US treated Saddam like a Cow. Part III

Socio-politico rants

Part 1: U.S. Treated Saddam ‘Like a Cow’. Can you understand why I am depressed now?

Part 2: Follow Up: US Treated Saddam Like a Cow

Comments

“But I don’t believe an eye for an eye. I think we should have treated him with all the respect he couldn’t afford others. It just proves to the world now, that whoever is in power CAN do what they want. With whomever they want. “

Hold on a sec. You’re really mistaken, if you perceive ANYBODY in power, who decided that the crooks who’ve tortured people long enough must be hunted down, is just as bad as the crooks they capture. Did the superpower attempt to kill and terrorise civilians (like those crooks had)?

And it’s really strange, this outpouring of sympathy to someone who was so bloodthirsty to his own people. Do the Iraqis sympathise with Saddam? Those families who had their relatives tortured and imprisoned through and through… are they sorry abt the capture of Saddam? I’m sure they would give you a different answer.

The Vatican complains Saddam was being handled “like a cow”. Here’s something funny. Did the soldiers kick his face, spit on him, starve him (when you know he well deserves it)?? What did they do – they gave him proper FOOD, probably vitamins too! They gave him a warm bed with good lighting, they gave him a medical checkup! A medical checkup!! What does that mean? It means if they found he was ill, they would have treated him(though I am not sure if he might have access to a counselor for emotional abuse…).

We watched the same footage of the capture of Saddam, his haggard face, dwelling,etc. I thought it was a routine checkup he was going through. Nothing humiliating or undignified about the 2nd worst asshole having his teeth checked and the whole world watching.

So… save your sympathy for those girls his sons had assfucked over the years. Those crimes DID HAPPEN. And, if there had been footages of those rape scenes of 12 year old girls, and shown around the world… YOU, the Vatican, and other whinners, would respond differently.

Posted by: Steph at December 20, 2003 11:47 PM

“All of Saddam supporters are now going to be even more hateful”

Any supporters of crooks like Saddam, if they’re gonna be more hateful than before… that’s not because of those footages that they felt humilated. That’s because they know, deep down, they’ve lost.

And fact? Cheering Iraqis.

Posted by: Steph at December 20, 2003 11:52 PM

“And it’s really strange, this outpouring of sympathy to someone who was so bloodthirsty to his own people. Do the Iraqis sympathise with Saddam? Those families who had their relatives tortured and imprisoned through and through… are they sorry abt the capture of Saddam? I’m sure they would give you a different answer.

“

First off, there are two perspectives to any situation. I am not saying that what Saddam did was “right” in any way, but if you keep on throwing “inoccent murdered civilians” into the disscusion, you are making it biased. We should all look at the side of the Saddam supporters and see thier logic behind it…

I personaly do not agree with them, or the regim, but, at least, think of thier posible arguments.

1) Oil stays in Iraq, and Iraq’s control

2) No foreigners, in army uniforms, with automatic guns walking the streets and scaring the SHIT out of everyone.

3) No bombing

4) Yes, a curropt, terrible, regime… but at least there is economic stability and quiet.

Yet again, i do not agree with this. Now though, the supportors will be more violent, because they are, indded loosing.. you’re right… but now, they also have the sense of revange in them. This will be JUST LIKE the Israel-Palestine conflict…a never ending small scale, in country war between two different ethnic groups…

Do you truly think that the US is that altruistic to go and “save” a country from an “evil” dictator… this sounds way too “Hollywoodish” to me.

There were no WODs… and the US knew that… then why did they go there?

Petrolium ofcourse… and the nice “we’re saving the people” is just a flowery, sunny, media cover… and ofcourse, you got the “hero”…Dubya, and the evil, bastard, devil, heathen Saddam.

Do not follow the media on this war, it is all perfectly staged.

