Saddam Hussein 'arrested in Iraq'

Remove all ads!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/3317429.stm

Edit - more news.

[ December 14, 2003, 11:37: Message edited by: Wildfire ]

 

I'm watching CNN right now! Thanks Wildfire If it is him and I get tutu installed today, I might just be happy for a second

 

That would be nice if they catch atleast one of the men who are responsible for all evil in this world.

Seriously though, I dont think this matter much, it is a long awaited relief for the US though but on the ground in Iraq I dont think it will matter much, sadly. I cant imagine Saddam have been controlling all of the resistance and in situations like this there always tend to be someone ready to step in. Lets also hope that it really is him, and that they really have caught someone. As far as I know the person in question is not in American hands?

 

Let's do some quick deductive reasoning... assume someone has captured Hussein. Assume it really is Hussein. Assume that this warlord dictator gets what's coming to him in all manner of the phrase, tried for every crime he committed, etc... What will the US do? If they don't completely oversee any and all trials against him, they (we) will most certainly take credit for his capture. Not that I'm complaining about his capture, necessarily, but, well....

I mean, c'mon, we're looking at 4 more years of President Dubya here.

 

I hope the country will eventually come to a rest, even though that's about the least thing Bush deserves after his reckless adventurism. The Iraqis deserve better though. I have my doubts the iraqi resistance will stall as a result of Saddam's capture. Maybe it'll be weakened, but I could imagine a rise in attacks first, sure commented as "definitely a desperate reaction on the capture of their leader"

The other point is what to do with him. Put him on trial? By a US assigned court? Sort of ... illegitimate, considering the illegality of the US invasion and the relating problem with the privatisation, oil sales and the like.

And I wonder about the charges against him. He didn't do anything against the US. Leaves crimes against humanity and War of Agression.
I doubt the US will really stress the latter part so much, as that would suggest that Bush deserves the same punishment for invading Iraq illegally, mon dieu! Another interesting thing would be what Saddam has to say about the US assistance in the war against Iran. As so many of the Bush crew served under Reagan, and were involved in that effort that is really inconvenient. It sort of rules out that will trialed too.

Yes, it'll be about Crimes against Humanity primarily, and so you can bet Saddam's atrocities will be stressed accordingly. Eventually the US have to be reassured that they did good in invading Iraq, there has been way too much doubt recently.

Wouldn't it be great if Saddam could be tried at an ICC? It would avoid all the stress the US will now have to construct a legitimate legal basis for the show trial against him.

 

They are claiming they have DNA evidence that it is him, but I sincerely doubt anything coming out of the media these days. We shall wait and see. Could have been a plant by US any way (Hussein I mean, not the DNA).

I do hope that every charge laid against him is also applied to the other offenders, no matter which side of the fence they are on.

 

Read about it just a few moments ago, and right away one question popped out: will it really be a real trial, or a "trial" done by US?

 

I heard it will be a real trial, the worst thing that could happen now is that he dies in custody or if he gets to a US military trial. Think about the buzz that would become if there were to be a rumor about america killing Saddam.

US Military sure has him on 24 hour watch just to make sure he aint gonna kill himself

 

This is truely a great day ... unless you are a terrorist, Baathist or the French or German government!

By the way ...

During the press conferance, when Saddam's picture first appeared on the screen, some people started chanting something in arabic. Does anyone know what they said?

 

What does the French or German government have to do with anything? Are you insinuating that because they did not endorse an illegal (and questionably unethical) invasion, based on unproved, and now known incorrect, data, that they are somehow fanatical or zaealots? Seems to me you are pointing the finger in the wrong direction.

I know you are making some sort of joke, I seriously hope that this was a part of it.

Edit: Yea, I know I need to lighten up a little- sorry about that. It's the damn heat, makes me grumpy. Still, it needed to be said.

 

Blackhawk.
If anyone should have ambivalent feelings about Saddam, all the misery he caused and that he needed to be brought down its the U.S. cause it supported him. So, please.

And mentioning the French and German government in one breath with terrorists isnt all too funny.

 

No. I wouldn't turn him over to the ICC. I'd let him be tried in Iraq by the Iraqis - which are what the preliminary reports are saying may happen (in Civil court). I hope it happens that way.

 

Sheesh, a five page spread in the papers. You'd think it was something important.

Anyway, like Laches, I agree he should be tried in Iraq by the Iraqis. They know first hand what he's done, and they should get to decide, not anyone else.

 

Huzzah Not to spoil the party, but it's about damned time. It's been what? 8 months since the war ended and the occupation started?

Oh yeah, as I said in the other thread:

I think they should sentence him to "death by shoe". Drop him in the middle of Baghdad and have him beaten to death with shoes by the very citizens he terrorised.

I'd make one hell of a judge

 

@Blackhawk

The subtitles here said "Death to Saddam" or something like that...

 

@ Morgoth

Thank you. I'm glad that they were saying Saddam!

 

Oh, good heavens, what a cynical bunch we are. Compare Hussein's fate to that of Charles Taylor, another scummy sadist that the US dealt with in a proper, diplomatic, multilateral way. Taylor is still controlling his billions from a Nigerian chateau, protected from retribution, and pulling puppet strings back home in Liberia. Which of these stories - Iraq or Liberia - has the happier ending, I wonder? Which is more in line with justice?

Thank goodness Hussein will be dealt with by American-appointed Iraqis instead of the ICC, Milosevic-style.

 

It is good to see him captured at last, but I think people are stupid to think that the attacks will lessen. Ever since the invasion started, I don't think Saddam had much to do with the attacks, so there is no reason for them to decrease. Yes, I guess they have lost their figure head, but if I where in that position I would increase the attacks on US to try and get them to release him.

And think what this is going to do to Bush's rating! Now that he has someone to stuff and hang on his wall, his ratings will go sky high, and so begins another 4 years of Bush's "war against terror"

Now don't get me wrong, it's certainly good that Saddam has been captured, but IMO it would have been better if he where captured by the Iraqie people, and possibly even killed on the spot, or if his body was found dead by some peace keepers. That would just lessen my predicted increase of "terrorism" and lessen Bush's vote increase.

 

I for one, am glad that the Iraqis will never fear Saddam again. It may not shut the rebel's down, but now that Saddam is in custody, all the people that were scared to help lest he come back, might decide to be part of the solution. The only problem with a trial by the Iraqi's, is if a Saddam supporter(hereby known as Saddamists hahaha), decides to start bullying/threatening/haranguing the jury. Still, he should be tried by the Iraqis.