Saddam Hussein To Be Hung By 9p Eastern

[Pumapayam]

He just arrived at the Gallo's any were from 9 to10 he will give us a report of global warming strait from Hell > > >

OMG, I thought he was given 30 days?

[Houstonian in Iraq]

Anyone located a full video on the Internet yet? Figure it won't be too long. All the beheadings were out with in hours, figure this diserves the same respect!

There are some still shots leading to his execution and of him dead in the Chron(slide show). If you click the associated press link there is footage of him getting walked to the gallows and noose put around his neck but not of him actually getting hung.

[TJones]

I happen to like this picture of him better.

[Trae]

[TJones]

You know I find this very strange. Alot of the world's craziest A-holes tend to carry the same traits. EXAMPLE:

[dbigtex56]

He just arrived at the Gallo's any were from 9 to10 he will give us a report of global warming strait from Hell > > >

He's taking a winery tour before being executed?

[TJones]

He's taking a winery tour before being executed?

Head's up, it's the Spellcheck "5-0" !

[houstonmacbro]

NONE playa.

Ohhhh, the witnesses have arrived. Any time now.

Bets the Bush family has a live feed of the execution?

They claim they went to bed ... right...

Prolly had popcorn and surround sound as they watched with glee on their 60" plasma.

Let the conspiracies begin! No proof yet that he is actually dead.

Though this video has to be only slightly more entertaining than seeing Saddam swinging in the breeze

No proof either that Ken Lay actually died either. Remember his body was cremated almost immediately.

Something reeks.

I don't think it was worth it. China kills their own every single day. Way more than Saddam has.

By this logic, China should be next.

Saddam was like Tito. Some people just can't handle themselves and deserve to live under a dictator.

Well, in reality they should have helped fight more for their freedom and THEIR democracy.

Feels like we just shoved it down their throats.

[DJ V Lawrence]

OMG, I thought he was given 30 days?

All jokes aside, I thought the same thing. Something was very odd about that. Even the 30-day thing. Usually, wouldn't a dude be on death row for at least a year or two before being executed?

And yeah, we all joke around about it, but Sadaam's not a dude I would consider significant as a terror threat to the U.S. as I did Osama or Al-Zakawi. When Al-Zakawi was killed, that was poetic justice. We went into Iraq in 2003 to keep Sadaam and the Iraqis from using WMDs against us. When you look back at Sadaam's execution, he was on trial for something that really didn't have anything to do with the U.S.. He murdered thousands of his own people, and paid the price, but there's a lot of other world leaders still currently in power that need to be put on trial for their genocidal track records.

If Sadaam's execution makes our fellow Americans safer in the Middle East and mainland, this is a big success. But if things there are still just as dangerous for our troops as before, I don't really see Sadaam's death as significant.

[Parrothead]

Head's up, it's the Spellcheck "5-0" !

Now don't confuse him with our resident Spellcheck, dalparadise.

[Heights2Bastrop]

Hey, TJones. Ya missed one!

[Mark F. Barnes]

All jokes aside, I thought the same thing. Something was very odd about that. Even the 30-day thing. Usually, wouldn't a dude be on death row for at least a year or two before being executed?

And yeah, we all joke around about it, but Sadaam's not a dude I would consider significant as a terror threat to the U.S. as I did Osama or Al-Zakawi. When Al-Zakawi was killed, that was poetic justice. We went into Iraq in 2003 to keep Sadaam and the Iraqis from using WMDs against us. When you look back at Sadaam's execution, he was on trial for something that really didn't have anything to do with the U.S.. He murdered thousands of his own people, and paid the price, but there's a lot of other world leaders still currently in power that need to be put on trial for their genocidal track records.

If Sadaam's execution makes our fellow Americans safer in the Middle East and mainland, this is a big success. But if things there are still just as dangerous for our troops as before, I don't really see Sadaam's death as significant.