“The Vatican complains Saddam was being handled “like a cow”. Here’s something funny. Did the soldiers kick his face, spit on him, starve him (when you know he well deserves it)?? What did they do – they gave him proper FOOD, probably vitamins too! They gave him a warm bed with good lighting, they gave him a medical checkup! A medical checkup!! What does that mean? It means if they found he was ill, they would have treated him(though I am not sure if he might have access to a counselor for emotional abuse…).

“

Medical checkups are mandatory. They had to compare his dental records and DNA (if it was indeed him) with the other dental records (they somehow had…)

Showing a soldier scan Saddam for fleas, and check his teath is extremely humiliating.

Another interesting thing is the lack of media coverage this has been getting, this makes me wonder… the first two days of the capture, the same image and the same pointless comentary was repeated…yet, there are no new images, no news…nothing… truly makes me wonder if it was indeed him…

Posted by: Pavel at December 21, 2003 01:17 AM

Please do not offer pat conspiracy theory like that the media is perfectly staged again.

My response to the arguments:
1) Oil stays in Iraq, and Iraq’s control

– It’s more important who can make the most efficient use of the resources. Did Saddam pass the benefits to his people, or did he siphon off all/most of the bounty for himself and his cronies?

2) No foreigners, in army uniforms, with automatic guns walking the streets and scaring the SHIT out of everyone.

– Oh yeah? Better than living in perpetual fear that your daughters would catch the attention of Saddam’s sons and be RAPED? Better than having your fingers chopped off infront of your family? Knowing that nobody could complain to the soldiers… since they were all Saddam’s soldiers?

3) No bombing

– No bombing, but subversive terror tactics over Iraqis. No suicide bombings probably because people were too afraid. Although there were plans to assasinate Saddam. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3324473.stm

4) Yes, a curropt, terrible, regime… but at least there is economic stability and quiet.

– Iraqis… like most people who have been living in extremely rough times, under distatorships, are a strong and resilient lot. There wasn’t economic stability; there was little trade between Iraq and rest of the world. Now, there’s more. There’s potential of FTAs. Could that occur in Saddam’s time?

Sure, there are supporters who are hating the fact that they are losing their way of life and that their beliefs are wrong, so wrong. And they are killing innocent civilians for it. That’s inhumane behavior.

Saddam’s DNA and other records could have been found through one of his private hospitals, his doctors.. etc. Don’t worry abt the lack of media coverage on Saddam. When he’s on trial, that’s when you’ll see more footages of the old man.

Posted by: steph at December 21, 2003 02:37 AM

I think you both made really good points. I hear Steph on the fact Saddam supporter are a hateful bunch to begin with because it’s very true, thanks for the reminder. I also think it’s healthy to question the media and it’s good to bring things like this up, although I am not big on conspiracy theories either, it is interesting to be reminded governments do stage events for their own agenda.

But I just want to remind everyone here (Including Myself) that really we all agree that Saddam did terrible things to his people and it’s a good thing he is deposed. We also agree human rights abuses should not be tolerated within and without our own “borders.”

We might disagree on how it’s handled and even the reasons for this, and how it might move in the future.

But this is also healthy, debate is good.

But really we are all in agreement to the bigger picture which is freedom, which all of us have at this moment, whether we are from HK, US, or Isreal. (Which is where we all are from).

So maybe we can all agree to disagree on the small facts, and not get too nitpicky which this conversation has, and obviously will go down further.

However if you want to continue feel free… the space is yours.

But I am staying out.

Nice to meet both of you.

I hope you will come back because I enjoyed hearing both of your views and it definately made me think harder on the issue and I am sure some of the readers as well.

So do come back, I am happy to hear opposing points as long as it’s not personal, which is the cardinal rule of this blog. If you want. Keep going.

And a Merry Christmas in the most secular sense of the words as that’s the best I can do.

Yan

Posted by: yan at December 21, 2003 03:11 AM

steph,

I am not arguing from an Iraqui Saddam supporter point of view. I agree that they are wrong, but, like i said, they also have valid points.

Yes, Iraq has not been in many international traid organizations (even though it was in OPAC…or however you spell them, i’m refering to the middle eastern petrolium trade organization).

