A successful or near successful escape would drop Bush's re-election chances down a hole so deep that you'd smell feet by the time you reached the bottom. The Americans will keep Saddam secure even if they have to stand their entire army in rings around him!
Yes, but do you reckon they'll try...? P.S: look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 855359.stm for a laff
I would hope, on a just in case basis, we have secreted a miniaturized GPS locator inside his body. Makes locating pretty basic if necessary.
I think we should have handed Saddam over to the Kuwaitis. I daresay he would have gotten a very warm welcome there. And a well-deserved one.
If who executed him? The Americans or the Iraqis? They wouldn't have a martyr if their own people or people of their faith executed him.
As the governing council is US appointed (supported) if the Iraqi government execute him the to Islamic extremist America has.
Oh yes he would. Because any Iraqi who executes him immediately becomes an American puppet. Even if it was a Muslim of the same faction - heck, if his personal Imam did it - it would not matter. Propaganda is a marvellous tool.
Here is a rock, here is a hard place, and in between is America. Unfortunate, but true. And us Brits are firmly at their side...
Islamic extremists would like nothing more than see Saddam executed.They have not forgotten his war against the islamic republic of Iran. Saddams supporters are mostly iraqi or arab nationalists.
They have their cake, & they eat it. They may not like Saddam, but he stood up to America, and has played the "Muslim vs. the USA" card. So they get an old emeny defeated, plus a new martyr in the fight against another old enemy.
Apart from the upsurge of fundamentalism it would cause in the area, if Saddam is to be trialed let justice be done. He is a criminal, so he must be trialed, but this has to be fair and legal. This is why he hasn't been turned over to any group, like the Kuwaitis or the Idon'tknowwhois. And I would strongly advise the court not to sentence Saddam to death, because of the above mentioned reasons; just put him away forever and never let there be word of him again. Like the time he's spent between his capture and his trial, when nobody knew where he was or how he fared. This is how he should be gotten rid of.
Leaving him to rot in jail would just encourage an endless series of hostage-takers worldwide who will demand the release of Saddam. Not because most of them will care about him, they'll just want the publicity. The best thing would be to use General Pershing's method during the Muslim insurrection in the Philippines. He would freshly slaughter a pig and throw it down in a ditch, then execute a suspect by firing squad so, when shot, he would fall into the ditch onto the dead pig. This was a huge descecration issue with the Muslims and whether they could enter heaven. It worked wonders. Doing this to Saddam would appall the world, and end the insurrection in one day.
That is a disgustingly disrespectful approach to the feelings of muslems worldwide. If they believe that touching pig blood at or after death will prevent you from reaching heaven, then it is absolutely intolerable to do this to muslems on purpose. The country doing that is no better at all than the Conquistadores who gave a defeated Inca king a choice to die by fire or by suffocation; fire, the Incas believed, would destroy one's soul before the afterlife began, thus preventing that, and the price for suffocation was convertion to Christianity. It is abuse of the people's beliefs. Like asking a pure Christian to spit on Jesus Christ's image before killing him; you wouldn't do that! Even the fundamentalists killing American hostages these days don't do that.
Well, I know in today's world this wouldn't be possible, but it would expose the Muslim world as pure hypocrites should they condemn this and yet not condemn their own extremists.
Why? Their extremists aren't commiting atrocities to muslems, which is an entirely different thing in the case of religion. As you well know from the history of your own religion, it all depends whether the victim is one of 'yours' or 'theirs'. That's why courts should not be biased by religion.
Even to suggest it will cause offence to Muslims and the ones sitting on the fence of suicide bomber or not would climb off the wrong side. Sorry but that is an argument without thinking. (it is not the first time I have heard it, but is still wrong).
