally posted by crazylozer
Anyone here ever read Asimov? The real way to get rid of him would be to make him work for you. Take away his ability to be a symbol. Killing him would make him a martyr; imprisoning him creates the possibility of escape, thus leading to him possible creating another army. If the US or any of their allies could get him to cooperate and help Iraq, there goes the figure of the old Iraq.
Sweet.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Read my post again.

BackFire, it does quite clearly make a difference. Him becoming a martyr or him not becoming one.

-AC


Not to me it doesn't, I couldn't care less.

I'm willing to bet he doesn't get executed.


Sure, it would be historically apparent that he would, but the Bus administration would do itself a disservice by executing him.


Even Sadam deserves better than a trial run by the Bush's.

Originally posted by crazylozer
Anyone here ever read Asimov? The real way to get rid of him would be to make him work for you. Take away his ability to be a symbol. Killing him would make him a martyr; imprisoning him creates the possibility of escape, thus leading to him possible creating another army. If the US or any of their allies could get him to cooperate and help Iraq, there goes the figure of the old Iraq.

I wish your observation was strictly Asimov. But it isn't that Asimov wrote his novels based on what he saw, it's that he wrote them based on what was going on around him...not what he envisioned in political futures..

Originally posted by BackFire
Don't care. Kill him right now, throw him in prison and let him live 60 years behind bars. Makes no difference.


you know, Hess lived to be 93. You're right though, his existance outside of prision matters little. Sure, his lawyers have been killed, but that can be changed.

I don't think he should be executed. Not publicly. As people have said, it creates a martyr - but also it makes America look worse than it does already. And if he's not, they'll be accused of cowardice. Hopefully, at least for the US and Britain, he'll commit suicide.

Originally posted by Trickster
I don't think he should be executed. Not publicly. As people have said, it creates a martyr - but also it makes America look worse than it does already. And if he's not, they'll be accused of cowardice. Hopefully, at least for the US and Britain, he'll commit suicide.

Publically...not at all


He should die a slow death...withering away in a state of total humiliation.


But, does he deserve it, based on the fact that America created his entire regime?

This man has been finger ****ed as hard as the tobacco companies...

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
On CNN da other day, they were talking about if Saddam was executed, how it would effect Iraq. Should he?

He would become a martyr for every western hating person. Execution of a leader such as Saddam or bin Laden and hoping for 'greater good' is ridiculous for numerous reasons.

a) The whole irony of ''you are a murderer and a bad guy, and we are not murderers and good guys, so we're gonna show you justice in our west by murdering you''

b) Anyone who has anything against west, will support Saddam - not because they agree with what he did, but simply because they are sharing an enemy.

Very stupid idea.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
He would become a martyr for every western hating person. Execution of a leader such as Saddam or bin Laden and hoping for 'greater good' is ridiculous for numerous reasons.

a) The whole irony of ''you are a murderer and a bad guy, and we are not murderers and good guys, so we're gonna show you justice in our west by murdering you''

b) Anyone who has anything against west, will support Saddam - not because they agree with what he did, but simply because they are sharing an enemy.

Very stupid idea.

I agree, but I also think that this very arrogant and plain stupid American politicians should leave the rest of the world alone - how would they feel if the rest of the world tries to rule them?

Originally posted by BackFire
Not to me it doesn't, I couldn't care less.

Refusing to acknowledge the difference and there not being one are two different things.

Originally posted by Wonderer
I agree, but I also think that this very arrogant and plain stupid American politicians should leave the rest of the world alone - how would they feel if the rest of the world tries to rule them?

In an ideal world you'd be right. We don't, never have and never will have an ideal world, though.

So it's all fine and dandy going Walt Disney about it, but this isn't the way the world works.

-AC

They shouldn't Execute him, dont get me wrong, I'm all for death penalty and all, but a man like Saddam Hussain has a lot of power and killing him will make him seem even more powerful, IE as was said before a Martyr.

Doing that will send the wrong message to his followers, this will lead them to think that the only way they could take away Saddam's power is to kill him.

Leave him in prision, will push his status to that of a regular man, So the legend of him will diminish. He cant do any more wrong while in prison.

Reading a lot of these posts, and thinking about the trial lately, I can't say that he doesn't deserve death. However, who am I to say he needs to die? That is not a place I should go....not for me to decide.

He has done nothing to me personally. I have not been personally affected, nor have any of my loved ones, by his being once ruler of Iraq.

That being said, I think the best way for him to go is to be silenced...lock him up for life to make the fallout from the trial as quiet as possible, globally speaking.

Yeah, it might be nice every now and then to see him scrubbing toilets in prison, or serving food to fellow inmates....duties a man of royalty would find so deplorable and humiliating.

Originally posted by Wonderer
I agree, but I also think that this very arrogant and plain stupid American politicians should leave the rest of the world alone - how would they feel if the rest of the world tries to rule them?

Well considering the land they inhabit was English theyve all ready experianced that.

Whats with all the pacifistic utopian left wingers on here? Saddam must be punished. Everyone is reedemable, but some have to die to be redeemed. Saddam must face the justice. Of course everyone on here who thnks executing will make him a martyr has a good point, but as for those who believe it is inhumane.....

Well its inhumane to murder people with gas isnt it? Thats what he did. He deserves death. Stop with the left wing (BLEEP)! Its people like you who make the world and our homes easier targets for these scum. Anyone who thinks Saddam doesnt deserve death because of ethics is a complete idiot who's living onm another planet.

And who are you to decide who deserves to live or die? You don't have that right, unless you like being a murderer.

You apparently are clueless as to how the real world works. Execute him, and we risk turning him into a martyr for the terrorist cause. Keeping him alive but in prison is the much better option because it'll not only show his followers that he is only human and subject to the same punishments as anyone else, but also that we took the moral high ground because we chose to not kill him.

You make a good point Alana. But I personally dont mind being the one to kill him.

I think it'd be much more degrading to have him in prison the rest of his life than to execute him. Kill him and he gets to go out with a bang. A better punishment is to let him rot and watch himself fade into obscurity. Though I do believe that he deserves to die.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
I A better punishment is to let him rot and watch himself fade into obscurity.
*shock*

I guess that is a better punishment. He can stew in what his life has become or will become and he will only have himself to blame.

These forums have gone to hell in a bucket......