I think what you are confusing DJ is he was tried and executed in Iraq for crimes in Iraq, if I am reading your concern in your post right, you feel we executed him for something he did in Iraq. We caught him and turned him over to the Iraq Judicial Council. They, (IJC) tried him and sentenced him, no one from the US or affilliated with the US even testified. He did have an attorney from the US that specialized in International Law, who is now on every channel except Fox saying the trial was a kangaroo court and the it was not a fair trial. It really has nothing to do with our judicial system, or even international law or the Geneva Convention, due to the fact that he was tried for the murder of 146 Iraqis, and sentenced under the Iraqi guidlines, whitch stated he was to be hung "within 30 days, no later" so they did. He had one breifing before the appellate court and the sentence was upheld. A few days later, he's dead. That's Iraqi Justice not ours. We keep guys on death row for upwards of 10+ years. That's because we have 7 different levels of appeals. Iraq does not, it's a one shot deal, and swift execution of sentence. He was indicted on several different crimes. The next one he was due to be tride for was for murdering 5000 Iraqi men by gassing them. He just didn't live to see the trial. Chemical Ali I think is the co-defendant in that indictment, and he will stand trial for those deaths.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I think what you are confusing DJ is he was tried and executed in Iraq for crimes in Iraq, if I am reading your concern in your post right, you feel we executed him for something he did in Iraq. We caught him and turned him over to the Iraq Judicial Council. They, (IJC) tried him and sentenced him, no one from the US or affilliated with the US even testified. He did have an attorney from the US that specialized in International Law, who is now on every channel except Fox saying the trial was a kangaroo court and the it was not a fair trial. It really has nothing to do with our judicial system, or even international law or the Geneva Convention, due to the fact that he was tried for the murder of 146 Iraqis, and sentenced under the Iraqi guidlines, whitch stated he was to be hung "within 30 days, no later" so they did. He had one breifing before the appellate court and the sentence was upheld. A few days later, he's dead. That's Iraqi Justice not ours. We keep guys on death row for upwards of 10+ years. That's because we have 7 different levels of appeals. Iraq does not, it's a one shot deal, and swift execution of sentence. He was indicted on several different crimes. The next one he was due to be tride for was for murdering 5000 Iraqi men by gassing them. He just didn't live to see the trial. Chemical Ali I think is the co-defendant in that indictment, and he will stand trial for those deaths.

My concern is the fact that we may mistake Sadaam's trial and execution as something significant and positive in regards to homeland security. I understand why he was tried and who tried him. Iraq laid justice on Sadaam and rightfully so, and that wouldn't have happened if it weren't for our troops and administration. Good job. But Sadaam's capture and trial is not the main reason why we went to Iraq; that was supposed to be just a bonus. I personally want to see Osama with a rope around their necks more than Sadaam. As an American, Sadaam's trial wasn't really any concern, and I don't know why our media covered it as if we were supposed to be effected by it.

[Guest Marty]

Did anybody see the news story on ch 13 where a Iraqi Congress member in Katy said that one of the witness told him that Saddam was afraid and showed no remorse?

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Did anybody see the news story on ch 13 where a Iraqi Congress member in Katy said that one of the witness told him that Saddam was afraid and showed no remorse?

They reported that on CNN and FOX as well as MSNBC about 2 hours after it happened

[Trae]

When the put the rope on him, you could tell that reality had set in. His whole facial expression changed. After I read what he did to his own people, I didn't feel sorry for him one bit.

[Guest Marty]

They reported that on CNN and FOX as well as MSNBC about 2 hours after it happened

*D'oh*

[Trae]

But you know, its all about oil. Iran is doing the exact same thing Iraq did before 2003, now they're next on the "hit list" from Bush. If we did attack Iran, it would be a very nerve racking situation for the everyone on Earth.

The only way for Bush to destroy the targets (underground nuclear stations) is to bring out the big guns, the nuclear bunker busters. They cannot be destroyed convetionally.

Iran has stated if they're attacked, they'll hit Israeli nuclear reactors. If this happens, all hell will break loose internationally. Russia and China are also semi-allies of Iran.

Iran is no Iraq. They've been building their military for 15 years. 800,000 soldiers stand between Ahmedinejad and the invaders.

Damn, nevermind all that, though, because Bush only attacks countries that he thinks he can walk over...

[Guest Marty]

Iran would be defeated within 2 weeks don't under estimate US military might, now if Iran started lobbing missiles at Israel then you will see the Nuclear Boogie Man.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

If Iran attacked Israel, this is what you will see over Tehran

[TheNiche]

But you know, its all about oil.

People say that a lot. They look for a motive, and oil makes a very convenient one...except that war in the Middle East isn't a very good way of obtaining or securing oil. The prices are a good indicator of the increased risk to oil supplies that come with war.

I don't claim to understand the true motive, myself, but oil probably isn't it.

Iran has stated if they're attacked, they'll hit Israeli nuclear reactors. If this happens, all hell will break loose internationally. Russia and China are also semi-allies of Iran.

They would get over the loss of a minor trading partner just as the French did with Iraq. They'd delicate flower and moan a lot, but they know where the big money is.

Iran is no Iraq. They've been building their military for 15 years. 800,000 soldiers stand between Ahmedinejad and the invaders.