There is more trade with Iraq right now, but i do not see the Iraquis controlling this trade. It is completely in the hands of the US and its allies.

Plus, from what i read, the only time actuall “innocent civilians” were murdered by Saddam supporters was when the Massque was bombed… and since no group took credit for that bombing, it might have as well been the US that bombed it, because of some “terrorist lead”

Saddam’s supporters target US soldiers… and as much as i want, i cannot call the US soldiers in Iraq “inoccent civilians”.

And, i’m not trying to push conspiracy theories into you, i’m just providing theories to solve a mistery.

When i see more media coverage of Saddam, then i’ll be more convinced.

and Yan,

Sorry if we’re getting a tad off-topic, but, the subcategories make up a major category. To have a concrete debate, the small details have to be adressed first, not the big picture right away.

I do not know if the public removal of Saddam makes a positive difference in Iraq. He had no power anyhow, and now, the Saddam following militaristic groups are even angrier at US troops then before.

The only outcome of this, is the increase of Bush’s popularity, and if he wins the next elections (which he probebly will), who knows against which country he’ll go next… maybe he’ll declare HK, Israel, or any other of the countiries in which we reside “terroists”… (i doubt that he will, yet, we cannot know how much another war against N.Korea, Syria,or Iran will affect the countries we live in)

My conclusion to all this (Iraq):

Bring the boys back home, and let the UN take care of setting up a new government. This will quiet the militants down. And, this will give Iraq the contol of thier oil, trade, and the country as a whole back. The US can always superwise from thier many military bases in Kuwait.

Posted by: Pavel at December 21, 2003 04:22 AM

Lively discussion.

Pavel, the Iraqis themselves have claimed torture and murder at the hands of the Hussein regime; and recent discoveries of mass graves bear out this truth:(http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2003/s1013827.htm)

Moreover, the suggestion that Bush will declare random countries “terrorist states” is a slippery slope argument, or a non-sequiter, if you will; though Shrub declared Iraq, with documented intelligence connections to terrorist groups (ie. Hamas), it does not follow that he’ll declare Israel, HK, etc. terror states and invade. (In all fairness, you may have been kidding.)

You also said, “I do not know if the public removal of Saddam makes a positive difference in Iraq. He had no power anyhow, and now, the Saddam following militaristic groups are even angrier at US troops then before.”

Saddam most certainly had power – he had total control. He was no figurehead. And if militaristic groups (such as his dissolved Pres Guard…) are following Saddam, doesn’t that give hime real power?

Yan, thanks for the forum.

Tom

Posted by: tom at December 21, 2003 08:41 AM

Tom and Pavel, No probs, do what you will.

[Ducking for cover.] 🙂

Yan

Posted by: yan at December 21, 2003 11:14 AM

Tom,

“Pavel, the Iraqis themselves have claimed torture and murder at the hands of the Hussein regime; and recent discoveries of mass graves bear out this truth:(http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2003/s1013827.htm)

“

Yes, i know, and agree… but that is not ALL of Iraq that was saying that… i think of it as true though.

“Moreover, the suggestion that Bush will declare random countries “terrorist states” is a slippery slope argument, or a non-sequiter, if you will; though Shrub declared Iraq, with documented intelligence connections to terrorist groups (ie. Hamas), it does not follow that he’ll declare Israel, HK, etc. terror states and invade. (In all fairness, you may have been kidding.)

“

Yes, my comment about those countries was a joke, the follow up statement was what i wanted to say…i’ll qoute it…

“(i doubt that he will, yet, we cannot know how much another war against N.Korea, Syria,or Iran will affect the countries we live in)
“

and

“Saddam most certainly had power – he had total control. He was no figurehead. And if militaristic groups (such as his dissolved Pres Guard…) are following Saddam, doesn’t that give hime real power?

“

Those people do not follow Saddam, they follow his apotheosised image… and the ideas he represents. Saddam is now just an image, a public figuere for an “unwesternized Iraq”… with his capture, the image has been tampered with… especially after those degrading photos of his. This angers the militants.