Originally posted by Trickster
I don't think he should be executed. Not publicly. As people have said, it creates a martyr - but also it makes America look worse than it does already. And if he's not, they'll be accused of cowardice. Hopefully, at least for the US and Britain, he'll commit suicide.

Like Hitler

I doubt Saddam will be viewed as a martyr; he did **** all but kill fellow Muslims himself.

Just do it, get it over with, and move on.

Originally posted by GCG
I doubt Saddam will be viewed as a martyr; he did **** all but kill fellow Muslims himself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trials_of_Saddam_Hussein

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trials_of_Saddam_Hussein

What did you link wikipedia for ?

Originally posted by GCG
What did you link wikipedia for ?

Because they paid me

for sex whistling

Originally posted by Lana
And who are you to decide who deserves to live or die? You don't have that right, unless you like being a murderer.

You apparently are clueless as to how the real world works. Execute him, and we risk turning him into a martyr for the terrorist cause. Keeping him alive but in prison is the much better option because it'll not only show his followers that he is only human and subject to the same punishments as anyone else, but also that we took the moral high ground because we chose to not kill him.


Well on the grounds of the piece ....."who are you to decide who deserves to live or die," instead of taking a life you merely make the decision for that person that they will be confined for the rest of their life. Either way you are taking something from that person without letting them choose..........either or, you are still playing God.

Jail doesn't make a man degrade over time Nelson Mandella is a good example.

Killing someone and letting them spend the rest of their life in confinement are two totally different things, Soleran.

Originally posted by Wonderer
how would they feel if the rest of the world tries to rule them?

America being under imposition by others, you mean?

Well let's see here:

The U.N. and foreign whizzkid George Soros endlessly funding a treaty for 06' that would impose on the U.S. 2nd Amendment by making all private gun ownership in America totally illegal with the exception of military, police, and oh yeah i forgot, Michael Moore and the UN and the society rich and elite (including the politicians.)

All of our hunting and shooting traditions taken away from the public and given to hypocritical "gun haters" like John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clunton and Ted Kenndy, the man whose car killed more people than most legally bought and owned guns now in America's hands. Foreign and international case law imposed on our Bill Of Rights and our Constitutional amendments.

What makes politicians and other rich people any more deserving of
the right to hunt, shoot, and bust a few clay pigeons at a trap range? What because they're rich and we aren't? we don't need Kofi Annan's permission to own a gun (or Michael Moore's for that matter.)


America's religious and holiday traditions under attack from Atheists,
as well as Jews and Muslims. (funny considering the last 2 have disagreed with each other for the last 200 years) You can say
Kwanzaa or Hanukah all you want on TV, but God forbid you say "Merry Christmas" or "God Bless" to someone, you're automatically stepping on someone and forcing God down their throats...

Oh not to mention the idiot down the street who sues his neighbor because her Christmas decorations go against HIS religious edicts. Oh and the people who have strokes over Santa Claus being on the side of a soda can...here we go. This is a REAL winner.

The ACLU standing behind people who print books instructing illegal immigrants on how to infiltrate America from the Mexican border, saying it's a violation of Free Speech to not print such material. Dosen't matter if violent gangs are shooting back at police on our borders, it's still Freedom Of Speech..Where does it say America has to accomodate illegal activity as part of it's concession to others?

The human rights people screaming because Mexicans die from dehydration in their illegal treks across the border, screaming for watering stations, while they say absolutely nothing about the kidnapping, beheading and torture of every Western or pro-Western person Al Qaeda gets their hands on in Iraq or elsewhere.

Yeah as you can see, no other country, or any special interest group attached to them, has ever used THEIR ideals religions, or principals to impose on the good old US of A.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
America being under imposition by others, you mean?

Well let's see here:

The U.N. and foreign whizzkid George Soros endlessly funding a treaty for 06' that would impose on the U.S. 2nd Amendment by making all private gun ownership in America totally illegal with the exception of military, police, and oh yeah i forgot, Michael Moore and the UN and the society rich and elite (including the politicians.)

All of our hunting and shooting traditions taken away from the public and given to hypocritical "gun haters" like John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clunton and Ted Kenndy, the man whose car killed more people than most legally bought and owned guns now in America's hands. Foreign and international case law imposed on our Bill Of Rights and our Constitutional amendments.

What makes politicians and other rich people any more deserving of
the right to hunt, shoot, and bust a few clay pigeons at a trap range? What because they're rich and we aren't? we don't need Kofi Annan's permission to own a gun (or Michael Moore's for that matter.)


America's religious and holiday traditions under attack from Atheists,
as well as Jews and Muslims. (funny considering the last 2 have disagreed with each other for the last 200 years) You can say
Kwanzaa or Hanukah all you want on TV, but God forbid you say "Merry Christmas" or "God Bless" to someone, you're automatically stepping on someone and forcing God down their throats...

Oh not to mention the idiot down the street who sues his neighbor because her Christmas decorations go against HIS religious edicts. Oh and the people who have strokes over Santa Claus being on the side of a soda can...here we go. This is a REAL winner.

The ACLU standing behind people who print books instructing illegal immigrants on how to infiltrate America from the Mexican border, saying it's a violation of Free Speech to not print such material. Dosen't matter if violent gangs are shooting back at police on our borders, it's still Freedom Of Speech..Where does it say America has to accomodate illegal activity as part of it's concession to others?

The human rights people screaming because Mexicans die from dehydration in their illegal treks across the border, screaming for watering stations, while they say absolutely nothing about the kidnapping, beheading and torture of every Western or pro-Western person Al Qaeda gets their hands on in Iraq or elsewhere.

Yeah as you can see, no other country, or any special interest group attached to them, has ever used THEIR ideals religions, or principals to impose on the good old US of A.

I love you.

Originally posted by Imagawa666
Then he doesnt deserve to die for all his crimes? Funny that. How come Its ok to execute murderers in the USA, but when its a war criminal whos commited genocide its not ok? I'm boggled with the stupidity....

Agreed.

Well you know the answer to that one...Stalin said that the death of ONE person was a tragedy, but the death of millions was a statistic. And you know how them thar' dicktators work, they're always trying to beat the previous high scores set in Europe from 1914-1918 and again from 1939-1945. So when THEY do it, rest assured it's only a game and they're trying to beat the high scores

Originally posted by FeceMan
I love you.

Aww...big HUG

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
America being under imposition by others, you mean?