There was a time when Iraq had accumulated the world's fourth largest army. We laid waste to it in 1991. Cold War technology just doesn't stand a chance. And both times that we've invaded, the military regulars surrendered in droves. They saw what we could do, and for them, the choice was very simple. I suspect that the same lessons will largely apply to Iran.

The critical thing, though, is that now that we're in Iraq, we can't show the tiniest inkling of weakness. We must show political and military resolve, even at extreme cost. If we fail, and it becomes apparent to our enemies that we can be beaten with guerilla tactics and a bloody televised PR campaign provided by our own news media, then we lose a lot of negotiating power on the world stage as our threats lose credibility.

Damn, nevermind all that, though, because Bush only attacks countries that he thinks he can walk over...

Damned straight. Would you pick a fight that you couldn't win?

[Pumapayam]

Iran would be defeated within 2 weeks don't under estimate US military might, now if Iran started lobbing missiles at Israel then you will see the Nuclear Boogie Man.

I would not underestimate them, they have a lot of equipment they bought from both the U.S. (pre-embargo) and Russia, plus it is pretty much mandatory to do a 2-3 year service in the army.

[nmainguy]

When you look back at Sadaam's execution, he was on trial for something that really didn't have anything to do with the U.S.. He murdered thousands of his own people, and paid the price, but there's a lot of other world leaders still currently in power that need to be put on trial for their genocidal track records.

One got a medal around his neck...guess who?

But hey, it was a fabulous show trial: impotent puppet judges protected by US security forces [because Iraq can't even defend a trio of judges-much less Baghdad]; assasinated defense lawyers all wrapped up with hanging by mob rule. Who could ask for more? After all, it's only taken us 3000+ lives to get here.

[TJones]

One got a medal around his neck...guess who?

But hey, it was a fabulous show trial: impotent puppet judges protected by US security forces [because Iraq can't even defend a trio of judges-much less Baghdad]; assasinated defense lawyers all wrapped up with hanging by mob rule. Who could ask for more? After all, it's only taken us 3000+ lives to get here.

It has actually taken over 6000 lives to get to this point nmain. Did you forget about the WTC, by terrorists harbored by Saddam at some point I am sure. You always drag out this old ass 20 some odd year video still as some sort of proof, that Saddam is America's fault. The World is one huge game of RISK. The U.S. basically control the power in the world, whether we want to or not. We set up Saddam in power to control the Iranians back int he 80's. When he became to big for his britches we took him out. Our govt. has been doing this type of chess playing since WW2, because we unfortunately have become the police of the world. It is our lot in life. But if you keep insisting on using that picture, then I will pull out this one and ask you whose fault is this little piggy ?

[DJ V Lawrence]

It has actually taken over 6000 lives to get to this point nmain. Did you forget about the WTC, by terrorists harbored by Saddam at some point I am sure. You always drag out this old ass 20 some odd year video still as some sort of proof, that Saddam is America's fault. The World is one huge game of RISK. The U.S. basically control the power in the world, whether we want to or not. We set up Saddam in power to control the Iranians back int he 80's. When he became to big for his britches we took him out. Our govt. has been doing this type of chess playing since WW2, because we unfortunately have become the police of the world. It is our lot in life. But if you keep insisting on using that picture, then I will pull out this one and ask you whose fault is this little piggy ?

First off, read what you said earlier:

We set up Saddam in power to control the Iranians back int he 80's. When he became to big for his britches we took him out.

...To control the Iranians? Why does Iran show so much anti-American sentiment in the first place? Read this right quick...

(reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States-Iran_relations )

The United States and Britain, through a now-admitted covert operation of the CIA called Operation Ajax, conducted from the US Embassy in Tehran, helped organize protests to overthrow Moussadeq and return the Shah to Iran. The operation failed and the Shah fled to Italy. After a second successful operation he returned from his brief exile. Iran's fledgling attempts at democracy quickly descended into dictatorship, as the Shah dismantled the constitutional limitations on his office and began to rule as an absolute monarch.

During his reign, the Shah received significant American support, frequently making state visits to the White House and earning praise from numerous American Presidents. The Shah's close ties to Washington and his bold agenda of rapidly Westernizing Iran soon began to infuriate certain segments of the Iranian population, especially the hardline Islamic conservatives.

Prior to the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Iran had one of the world's largest number of students residing in the United States.

---

In 1979, the Iranians revolted and the Shah was ousted for a second time. Ayatollah Khomeni became Iran's new leader and soon began issuing vicious rhetoric against the United States, describing the country as the "Great Satan" and a "nation of infidels."

