Iriemon

How many of the supposedly 400,000 death Hussein supposedly caused was he actually covicted for?

__________________
Matthew 5:9

Truth Detector

Do you ever have a coherent point to make? Does it make any difference how many he was held accountable for before he was put to death? No. Does it minimize his atrocities? Not in the least.

So it begs the question; what is your point?

__________________
Nothing can frighten a Socialist more than the TRUTH; and nothing can frighten Obama more than REALITY

Iriemon

OC's wrote his observation about mass graves regarding my point about the dubiousness of the claims that there where hundreds of thousands buried in such graves. You in response wrote:

You are profound in your denial. The notion that these secret killing fields were somehow normal burial is the most profound denial I have seen from you or anyone on this forum.

I guess you missed the news about these sites and what they stood for including the trial where Saddam was executed for precisely this reason.

Your answer implies that the Saddam was tried and executed for these hundreds of thousands buried in the mass graves.

That is absolutely false.

Since you are apparently ignorant of the facts, I'll give you the answer. It was precisely 148.

American

How many died on his watch? 400,000? Nuff said.

__________________
It's Obama's fault!

Iriemon

The House and the Senate did not vote to start the war. 76% may not have agreed at the time, after the neocon/Bush Admin propoganda blitz falsely implying the Hussein was in bed with AQ and they knew for a fact where those WMDs were.

Many more agree with me now that the truth has come out.

Yes, after the deception of the neocon/Bush Administration was revealed.

That is profound.

Where did I ever suggest we should have a do-over?

To suggest that the 1990 war resulted in the Mar 03 invasion is a profound fact of delusion.

I have never suggested such a thing. You must be thinking of someone else.

That implies one required the other. A profound act of delusion.

Hussein was no urgent threat in Mar 2003 requiring a rush to war. The inspectors had spent months combing thru Iraq without finding the WMDs where our sources said they were was a red flag that should have triggered suspicion as to the accuracy of our sources.

And even if Hussein had WMDs, he'd had them for 20 years and never gave them to terrorists. That would have been against his primary goal of staying in power. He was no urgent threat.

The only urgent threat was that the neocons and Bush Admin knew they were losing their excuse.


Read up on history a bit and then you'll understand. But you have to look at sources other than the Weekly Standard, Fox News, and Rush Limbaugh.

It was not. No nation has a right to attack another unless in defense.

It certainly isn't stable because of our actions.

Isn't it obvious? Are you that unknowlegeable about history?

I'll assume you are being sincere and explain.

In 1990, Iraq attacked and invaded another nation without any defensive purpose or justification. It was an illegitimate act of war. As a result, the UN security counsel authorized use of force against Iraq, and all our allies, yes including France Germany Russia Canada etc., and even several ME states, approved the action. It was a completely legitimate military intervention based upon another state having attacked another without justification.

In 2003, Iraq had attacked no one. We were the ones attacking another state without any defensive purpose of justification.

Thanks for looking that up. Proves my point.

I forgot what we did for Spain in WWII?

No nation can unilaterally decide it can attack another because it thinks UN resolutions should be enforced. If that was the rule, Arab nations could attack Israel tomorrow and according to you it would be completely legitimate by the UN.

Again, the argument that the justification for the US attack on Iraq in Mar 2003 was equally justified as Operation Desert Storm in 1990 is delusional and is not supported by any construction of credible facts.

Truth Detector

Let me be sure I understand your "dubious" argument: because Saddam was only tried for the murders of 148, the other "killing" fields I refer to are just what OC attempted to suggest, just a normal traditional burial?

I want to be sure this is the argument you are attempting to make here in your ludicrous condescending remarks.

My answer did not imply that Saddam was tried and executed for the thousands buried in mass graves; my answer was that these graves were indeed his handiwork contrary to the absurd apologist remarks that they were "normal" burials.

Why would anyone care what he was tried and executed for except perhaps the extremist apologists for his atrocities, those same apologists for despots who want to portray Bush and this administration as being worse?

What deeply uninformed and ignorant existence does one need to wallow in to come with such abject nonsense is what I have to ask?

I guess the holocaust never happened either.

Here's a few of the atrocities he wasn't convicted of that apparently do not exist in your warped world of denial:

Mass grave unearthed in Iraq
Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Many of the bodies found at the site near al-Hatra are believed to be the bodies of Kurdish women and children thought slaughtered by the Saddam Hussein regime.