Well let's see here:

The U.N. and foreign whizzkid George Soros endlessly funding a treaty for 06' that would impose on the U.S. 2nd Amendment by making all private gun ownership in America totally illegal with the exception of military, police, and oh yeah i forgot, Michael Moore and the UN and the society rich and elite (including the politicians.)

All of our hunting and shooting traditions taken away from the public and given to hypocritical "gun haters" like John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clunton and Ted Kenndy, the man whose car killed more people than most legally bought and owned guns now in America's hands. Foreign and international case law imposed on our Bill Of Rights and our Constitutional amendments.

What makes politicians and other rich people any more deserving of
the right to hunt, shoot, and bust a few clay pigeons at a trap range? What because they're rich and we aren't? we don't need Kofi Annan's permission to own a gun (or Michael Moore's for that matter.)


America's religious and holiday traditions under attack from Atheists,
as well as Jews and Muslims. (funny considering the last 2 have disagreed with each other for the last 200 years) You can say
Kwanzaa or Hanukah all you want on TV, but God forbid you say "Merry Christmas" or "God Bless" to someone, you're automatically stepping on someone and forcing God down their throats...

Oh not to mention the idiot down the street who sues his neighbor because her Christmas decorations go against HIS religious edicts. Oh and the people who have strokes over Santa Claus being on the side of a soda can...here we go. This is a REAL winner.

The ACLU standing behind people who print books instructing illegal immigrants on how to infiltrate America from the Mexican border, saying it's a violation of Free Speech to not print such material. Dosen't matter if violent gangs are shooting back at police on our borders, it's still Freedom Of Speech..Where does it say America has to accomodate illegal activity as part of it's concession to others?

The human rights people screaming because Mexicans die from dehydration in their illegal treks across the border, screaming for watering stations, while they say absolutely nothing about the kidnapping, beheading and torture of every Western or pro-Western person Al Qaeda gets their hands on in Iraq or elsewhere.

Yeah as you can see, no other country, or any special interest group attached to them, has ever used THEIR ideals religions, or principals to impose on the good old US of A.



Its like you took the words out of my mouth.

Originally posted by ash007
Its like you took the words out of my mouth.

Seriously, or sarcastically? Just curious because I have a feeling I'm being eyed like a side of beef at this moment as a result of the simple fact that the street runs both ways...

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Seriously, or sarcastically? Just curious because I have a feeling I'm being eyed like a side of beef at this moment as a result of the simple fact that the street runs both ways...


no really i loved what you wrote.

yeah i know how its like thats why i stopped contributing recently.
Just keep writing what you believe in and don't give a damn what people might think. Because there will be someone who disagrees with you and there will always be someone who aagrees with what you are saying.

Originally posted by Lana
And who are you to decide who deserves to live or die? You don't have that right, unless you like being a murderer.

Execute him, and we risk turning him into a martyr for the terrorist cause. Keeping him alive but in prison is the much better option because it'll not only show his followers that he is only human and subject to the same punishments as anyone else, but also that we took the moral high ground because we chose to not kill him.


It dosen't really matter at this point: martyrdom is something Islamic extremists live for, and they already have decided that no matter how many of them die, they will always aim to take a larger number with them because as the old Viking saying goes, "the condemned man will kick at anything one the noose starts to tighten.."

We execute him, and we're bastards, but then if we let Saddam LIVE, Al Qaeda will turn around and say we're being too "soft" or they'll say that we're doing it to embarrass him and keep him as a symbol of American power and imperialism.

Moral high ground means nothing to a group of killers who behead innocents and send the videos to their families for extra traumatization, or to Al Qaeda after their murder of 3,000 innocents on 9\11.

But play their game and you lose, so we're ****ed no matter what we do. Kill him or keep him, either way we're still bastards.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Aww...big HUG

Originally posted by BobbyD
Killing someone and letting them spend the rest of their life in confinement are two totally different things, Soleran.


yes in one instance we end their life

the other we decide their life isn't worth ending and we let them suffer for as long as possible........which of course is SO much more humane.......lol

OH....I say public executions should be brought back......Makes for good friday nights.

It's not about being humane essentially though.

Killing someone because it's wrong to kill isn't the best way out is it?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not about being humane essentially though.

Killing someone because it's wrong to kill isn't the best way out is it?

-AC What is?....curious...your idea then..

Originally posted by ash007
no really i loved what you wrote.

yeah i know how its like thats why i stopped contributing recently.
Just keep writing what you believe in and don't give a damn what people might think. Because there will be someone who disagrees with you and there will always be someone who aagrees with what you are saying.

That's nice to hear, mate. Cheers *raises glass*

There's a lot of stuff I'd like to explain here but at this point it would be redundant. My views were made clear in the post.

Suffice to say that I am all for preserving America's heritage, from guns and ammo, and shooting sports and hunting, to the holiday seasons, and I WON'T kiss ass on anyone who hates our traditions because THEY don't believe in them.

Wal Mart can kiss my ass. I don't need their permission to believe in Christmas...

I don't see how a day at the shooting range with my father is contributing to the criminal gun element in America, or how saying Merry Christmas is shoving God down someone's throat. But that's OK, because Moore, the ACLU and Green Day say that if you do this or you do THAT.......

Our country and traditions were here first, not Moore, not the ACLU,
and not the soccer moms and politicians who use the delusional political expertise of Hollywood to infringe on others because they don't like something.

It's not enough that people have freedom of choice and freedom from other peoples' choices, now they want to bend the rules so that NOONE can have certain things THEY personally don't agree with.

It's bullshit.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not about being humane essentially though.

Killing someone because it's wrong to kill isn't the best way out is it?

-AC


I am just trying to understand the thoughts on this............

ok place them in jail for the rest of their life.........you are taking their "life" away from them except prison.

or kill them and move on. Either way you are TAKING something from them.........its just comical to say one is more humane then the other because death is worse...........but who's to say jail's not worse.....?

Originally posted by soleran30
I am just trying to understand the thoughts on this............

ok place them in jail for the rest of their life.........you are taking their "life" away from them except prison.

or kill them and move on. Either way you are TAKING something from them.........its just comical to say one is more humane then the other because death is worse...........but who's to say jail's not worse.....?

Yeah and you're taking years of tax dollars from the taxpayers by keeping him alive while all of his victims lay dead and missing from their loved ones...same with that Tookie Williams guy. The co-founder of one of the most violent street gangs in America. He gets a second chance while all of his victims have been missing from their loved ones for the last 30 years? Yeah, real fair.