Posted by: Pavel at December 21, 2003 12:15 PM

The thing is, with the way the USA has spun so much garbage during the course of the invasion, no one would believe they had Saddam until they paraded him in front of a camera.

And he’s a prize catch for the next US election. Can you imagine what would have happened if some gung-ho steakhead had dropped a grenade into the spiderhole?

“You just earnt yourself a court-martial, private!”

A dead Saddam has far less re-election impact than a living Saddam.

Idealistically, I totally agree with you. But if I was an Iraqi who had lost a family member under his regime, I don’t think I could afford to sit back and make such a call. I know I wouldn’t care whether the Geneva Convention had been adhered to or not.

And that’s the beauty of getting Saddam. Take out the bad guy on the block and, even if you’re the second-worst bad guy, you can make yourself look like Mr Clean. For a short time, anyway.

Hopefully, the USA will wake up and realise what crooks they have running the show stateside.

For the record, I’m against the war too. You’ll find a few interesting links on my site.

Posted by: finnigan at December 22, 2003 07:52 PM

“Hopefully, the USA will wake up and realise what crooks they have running the show stateside.”

I think a lot of people know. When I went back to US in the last year, which is the first time I had been since the change of the adminstration. I was really horrified just how badly everybody was.

How dissappointed, how angry, pissed off.

People who were never political was ranting on about their government. People who believed in the system told me they never want to vote again because they could see the whole thing hijacked.

People who hated it in the first place was actually saying they didn’t want to fight anymore. You know it’s scary when activists tell you that it’s a lost cause because otherwise how could it turn out so bad.

A friend who worked for a democratic senator, said, after I asked him, “How could this happen?”

He said, “I don’t know. We’re asking ourselves the same question. Something went wrong. Maybe we didn’t listen enough. I don’t know. A lot of people are asking that question right now.”

This is when I realized how badly the media was. Like how fake, full of shit it was because that’s what you DON’T hear. I was half expecting my friends to ram American Propaganda down my throat, which is how the media portrays “Americans” including their own media, CNN, FOX, CBS etc, etc. Which no one did, I never encountered a single American in America who did in the two months I was there this year. Maybe it was where I was, Berkely, Manhatten, Los Angeles, Black Rock City. But that’s a good lot of places. Although I have met a few like that in HK, which makes me get up and walk away, coz I have nothing in common with them.

A lot of people asked me how they were being percieved outside and I would say, “really badly, like I thought you would be all pro-america by now.. which I was wrong.” And they would just look even more unhappy.

Coz the media won’t show you the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people in NY protesting, which I was there, they didn’t show the your marches in Washington, where people from all over went to, and they didn’t show them shutting down SF down town, which is what happenned when the war started.

Or people telling you that after 911, they felt they were sold out by their own government.

When you ask New Yorker why AREN’t they supporting the war since they were attacked, they tell you, “Why? We deserved it?” “Wouldn’t you want to do that to us after what we’ve done to them?”

“But aren’t you angry?” I say, and the will reply, “Yes, I am angry at my government for doing all these things to make people hate us.” “I am angry they are making the situation worse and making it more likely we will be attacked.

I was hella SHOCKED.

It’s not what I expected at all.

Not a single person I met in New York supported the war. In some ways, they were saying to me, “We know how it feels. We don’t want this to happen to other innoccent people.”

Which makes me hyper suspicious of those pro-war, pro-Bush, pro-attack rah-rah-rahs. No one supports Saddam, every one knows it was a good thing he was gone. They just like to use that as an excuse to shut other people up. But people also see that wasn’t the REAL reason the Bush adminstration when in. Rumsfield was part of a think tank that put out papers on how the US should go into Iraq ages before 911. It’s well documented many of the politicians and thier cronies have oil interests. If everyone I know, everyone I met can see, why can’t the others.

Personally I suspect they might just be just stupid.

Yan

Posted by: yan at December 22, 2003