Saddam arrested?

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Before you go spouting off about it being against the Geneva Convention, think about why that rule is in the GC in the first place. It was placed there so prisoners would not be viewed as trophies of war. The video of Saddam isn't being used like that. It was released to show the people of Iraq that the man they feared above all others was captured and no longer a threat to them, their loved ones and their country. Unfortuately there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the video could only be broadcast in Iraq and not the rest of the world. Today's modern technology will not allow it.

Let's see, the Saddam video was released to show the people that the man they feared was captured? How is that not a trophy? I guess it depends on how you define trophy, where you live etc.

Btw you don't honestly believe that was the only reason the tape was released? I mean we have international relations, poll numbers etc. etc.

Sultan, lovely piece. Now that would be a trial I would watch.

[Skunk]

And showing him undergoing a medical examination was neccessary too?

If it really was neccessary to show a video of him, why not allow him to have a shower and put on his uniform? Surely that wouldn't have hurt the coalition?

[Sir Taliesin]

No one would believe them in Iraq, if they didn't show these pictures and these people fear Saddam so much, it's unreal.

Look if there was a chance all the voilence in Iraq would end if you showed pictures of Saddam, would you? Even though it was against the GC??? If you wouldn't then you are a better person than I.

Sir T, nobody is saying that.

first, there was no evidence that capturing saddam would end all violence, nor has it, so put away the ridiculous hypotheticals.

second, i dont think anyone disagrees that a picture was necessary. however, picking through him like a wild gorilla, looking for lice and such is disrespectful. yes, the medical care needs to be done, and checking for weapons and suicide capsules too. but those arent the pictures that need to be shown. give him a shower, give him some clean clothes, show the man with dignity.

because whether he deserves it or not, we are better than that. or, at least, i thought we were.

here's an article that says it well, and raises the legitimate questions about what it says about us.

[Timber Loftis]

Tonight President Bush spoke to the limited value of catching Saddam. As for useful info, he said he wouldn't trust anything the man said. As for Iraq, he said it lets Iraqis know he won't return. But the road is still long, and the mission is not finished.

[Azimaith]

Originally posted by sultan: Sir T, nobody is saying that. first, there was no evidence that capturing saddam would end all violence, nor has it, so put away the ridiculous hypotheticals. second, i dont think anyone disagrees that a picture was necessary. however, picking through him like a wild gorilla, looking for lice and such is disrespectful. yes, the medical care needs to be done, and checking for weapons and suicide capsules too. but those arent the pictures that need to be shown. give him a shower, give him some clean clothes, show the man with dignity. because whether he deserves it or not, we are better than that. or, at least, i thought we were. here's an article that says it well, and raises the legitimate questions about what it says about us.

I don't think he deserves it, hes not a president, hes a criminal. I bet if you lived in his country you would be pretty po'ed to see him with dignity too. Remember this is a huge PR war with the Iraqis, the majority did not like Saddam and so showing him looking respectable would not make them feel any better.

[Donut]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Before you go spouting off about it being against the Geneva Convention, think about why that rule is in the GC in the first place. It was placed there so prisoners would not be viewed as trophies of war. The video of Saddam isn't being used like that. It was released to show the people of Iraq that the man they feared above all others was captured and no longer a threat to them, their loved ones and their country. Unfortuately there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the video could only be broadcast in Iraq and not the rest of the world. Today's modern technology will not allow it.

My comments aren't about Saddam, Iraq or the Iraqi people - they are about the hypocrisy of Bush and Rumsfeld. If it's against the GC to put captives on TV then it applies to ALL captives.

And if you don't think he was being paraded as a trophy of war then you must have watched a different clip.

Of course, as a by product it hasn't done Bush's re-election campaign any harm has it?

[Donut]

Originally posted by Skunk: And showing him undergoing a medical examination was neccessary too?

Only the bit showing him being checked for head lice!

And before any one complains - I have absolutely no sympathy for the man at all. But I can't abide hypocrisy.