You can't teach democracy to those who have never had it, any more than you can take old habits out of hardened people like Saddam and Tookie.

Screw it...

I have plenty of compassion, but what are you gonna do with these type of criminals?

Originally posted by debbiejo
What is?....curious...your idea then..

Well it's not killing them, obviously. Yes, let's go give every terrorist in the middle-east ANOTHER huge excuse to get pissed and start attacking out countries.

The only people who have a problem with locking the man up for the rest of his life are die hard vigilantes who believe it's "right" to kill him because he himself has killed. What does that achieve?Dead dictators can't do anything can they? No. Neither can living dictators locked away for the rest of their lives. So why not take the way that ISN'T stooping to his level and being hypocritical?

"Because he's kil..." No, before you even say it.

Originally posted by soleran30
ok place them in jail for the rest of their life.........you are taking their "life" away from them except prison.

or kill them and move on. Either way you are TAKING something from them.........its just comical to say one is more humane then the other because death is worse...........but who's to say jail's not worse.....?

Think about what you are suggesting here. You are suggesting that condemning someone for being a murderer, then murdering them for eternity, is not as bad as being above the killing, locking them away and having done with it.

You're suggesting we can't "move on" if he's in prison. Why? I'm fine with locking him away. Why is him being in prison stopping you from moving on? Killing him is not only overblowing things and being extremely hypocritical, but it could also cause more trouble. It's almost as though you are saying there's no point keeping him alive, might as well kill him.

Did you leave your logic outside the thread?

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Yeah and you're taking years of tax dollars from the taxpayers by keeping him alive while all of his victims lay dead and missing from their loved ones...same with that Tookie Williams guy. The co-founder of one of the most violent street gangs in America. He gets a second chance while all of his victims have been missing from their loved ones for the last 30 years? Yeah, real fair.

Life isn't fair, shit happens. What you are suggesting isn't justice, it's vengeance and eye-for-an-eye mentality. Which isn't needed. What you want done with the man, and what would solve more problems instead of causing them are clearly two different things aren't they?

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
You can't teach democracy to those who have never had it, any more than you can take old habits out of hardened people like Saddam and Tookie.

Screw it...

Every terrorist in the world is probably hoping Saddam is killed, gives them another reason, a bigger reason. You are talking about fairness to the families, so if anything you should be supporting locking him up. Death is not only a sentence no man has the right to deal, but it's also an easy way out. Saddam commits horrific crimes, gets put out of his misery and boom, mission accomplished for Saddam.

You are confusing personal feelings with practical action and that's not what is needed in this case.

Saying "Screw it..." doesn't make you cool.

-AC

Wrong - it is far cheaper to put someone in prison for life than to execute them.

Originally posted by Lana
Wrong - it is far cheaper to put someone in prison for life than to execute them.


only in regards to manhours spent while they are on deathrow to make sure they have all the evidence. Otherwise it is FAR FAR cheaper to execute.

AC- You do realize that even in prison he is able to communicate outside of the jail..............anyway in the end what you try and justify as ok with keeping him locked up is no different then killing them.....you are making a descision to take away something from them...........LOL you focused solely on the put him to death piece however are you doing that because you think its not fair or you don't want to cause them harm? Like I said perhaps jail is a far far worse place and that would be torture do you advocate torture?

What punishment is more humane/just? Execution or imprisonment? Who are we to say what is more important to a person, what is degrading or kind. Ever heard of Patrick Henry? "Give me liberty or give me death" ? History is written by the victors, and it is commonly seen that Henry was a good person who defended freedom. Ours is not to judge humanity, but to be part of it.

Originally posted by soleran30
only in regards to manhours spent while they are on deathrow to make sure they have all the evidence. Otherwise it is FAR FAR cheaper to execute.

No, it's not. It costs much more in dollars to execute someone; I've posted the facts before but you chose to not read them all.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FactSheet.pdf

Originally posted by Lana
No, it's not. It costs much more in dollars to execute someone; I've posted the facts before but you chose to not read them all.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FactSheet.pdf


Yeah I read that in the past also Raven Gaurdia posted that and guess what.........that post is CRAP to what I just posted..........the reason it costs more is due to the fact man hours are spent up until they are sentanced to death.........when you are in jail without parole you are locked away and forgotten..........yes so much more humane.

Not one time in the article did they explain WHY it costs more and I posted the WHY from the florida budget as an example on the death penalty page........clearly you didn't read that or you chose to overlook it.

Originally posted by soleran30
AC- You do realize that even in prison he is able to communicate outside of the jail..............anyway in the end what you try and justify as ok with keeping him locked up is no different then killing them.....you are making a descision to take away something from them...........LOL you focused solely on the put him to death piece however are you doing that because you think its not fair or you don't want to cause them harm? Like I said perhaps jail is a far far worse place and that would be torture do you advocate torture?

A) Yeah, I hear he has this Jean Grey telekinetic mutant power thing going on. Because of course, taking away his communication privileges would still leave his ability to mentally contact his cohorts I'm sure.

B) Yes, it is completely different from ending someone's life literally, as in causing them to cease being alive and taking away their freedom to do things that make their life worth anything. What part of this do you genuinely not grasp? Curious.

I think it's extremely hypocritical to put him to death because....he killed. Not only that but it would cause more trouble than it's worth.

It wouldn't literally be torture with intent, would it? No. Let's not confuse torture with imprisonment and subsequent torturous effects in a person. You're already very far into hyperbole.

-AC

Lets put him in jail, and then quietly in the night kill him and make it look like a suicide. Nuf said.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
A) Yeah, I hear he has this Jean Grey telekinetic mutant power thing going on. Because of course, taking away his communication privileges would still leave his ability to mentally contact his cohorts I'm sure.

B) Yes, it is completely different from ending someone's life literally, as in causing them to cease being alive and taking away their freedom to do things that make their life worth anything. What part of this do you genuinely not grasp? Curious.

I think it's extremely hypocritical to put him to death because....he killed. Not only that but it would cause more trouble than it's worth.

It wouldn't literally be torture with intent, would it? No. Let's not confuse torture with imprisonment and subsequent torturous effects in a person. You're already very far into hyperbole.

-AC

lets not let you decide what the term torture means for everyone......peoples fears are all different.

your A piece I am just gonna laugh about yeah ok nice touch there what are his hands missing so he cannot communicate?