The American administration under President Jimmy Carter refused to give the Shah any further support and expressed no interest in attempting to return him to power. A significant embarrassment for Carter occurred when the Shah, as of that time suffering from cancer, requested entry into the United States for treatment. Carter reluctantly agreed, but the move only reinforced Iranian notions that the former monarch was an American puppet.

----

The 1979 Iran hostage crisis

Main article: Iran hostage crisis

On November 4, 1979, Muslim student followers of the Imam's line occupied the American embassy in Tehran with the support of Ayatollah Khomeini because some of the USA spying was done at that embassy. Fifty-two Americans were held hostage for 444 days. On April 7, 1980, the United States broke diplomatic relations with Iran, and on April 24, 1981, the Swiss Government assumed representation of U.S. interests in Tehran via an interest section. Iranian interests in the United States are represented by the Iranian Interests Section of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, DC.

In accordance with the Algiers Accords of January 19, 1981, the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (located in The Hague, Netherlands) was established for the purpose of handling claims of U.S. nationals against Iran and of Iranian nationals against the United States. U.S. contact with Iran through The Hague covers only legal matters. On January 20, 1981, the date the treaty was signed, the hostages were released.

---

The Iran-Contra Affair

Main article: Iran-Contra Affair

In 1986 members of the Reagan administration helped sell weapons to Iran, using the profits to fund Contra militants in Nicaragua[8].

---

The 1988 shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655

Main article: Iran Air Flight 655

On July 3, 1988 the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian Airbus A300B2 on a scheduled commercial flight in Iranian airspace over the Strait of Hormuz, resulting in 290 civilian fatalities from six nations, including 66 children. On February 22, 1996 the United States agreed to pay Iran $61.8 million in compensation for the 248 Iranians killed in the shootdown. The United States has not compensated Iran for the airplane itself to date. The aircraft was worth more than $30 million.

---

Hezbollah bombings

The U.S. contends that the Iranian-backed organization of Hezbollah has been involved in several anti-American terrorist attacks, including the April 1983 United States Embassy bombing which killed 17 Americans, the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing which killed 241 U.S. peacekeepers in Lebannon, and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing.

---

Commercial relations

Before the Revolution with the Shah, the United States was Iran's foremost economic and military partner, thus participating greatly in the rapid modernization of its infrastructure and industry with as many as thirty thousand American expatriates residing in the country in a technical, consulting, or teaching capacity. A posteriori, some western analysts argue that the transformation may have been too rapid, fueling unrest and discontent among an important part of the population in the country, which culminated with the revolution itself in 1979.

There's a lot more there. The point is the fact that Iraq/Iran was in many ways U.S.-financed and U.S. armed and supplied. The supposed WMDs that Sadaam had (which took us to Iraq in 2003 in the first place) were WMDs supplied by the States during the Reagan administration. With those WMDs in the 80's, Sadaam went from a good guy-gone-mad and paranoid. Sadaam in every way deserved to be executed and responsible for his genocidal actions, but it should be understood that he used our weapons to pull his evil deeds. As a result of Sadaam's mistrusting ways with those weapons, unpredictability, and attempts to take oil-rich Kuwait, we had Desert Storm. His mistrust and flawed relations with the U.S. soon after, plus the second Bush administration's lack of diplomatic desire with Iraq pre and post-9-11, led to Iraq 2003-today.

Sure, Iraq may have helped financed terrorist cells, maybe even Al-Qaida (though it's said that Osama and Hussein were enemies), but there may have been other countries in that same region that financed Al-Qaida a lot more than Iraq did...i.e. Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria. In my opinion, Afghanistan should still be the focal point on the War on Terror in terms of taking out the enemy, and Iraq should be seen now as a situation where we should find a way to get out peacefully, which will probably take many years to do.

It should also be for the record that the relations with U.S.-Iran and U.S. Iraq are 60 years in the making. Both Democrat and Republican offices have been in power in that time period, including Carter during the Iran hostage crisis. No one person is to blame per-say. It was flaws and too much foreign trust and dependance in our policies. We tried to influence too much. Instead of denying that we did anything wrong, we should just learn from our history and not make that same mistake ever again.

But if you keep insisting on using that picture, then I will pull out this one and ask you whose fault is this little piggy ?