[Azred]

A medical examination of the kind he was being given on "the clip" is neither embarrassing nor detrimental to Hussein's fundamental human rights. Thus, this particular video clip doesn't violate any agreements or accords.

re: Hussein's eventual trial. Hussein must be given over to an Iraqi court to face justice. Everyone in the world--the US included--must also be content to sit back and let the Iraqi court decide as it will. Unfortunately for the anti-death penalty crowd, Iraq currently allows for the death penalty; this means that if the Iraqi court sentences him to death everyone in the world must accept that decision.
The most likely scenario will be that an Iraqi court will find him guilty of all sorts of war crimes and sentence him to death, but will let him choose the manner of execution to let him "save face" and retain some of the honor and dignity with which many Arabs view Hussein. Practical and sagacious.

It is as I thought--the first conspiracy theory surrounding Hussein's capture is that we have had him for months and were simply timing his "capture" to maximize the positive news for Bush. [img]graemlins/erm.gif[/img] If that were true, then wouldn't his capture have happened in September 2004, much closer to the election?

Oh, well. Time to close that particular chapter and re-focus on rebuilding Iraq.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Donut: My comments aren't about Saddam, Iraq or the Iraqi people - they are about the hypocrisy of Bush and Rumsfeld. If it's against the GC to put captives on TV then it applies to ALL captives. And if you don't think he was being paraded as a trophy of war then you must have watched a different clip. Of course, as a by product it hasn't done Bush's re-election campaign any harm has it?

Donut - I think you (and the others) are overlooking a few fundamental differences between the clips of American POW's and Saddam Hussein.

First of all, the American soldiers were Prisoners of War. Saddam Hussein is not. He is a man wanted for crimes against humanity. Big Difference!!! He is a simply a captured criminal. And showing a video of his capture is no different than showing video of any other well-known criminal that had been captured after a long manhunt.

The purpose in showing the clip of Saddam Hussein is not so much to "show him off as a trophy" as it is to show documented proof that a wanted criminal had been captured and brought to justice. The inclusion of the medical exam was done (as far as I could tell) to show that he was being treated in a humane manner and was being given medical attention. I personally saw nothing "undignified" about the video, but I'm not an Iraqi..so I will concede that they may have taken exception to it (though I doubt the veracity of that claim. I don't think many Iraqi's would be upset in seeing Hussein treated in an undignified manner. Again, that is just my opinion).

Since we are no longer actively "at war" with Iraq - and since Saddam Hussein is not a Prisoner of War - I would imagine that is the distinction Rumsfeld was making regarding the Geneva Convention. I admit I don't know enough about the G.C. myself to know if one clip is right and the other wrong, or if both are right or both wrong, but since the G.C. deals specifically with wartime activities and the treatment of POW's, I can't imagine it would apply to Saddam Hussein.

As for your charges of hypocrisy against Bush, I would just point out that Bush was NOT the one who claimed the video clips of the American POW's violated the G.C. to begin with. That was Rumsfeld (as you pointed out). Secondly, do you REALLY believe President Bush could have prevented the media from airing the clips of Saddam Hussein. If he had tried to prevent the broadcast of the clip, the networks would be SCREAMING that their First Amendment Rights were being violated. So Bush couldn't have prevented the clip from being shown even if he had wanted to.

You say that you cannot abide hypocrisy. Fair enough. I am equally dimayed that one of the most evil men to live in our lifetime has finally been captured and will stand trial for his crimes, yet the only "good thing" some members can see in this situation is that it affords them another chance to criticize President Bush on general principle.

Of course, I shouldn't be too surprised by that. Saddam Hussein has committed innumerable atrocities and crimes against humanity during his reign in Iraq. Political opponents were dragged out of the building and shot in the street while Saddam sat at the podium and smiled. Political prisoners endured all manners of torture, beatings, and maimings. The Khurds were attacked with biological weapons in an attempt at genocide and even the professional athletes of Iraq were beaten and/or tortured if they failed to perform adequately in competition. Yet President Bush was the one labeled "a modern day Adolf Hitler" before the war with Iraq began. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img]

If members can't see the absurd fallacy of that comparison, then there really isn't anything else to discuss.

You said "Hypocrisy, thy name is Bush"

I say "Blind criticism, thy name is too numerous to list here"