AC you feel so vindicated and justified by taking this path of nonexecution so who cares what you find hypocrtical. You don't believe in it, its not fair, killing is bad whatever........your opinion so save your "logic" piece because it doesn't have to fit this mold.

Just so you have an idea about terrorists...........they don't need an excuse to cause terror........actually giving them a reason to act on diminshes the affect because people expect it. So killing Suddam isn't going to be any sort of catalyst you think it might be.......

Originally posted by Imagawa666
Lets put him in jail, and then quietly in the night kill him and make it look like a suicide. Nuf said.

ha ha ;

It could have been so much easier and cheaper had they throne a grenade down that hole when they found him.

Considering the trial, which is really expensive due to all the security measures, it would have been far economical.

Maybe..... I twould be the best from of vindication. Remember everyone can be redeemed. But some can only be redeemed through death.

Before people start posting links or arguments about the costs of the death penalty. Please be aware that the DPIC is actually an "Anti-Capital Punishment" website. Whatever they claim or even declare as facts...are subject to be disputable. It is simpy a bias website and look at their board of directors. Most of them are lawyers and we all know lawyers usually twist things around to win cases in trials. Please be aware of them.

Originally posted by Imagawa666
Maybe..... I twould be the best from of vindication. Remember everyone can be redeemed. But some can only be redeemed through death.

Yeah but here is my question. They could have killed him. The reward was for either his capture or the confirmation of his death. Which basically meant Dead or Alive.

If it was cheaper to have him dead, why did US troops bring him in alive? They wanted him alive.

Originally posted by WindDancer
Before people start posting links or arguments about the costs of the death penalty. Please be aware that the DPIC is actually an "Anti-Capital Punishment" website. Whatever they claim or even declare as facts...are subject to be disputable. It is simpy a bias website and look at their board of directors. Most of them are lawyers and we all know lawyers usually twist things around to win cases in trials. Please be aware of them.

Is it? I did not know that, I just googled 'death penalty' and got that.

Though I've always heard and been told that it's cheaper to imprison someone than to execute them.

Yeah but thats not applicable to Muslim law.

Originally posted by soleran30
lets not let you decide what the term torture means for everyone......peoples fears are all different.

No, I think you'll find that the torture you are implying he will receive in prison is nothing like the torture he put people through. It's a torturous experience, not literal torture.

Originally posted by soleran30
your A piece I am just gonna laugh about yeah ok nice touch there what are his hands missing so he cannot communicate?

If you believe the man is capable of anything serious once locked away with no priviliges, then I laugh back.

Originally posted by soleran30
AC you feel so vindicated and justified by taking this path of nonexecution so who cares what you find hypocrtical. You don't believe in it, its not fair, killing is bad whatever........your opinion so save your "logic" piece because it doesn't have to fit this mold.

Apparantly you, or you wouldn't be replying or commenting on it.

It's not about what my opinion is on killing. It's about what do you believe will be achieved by killing a man...BECAUSE it's "wrong" to kill. Only serving to make him a martyr. Where as locking him up, save for your pitiful cost argument, is clearly the better way of doing things?

He's locked up, he can't communicate enough to do any kind of damage. Terrorists have no martyr.

You're more or less saying that torture (which imprisonment isn't literally) is worse...so kill him. Like it or not, there's no logic there. So don't go all Charlie's Angels on me with "Who cares what you find hypocritical?" Evidently you are replying to me.

Originally posted by soleran30
Just so you have an idea about terrorists...........they don't need an excuse to cause terror........actually giving them a reason to act on diminshes the affect because people expect it. So killing Suddam isn't going to be any sort of catalyst you think it might be.......

Giving them a reason...diminishes the effect of an attack...because people expect it...

Yes. I'm sure any families who have lost people to terrorist attacks would argue that if they KNEW it was coming, they'd feel better. I'm sure that'd solve big problems in the middle east.

Terrorist: YOU KILLED SADDAM! NOW WE'VE KILLED MANY AMERICAN INNOCENTS!
Government: AHA! BUT WE KNEW YOU WOULD!
Terrorist: Yeah but!.....F*CK!

Let's try to apply some intelligence and rationality to the debate please.

-AC

Originally posted by Lana
Is it? I did not know that, I just googled 'death penalty' and got that.

Though I've always heard and been told that it's cheaper to imprison someone than to execute them.


It has received criticism in past. But that doesn't mean they're completely bias. They may have very good arguments to provide. But we can't really take everything they say. Much more research is always helpful.

Originally posted by GCG
Yeah but here is my question. They could have killed him. The reward was for either his capture or the confirmation of his death. Which basically meant Dead or Alive.

If it was cheaper to have him dead, why did US troops bring him in alive? They wanted him alive.

To humiliate him him be putting him on trail for his crimes. Seeing him judged would be a humilation for Saddam. The people may relise that something good has come out of this war.With Saddam gone we can try and build a futre for these people. With Oil, Iraq will become one of the richest nations on earth. Now is the time to make the final push against the insurgents. With them gone Iraq will prosper like never before.

AC keep your logic out of any discussion you want to theorize about terrorists with since the entire premise of terror is an emotional state not logical one.........

"It's a torturous experience, not literal torture."
What are you some politician? Stop twisting words torture is what someone experiences....emotional or physical.

If you think a man's words don't change people or incite action you must be blind.......it only takes one person to believe and follow through with conviction and you end up with a new faction for saddam seriously .

Terrorists don't need a reason to attack other then to strike terror to the masses, they strike anywhere anytime.........your application of "logic" to terror is blind.......

How can you keep logic out of a dicussion?

Originally posted by Imagawa666
To humiliate him him be putting him on trail for his crimes. Seeing him judged would be a humilation for Saddam. The people may relise that something good has come out of this war.With Saddam gone we can try and build a futre for these people. With Oil, Iraq will become one of the richest nations on earth. Now is the time to make the final push against the insurgents. With them gone Iraq will prosper like never before.

Therfore you admit that its a kangaroo court

Who cares...

Originally posted by soleran30
AC keep your logic out of any discussion you want to theorize about terrorists with since the entire premise of terror is an emotional state not logical one.........

Logic still applies doesn't it? You're not stupid are you? Don't act like it then. Killing someone because they killed, isn't logical. Putting them in prison and possibly solving and preventing many worse problems, is.

Originally posted by soleran30
"It's a torturous experience, not literal torture."
What are you some politician? Stop twisting words torture is what someone experiences....emotional or physical.