"It is my personal opinion that this is a killing field," Kehoe told reporters during a visit to the site south of Mosul.

CNN.com - Mass grave unearthed in Iraq - Oct 13, 2004

'Mass grave' found in Iraq

Kurdish officials say they have found a series of mostly unmarked graves that contain about 2,000 bodies outside the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk.
They say the area was used by the Iraqi army to bury Kurds they killed in the late 1980s.

During that period at least 100,000 Kurds were killed in Saddam Hussein's policy of ethnic cleansing in Iraq.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | 'Mass grave' found in Iraq

Mass Graves Found In Iraq

Some 290 Grave Sites Have Been Found Since U.S. Invasion
BAGHDAD (CBS) ― Several mass graves have been recently discovered in Iraq, including one site holding an estimated 5,000 soldiers massacred after a failed uprising against Saddam Hussein after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, Iraqi officials say.

At least 290 grave sites containing some 300,000 bodies have been found since the American invasion two years ago, Iraqi officials tell the Times. The most recent sites, if the estimates are accurate, are among the largest.

wcbstv.com - Mass Graves Found In Iraq

New mass grave found in Iraq
Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:29:27

American troops and Iraqis have unearthed fourteen badly decomposed bodies in a mass grave northeast of Baghdad, the US military says.

The mass grave was only 100 meters away from one found on Thursday containing the corpses of 37 people, with the bodies showing signs of torture.

Press TV - New mass grave found in Iraq


Yes of course, these are just NECON subsidiaries of Fox News trying to impugn the good nature of Saddam and his two sons along with the other BUTCHERS of his cabinet.

Good lord, you have to wonder what the state of education in the world is to see such ignorance professed on the internet.

Iriemon

Lots died. How many died from Hussein's murders is the question.

When the neocons found out there was no WMDs plan B - make Hussein the Devil incarnate, was launched, and at that time there were reports bandied about of 300,000 or 400,000 Iraqis found in mass graves.

Here's an example from an April 2004 article:

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reports that since Saddam was ousted 270 sites of mass graves have been reported. These contain an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and Kuwaiti prisoners among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime Minister Tony Blair puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far.

Mass Graves Testify To Saddam's Evil; Investigators of Iraq's killing grounds have turned up 270 mass grave sites and an estimated 400,000 victims so far, bearing witness to Saddam Hussein's depravity | Insight on the News | Find Articles at BNET

Wow, Hussein really must be a monster to murder 400,000!

Only thing is, it wasn't quite right. Blair admitted he lied. And when they started digging up graves, they didn't find 400,000, or 40,000. Last time I looked after digging all around the country, they hand't found 4000.

Good luck finding stories on it now. But the truth didn't matter, the propoganda was out and had its effect.

I just found it curious that Hussein supposedly murdered 400,000, but at his trial they could only prove 148, and even that in a kangaroo trial. 399,852 more and they'd have reached the estimate.

jallman

You've already got one husband to make miserable. Go nag him.

__________________
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/d...amaSigcopy.jpg

American

I said, "Nuff said." Can't you follow directions?

Iriemon

No, the fact that he was only tried for 148 suggests that the 400,000 bodies found is bull****. As the British government admitted. Anti-Hussein propoganda to shore up support for the war when no WMDs were found.

That is wise.

If he supposedly murdered hundreds of thousands as the neocons claim, it would be nice to see proof of it.

After all, its not like they were exactly honest about just about everything else about Iraq.

I call it the truth. What do you call it?

There's lots of hard evidence for it.

Here's a few of the atrocities he wasn't convicted of that apparently do not exist in your warped world of denial:

From the article:

The first trench contains the remains of women and children, and the second contains the remains of men only. More than 100 bodies have been found from the first location and a similar number from the other.

So apparently a couple hundred were found.

That's 2000.

Mass Graves Found In Iraq

The assertion that 300,000 bodies have been found has to be wrong; like Blair's claims to the same effect. Shoddy reporting or writing, based on earlier reports of estimates.

You somehow forgot the last sentence when you clipped this report:

The military said the bodies appeared to have been in the grave for periods ranging from two to six months.

That would make it kind of hard to say Hussein did it, wouldn't it?

See below, I welcome additions to the research I did.