That's a totally different situation. At least Albright at that time was able to put herself in a position where she could at least have some kind of talks with North Korea, get a better understanding as to how the other side works, and be able to get a hands-on take on Kim Jong-Il. I rarely ever heard Rumsfeld talk about his visit with Sadaam, and can't remember the last time anyone in the Bush administration was able to visit Iran, Iraq, or North Korea while that government was in control (Bush, and a number of administrators have visited Iraq, but that was AFTER Sadaam lost power, and before Iraq/ U.S. relations were jacked up). Albright actually meant what she said when she said she was attempting "diplomatic" ending to the North Korea standoff (which has been going on since the '50s). Rice has yet to build a condition to where she could visit the North, converse, and get a sense of how the enemy thinks without having to look at possibly flawed intel. Neither DPRK or Bush have done anything to help. It's been nothing but speeches of "Axis Of Evil" from us, and defiant nuclear talks, testing, and propoganda from them. But North Korea and Iraq are two totally seperate issues.

[houstonmacbro]

I think we can all agree that the whole region is one big ole boo-hoo mess.

[TJones]

There's a lot more there. The point is the fact that Iraq/Iran was in many ways U.S.-financed and U.S. armed and supplied. The supposed WMDs that Sadaam had (which took us to Iraq in 2003 in the first place) were WMDs supplied by the States during the Reagan administration. With those WMDs in the 80's, Sadaam went from a good guy-gone-mad and paranoid. Sadaam in every way deserved to be executed and responsible for his genocidal actions, but it should be understood that he used our weapons to pull his evil deeds. As a result of Sadaam's mistrusting ways with those weapons, unpredictability, and attempts to take oil-rich Kuwait, we had Desert Storm. His mistrust and flawed relations with the U.S. soon after, plus the second Bush administration's lack of diplomatic desire with Iraq pre and post-9-11, led to Iraq 2003-today.

So, you blame the gunshop owner for selling the gun, or do you blame the person who actually used the gun to kill your parents ?

DJ, of course Kim Jon Il is gonna let Albright come see what wonderful Nuclear Reactors her loving President has supplied for him. The Bush administrations take on Il is to cease and desist all nuclear weapon activities at once, that is the "diplomatic" strategy on Condi's part. Jon Il doesn't want to hear that, so what is the use of having her come talk to him ?

[DJ V Lawrence]

So, you blame the gunshop owner for selling the gun, or do you blame the person who actually used the gun to kill your parents ?

Of course I'd blame the killer; in this case, Sadaam. It needs to be acknowledged though that we were the gunshow owners in this case. The U.S. is not responsible for Sadaam's genocide. We need to learn from our mistakes by improve our policies, watching more carefully who we trade arms with, and not repeat history. Also, it seems that when we place a leader in power of another nation, it could be a recipe for disaster for generations to come. Just like how the world community does whatever it can to avoid another Hitler in power, we should also do the same in this instance; avoid another Sadaam from coming into power.

DJ, of course Kim Jon Il is gonna let Albright come see what wonderful Nuclear Reactors her loving President has supplied for him. The Bush administrations take on Il is to cease and desist all nuclear weapon activities at once, that is the "diplomatic" strategy on Condi's part. Jon Il doesn't want to hear that, so what is the use of having her come talk to him ?

Administrations from both parties have been giving North Korea aid; Clinton's admin wasn't the first or last. Also, because of Albright's trip, both Clinton AND Bush's administrations and intel are improved from what Albright was able to provide for both admins. There's not too much more intel that Rice can for the next admin. Best thing that can be done at this point is to keep "talks" going and to leave it at a stale-mate until the next administration comes into office in 2009. North Korea hasn't given much for the U.S. to work with in recent years, so no, North Korea is not Bush or Rice's fault. But no one has died on either side because of Albright's trip, and her trip there was gutsier than any other administrator's trip in from Bush OR Clinton's admin.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Talk is cheap and bullS**t runs the marathon. No amount of wiki-crap posted here will tell the true story of why Iran hates the USA. They dont like us because we stand for everything they are not, and thats FREEDOM. Throw in the fact that we are on friendly terms with Israel and that just adds fuel to the fire. I mean how dare the jews attempt to have a homeland on mideast soil and the great satan America support them.

Out of all the stuff posted here from Wikipedia about things the USA has done to anger Iran, thier own neighbors and fellow muslims have done 100 things more and much worst to them. You dont see them massing in the streets and shouting death to thier neighbors or takeing over thier neighbors embassies by force.

There are over a billion muslims in the world/Islam is a religion of peace.

[nmainguy]

It has actually taken over 6000 lives to get to this point nmain. Did you forget about the WTC, by terrorists harbored by Saddam at some point I am sure.

I think it's a disservice to the victims of 9.11 to place the blame on Saddam.

There is no evidence Saddam had anything to do with 9.11. However, there is overwhelming evidence Osama was the mastermind of 9.11 yet we abandoned our search for our real and immediate enemy when we had the vast majority of the country