Then it's a torturous emotional experience isn't it? It's not like him torturing those people. It's not a single person inflicting it upon him.

Originally posted by soleran30
If you think a man's words don't change people or incite action you must be blind.......it only takes one person to believe and follow through with conviction and you end up with a new faction for saddam seriously.

Right.

So....does he do that with the telekinetics? What's the deal here? If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it?

Go on.

Originally posted by soleran30
Terrorists don't need a reason to attack other then to strike terror to the masses, they strike anywhere anytime.........your application of "logic" to terror is blind.......

Exactly.

So let's not give them a reason that will probably cause even more.

-AC

"Logic still applies doesn't it? You're not stupid are you? Don't act like it then. Killing someone because they killed, isn't logical. Putting them in prison and possibly solving and preventing many worse problems, is."
and since you asked me logic isn't the drive to terror. Logic=thinking, terror=feeling. Don't try and tell someone how to feel or how they will feel or what they can feel because you THINK.

Your assuming that jail is the solution from your own coveted logic piece.......whatever.....lets you sleep at night.

"Then it's a torturous emotional experience isn't it? It's not like him torturing those people. It's not a single person inflicting it upon him."

Until you sat through what "those"people did you aren't really in a position to tell us how they felt........ok tell yeah what here are 2 simple questions for you.

1) Have you served a significant (ie 5 years or more) time in prison...any kind.....then please elaborate on your knowledge and how that made you feel.....

2) Have you ever been tortured deliberatly where you had no choice but to sit and take it......if so tell me how you felt....ok

Originally posted by soleran30
and since you asked me logic isn't the drive to terror. Logic=thinking, terror=feeling. Don't try and tell someone how to feel or how they will feel or what they can feel because you THINK.

You're applying that to what exactly? Where does that particular definition of logic apply to you?

Where's the logic in killing him? What many greater positives will it achieve that imprisonment won't?

Originally posted by soleran30
Your assuming that jail is the solution from your own coveted logic piece.......whatever.....lets you sleep at night.

No, I'm saying it's more logical and solves more problems than it causes, because it does.

Originally posted by soleran30
Until you sat through what "those"people did you aren't really in a position to tell us how they felt........ok tell yeah what here are 2 simple questions for you.

1) Have you served a significant (ie 5 years or more) time in prison...any kind.....then please elaborate on your knowledge and how that made you feel.....

2) Have you ever been tortured deliberatly where you had no choice but to sit and take it......if so tell me how you felt....ok

1) I haven't no.

2) No I haven't.

Now answer me this? Have you? If you haven't been through both, to the degree that a prisoner has and to the degree that one of Saddam's captives has, you have as much right to comment as I do.

Now let me ask you a question:

What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?

-AC

"No, I'm saying it's more logical and solves more problems than it causes, because it does."

This you are assuming unless you can see into the future....can you....

You're applying that to what exactly? Where does that particular definition of logic apply to you?

"Where's the logic in killing him? What many greater positives will it achieve that imprisonment won't?"

You are using logic far to often and perhaps not in the correct context. Maybe a better question is how can you rationalize the killing of him.......how will it benefit anyone greater then imprisonment? As I have said I don't think we should waste a penny to shack him up. The greater positives you should be thinking about is "what do we gain by holding him for the rest of his life?" Well what is it.....do we become an icon for justice or a hypocrasy for torture?

"What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?"

the worst tortures aren't physical they are mental. After a time physical pain subsides mental is alive if you have breathe and can think. What you're asking me to do is to say which is a better torture....well use your logic and you tell me

and the longest I stayed in jail was overnight on an unpaid ticket That was long enough for me to know thats not my kinda place.

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
How can you keep logic out of a dicussion?

If anyone else would like to learn about this interesting subject, simply visit the internet based website www.killermovies.com, and read one of the various threads contained thereupon.

Originally posted by soleran30
This you are assuming unless you can see into the future....can you....

Well if you thought I was speaking of anything besides in theory, then there may be less hope than I originally thought.

Even in theory, it's the more logical approach. Clearly.

Originally posted by soleran30
As I have said I don't think we should waste a penny to shack him up. The greater positives you should be thinking about is "what do we gain by holding him for the rest of his life?" Well what is it.....do we become an icon for justice or a hypocrasy for torture?

So you shouldn't waste the money shacking him up, kill him? That genuinely IS illogical. Killing someone because safety is too expensive. There's been millions blown on an unjust war, why not use it to keep a dictator captive and the USA safER than it would likely be if he was killed off?

Your rationale is really silly. "We should kill him because keeping him alive is too damaging to the economy." What if killing him caused another Sept 11th? What if it did (not saying it will)? Would you stand by your decision if you knew they said they did it because you killed Saddam? Is it worth saving the money?

Originally posted by soleran30
the worst tortures aren't physical they are mental. After a time physical pain subsides mental is alive if you have breathe and can think. What you're asking me to do is to say which is a better torture....well use your logic and you tell me

No, because we're not discussing which is the better torture are we? You are trying to turn it into that. Nobody is going to be in there trying to psychologically kill the man. It's just something that happens in prison, possibly.

Originally posted by soleran30
and the longest I stayed in jail was overnight on an unpaid ticket That was long enough for me to know thats not my kinda place.

Yeah...so, my question? I didn't ask it for laughs, I asked it to be answered.

Also this one:

You: If you think a man's words don't change people or incite action you must be blind.......it only takes one person to believe and follow through with conviction and you end up with a new faction for saddam seriously.

My reply: Right. So....does he do that with the telekinetics? What's the deal here? If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it?

Because this of course was one of your reasons for not imprisoning him.

-AC

"Even in theory, it's the more logical approach. Clearly."

In your mind its the most logical approach, clearly.

"Your rationale is really silly. "We should kill him because keeping him alive is too damaging to the economy." What if killing him caused another Sept 11th? What if it did (not saying it will)? Would you stand by your decision if you knew they said they did it because you killed Saddam? Is it worth saving the money?"

Not once did I say it was damaging to the economy you are assuming I meant that however never once did I discuss the economy nor lead anyone to believe my decsion was based what so ever with the economy because it doesn't.........I simply said he is a waste of money.

"No, because we're not discussing which is the better torture are we? You are trying to turn it into that. Nobody is going to be in there trying to psychologically kill the man. It's just something that happens in prison, possibly."

Yes well since you are the humanitarian here then you should give the man the choice.......jail or death penalty. I mean who are you to decide what is and isn't torture what is meaningful and what isn't to this person. If you think the death penalty is so meaningless and without logic then to what purpose does incarceration serve and to what meaning, also why do you feel it is so much better especially if you let someone choose.

O h and even if you didn't ask for laughs AC I still got a kisk out of it. You have no experience with jail you don't know what it does and yet you logically find it to be the more sensible approach.....ahh from the wisdom you have garnered I suppose.......

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
On CNN da other day, they were talking about if Saddam was executed, how it would effect Iraq. Should he?


Time for a Public Hanging.

You seem not to see the whole picture, or you're choosing not to believe it.

Silencing Saddam, by locking him up, and he will slowly fade away, kill him now and he'll live forever in psychopathic minds.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You seem not to see the whole picture, or you're choosing not to believe it.

Silencing Saddam, by locking him up, and he will slowly fade away, kill him now and he'll live forever in psychopathic minds.


You seem to believe that locking him up will allow him to fade away.......Nelson Mandela was locked up for a long long time and ended up running his country.........locking up doesn't mean thrown/fade away......history tends to repeat itself.

Originally posted by soleran30
In your mind its the most logical approach, clearly.

No, stop being silly. Looking at the logical and rational possible outcomes for both, imprisonment is clearly better. You either can't state why it's not, or you don't know.

Originally posted by soleran30
Not once did I say it was damaging to the economy you are assuming I meant that however never once did I discuss the economy nor lead anyone to believe my decsion was based what so ever with the economy because it doesn't.........I simply said he is a waste of money.

Exactly, how stupid can you be? "Don't lock him up. Kill him." "Why? That, in clear and reasonable theory, will only cause more problems and it's also very hypocritical." "Yeah, cheaper though."

Flawed rationale to say the least. What matters more to you? Resolution or saving money?

Originally posted by soleran30
Yes well since you are the humanitarian here then you should give the man the choice.......jail or death penalty. I mean who are you to decide what is and isn't torture what is meaningful and what isn't to this person. If you think the death penalty is so meaningless and without logic then to what purpose does incarceration serve and to what meaning, also why do you feel it is so much better especially if you let someone choose.

So now you've resorted to just typing stuff that doesn't make sense in hopes of hitting on something that justifies your extremely lame argument.

Stop trying to go off somewhere else. The fact of the matter is this, if he's put in jail with no privileges and no specialties, he won't be tortured. If he goes mental because of it, that's because he can't handle it. No one will be in there trying to torture the man. He'd be imprisoned, that's as far as it should go, and that's as far as it would go. You're making excuses to kill him and it's pathetic. Now we've whittled it down to "Waste of money" as your reason for execution.

Originally posted by soleran30
O h and even if you didn't ask for laughs AC I still got a kisk out of it. You have no experience with jail you don't know what it does and yet you logically find it to be the more sensible approach.....ahh from the wisdom you have garnered I suppose.......

Yeah so, you gonna answer my questions or are you gonna keep dodging?

I'll ask you again:

You: If you think a man's words don't change people or incite action you must be blind.......it only takes one person to believe and follow through with conviction and you end up with a new faction for saddam seriously.

My reply: Right. So....does he do that with the telekinetics? What's the deal here? If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it?

First one ^^^. I expect it answered.

What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?

Second one ^^^.

Nice and italicised for you. Try not to dodge them again.

-AC

My reply: Right. So....does he do that with the telekinetics? What's the deal here? If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it?

See I thought you were joking LOL telekinetics is moving objects........telepathy is thought transfer.......so the answer to your question is I highly doubt he will be moving objects with his mind to people HAHA Please before you become adamant about responses check your questions.

Originally posted by soleran30
My reply: Right. So....does he do that with the telekinetics? What's the deal here? If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it?

See I thought you were joking LOL telekinetics is moving objects........telepathy is thought transfer.......so the answer to your question is I highly doubt he will be moving objects with his mind to people HAHA Please before you become adamant about responses check your questions.

If I was refering to telepathy you'd have had me there. Before you comment, please don't assume. Thanks.

He's not able to send supplies to people via telekinesis is he? Just as he's not able to comment with telepathy.

So stop dodging my questions, here they are again:

1) If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it? Since this was one of you reasons for not imprisoning him. What danger does he present in prison? None, but go on.

2) What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?

Answer them, stop browning your undergarments. Oh, and none of that "I can't say what's worse" bs, because there is a clear answer to the second question.

I'm not gonna just let you off, you might as well answer them, cos I'll just keep asking if you do not.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Life isn't fair, shit happens. What you are suggesting isn't justice, it's vengeance and eye-for-an-eye mentality. Which isn't needed. What you want done with the man, and what would solve more problems instead of causing them are clearly two different things aren't they?You are confusing personal feelings with practical action and that's not what is needed in this case.


And I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot and YOU had loved
ones murdered, it wouldn't be a case of "shit happens", I'm sure you would want to make sure the one who killed your loved ones wouldn't be set free to do it again. It's always different when it's someone else's problem and not your own, isn't it? I love how people talk about how life isn't fair and then shit themselves when it's THEIR turn in the barrel.


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Dead dictators can't do anything can they? No. Neither can living dictators locked away for the rest of their lives. So why not take the way that ISN'T stooping to his level and being hypocritical?


Yeah, and while he's locked away, he can get 3 meals a day, exercise, and get a chance at life while the relatives of those he killed have to live w\o the comfort and happiness their loved ones could have provided them over the years, not to mention the irreparable mental damage he and his sons caused to the families of the victims.


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Saying "Screw it..." doesn't make you cool.

Ooooo, well that just busts MY britches don't it? I'm not here to be "cool." This thread offers us the chance to speak our feelings, and not to say what's "right" or "cool". It's not about being cool. Maybe that's YOUR mission but it's isn't mine.

Oh well, with Michael Moore as his defense attorney, I'm sure Saddam has a great chance of getting off and going back to the streets. Hooray

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
And I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot and YOU had loved
ones murdered, it wouldn't be a case of "shit happens", I'm sure you would want to make sure the one who killed your loved ones wouldn't be set free to do it again. It's always different when it's someone else's problem and not your own, isn't it? I love how people talk about how life isn't fair and then shit themselves when it's THEIR turn in the barrel.

Exactly. I wouldn't want them set free to do it again. You are absolutely right. We agree 100% in that. That's exactly my point. Don't set him free to do it again.

Why is death necessary for this to happen?

Don't speak for me, learn that. Don't pull the age old "If it were you..." argument on me. That's been tried before and it doesn't work.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Yeah, and while he's locked away, he can get 3 meals a day, exercise, and get a chance at life while the relatives of those he killed have to live w\o the comfort and happiness their loved ones could have provided them over the years, not to mention the irreparable mental damage he and his sons caused to the families of the victims.

How does he get a chance at life? He's alive, yeah. That's hardly a chance at life if it's spent in some cell for the rest of his natural life is it? My idea of revenge isn't giving them the easy way out and being as bad. That's the simple minded, "I can't think but five minutes infront of me" vigilante mind-set.

The damage he's done is unforgivable, but who's asking anyone to forgive the man? To me, justice is locking him up and taking away his freedom until the day he dies. Would I want the man dead who harmed/killed my family? Yes. Am I stupid and hypocritical enough to want the blood on my hands? No. So if it were up to me I'd keep him alive and lock him away forever. Because while it might hurt in the heart, I'd know that it was taking away from him something that he loves and wants, as he did from me. If your whole idea behind this is do unto others, then you should want that too.

This is all based on your personal views rather than what's practical.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Ooooo, well that just busts MY britches don't it? I'm not here to be "cool." This thread offers us the chance to speak our feelings, and not to say what's "right" or "cool". It's not about being cool. Maybe that's YOUR mission but it's isn't mine.

Haha, nice technique. Reverse what I said because I accused you of it. Original, never seen before material. I like it.

Speaking with your heart in mind is all very well and good, speaking with your brain first is better.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
Oh well, with Michael Moore as his defense attorney, I'm sure Saddam has a great chance of getting off and going back to the streets. Hooray

I do absolutely love it when, in a failing attempt to falsely exacerbate what I'm saying, people make a completely stupid point of view in the hope that it will make me look bad.

Do quite love that. One of my favourite things ever.

-AC

If he is executed, I would not be suprised to see statues of Saddam in Iraq again in 20 years, but this time as a martyr for the cause of Iraq.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


I do absolutely love it when, in a failing attempt to falsely exacerbate what I'm saying, people make a completely stupid point of view in the hope that it will make me look bad.

Do quite love that. One of my favourite things ever.



In many ways, you are quite a sad specimen of personified genitalia, aren't you.

Sort of, but not in the derogatory sense. Although you do subscribe to the negative zone theory which is untrue.

-AC

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
In many ways, you are quite a sad specimen of personified genitalia, aren't you.

That's funny.

Don't encourage him.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Don't encourage him.

-AC

I think VVD is adult enough to can act upon his own behalf with or without my encouragement.

Humour, come on in.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Humour, come on in.

-AC

Humour is currently outside having a discussion with sarcasm about some of your comments, both are shaking their heads in disbelief.

I realise you have a new found love of VVD's material, I agree it's funny. I just don't see why you have to become menstrual every time you don't get one of my comments rather than asking if I meant it in a non-serious way.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I realise you have a new found love of VVD's material, I agree it's funny.

Nice attempt at a dig, but VVD and I have had a mutual respect going for a while. At least I hope it's mutual.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I just don't see why you have to become menstrual every time you don't get one of my comments rather than asking if I meant it in a non-serious way.

-AC

Because I wanted to. How does that work?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Nice attempt at a dig, but VVD and I have had a mutual respect going for a while. At least I hope it's mutual.

Wait, how in the hell did you deduce that was a dig as I specifically said it was funny afterward? Chill out man. It wasn't a dig unless you subconsciously believe it to be a negative thing.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Because I wanted to. How does that work?

So you make needless comments that serve no meaning other than to cause these types of encounters, because you want to...despite knowing that you could have just asked what I meant? Cool.

Just never speak of maturity to another poster on this boards again.

-AC

Oh!

Don't try to instigate, Inspectah. I'm not attacking the man, I just don't see why he seems to have so much trouble with me.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Don't try to instigate, Inspectah. I'm not attacking the man, I just don't see why he seems to have so much trouble with me.

-AC

I investigate so I must instigate

1) If he has no means of communication, no privileges, nothing...how does he do it? Since this was one of you reasons for not imprisoning him. What danger does he present in prison? None, but go on.

There are no assurances of this so the danger he presents in prison is that fact he is alive and represents a faction that needs to be dissolved. Again are you aware of Nelson Mandella?


2) What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?

Torture is torture is torture..........do you want to justify one because you deem more humanitarian? I answered your number 2 awhile back go back and read........if you wish to play semantics its all torture so you tell me with your logic.

AC is a little deluded whne it comes to this topic. People like her are what make the country unstable. She is indriectly helpiing these criminals by opposing the war.

Originally posted by soleran30
There are no assurances of this so the danger he presents in prison is that fact he is alive and represents a faction that needs to be dissolved. Again are you aware of Nelson Mandella?

How are you seriously sitting there saying there are no assurances only to swan off and talk about another guy? We're discussing Saddam.

Secondly, answer my question. If he is in prison with no means of organising anything in any way (which obviously will be the case, they're not gonna give the guy air time are they?), how is he going to have the effect you stated he would? Stop dodging it.

Originally posted by soleran30
Torture is torture is torture..........do you want to justify one because you deem more humanitarian? I answered your number 2 awhile back go back and read........if you wish to play semantics its all torture so you tell me with your logic.

Here's my question again:

What's worse, torturing many people with gases and brutal physical torture, or being in prison with a bed and toilet facilities, for your crimes....forever?

What is worse? The first or the second? We have established you believe they are both torture, my question is which one is worse to you. Don't cop out with "Oh torture is torture". Just answer it. Which one is worse? The brutal torture of human beings through deadly physical/biochemical means, or imprisonment?

Imagawa, I've dealt with you. You're not only stupid but obviously not very perceptive. I'm not a female.

-AC

Oh be quiet ive been banned once.... I aint going to that trouble agin.

AC> I'm gonna attempt to answer your question.
I think it has become more socially acceptable to do the latter, as it has more of a phycological (Spelled horrendously) impact on a person. Staggering boredom has an effect after a while,
But the former is more physical, and I would tend to lean towards this simply because physical tourture can become phycological after a certian degree or exposure.
Although Both are punishments to a degree that I cannot even fathom, but I think that life in prison is preferable to death.
And I take a strong anti-death penalty view no matter the subject. Even Hitler shouldn't receive the death penalty.