Saddam Hussein Hanged

:confused:
Why would anyone be against the Death penalty.
This hussein got what he deserved.
Dont it matter anymore about the VICTIMES. the Men, Women and innocent children he had put to death.
I believe in "an eye for an eye" kill and you also should be killed.
Steel and you should have your hand cut off.

Hazell, if something like an invasion like this is so bad, you don't erase it happening, you remember, so it doesn't happen again. I guess you don't remember that your nation was attacked?? They didn't teach you how wrong it was for Hitler to try to wrest away freedom from Western Europe and possibly the UK? I suspect they did, for it was wrong. IF you believe Iraq being invaded is so wrong, you wouldn't want to forget that.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it..... yes, that makes more sense after reading Hazell's take on things

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eirenspeed

:confused:
Why would anyone be against the Death penalty.
This hussein got what he deserved.
Dont it matter anymore about the VICTIMES. the Men, Women and innocent children he had put to death.
I believe in "an eye for an eye" kill and you also should be killed.
Steel and you should have your hand cut off.

---

Eiren, the death penalty is a last resort, reserved for humans so vile that killing them solves more problems than it causes.

I haven't forgotten about Saddam's victims. Unlike most of these guys, I know that life under Saddam was a cruel, inhuman slog living with fear of your countrymen every day. The US Military have torn the place up to be sure, but at least they had no personal malice towards the Iraqi people, unlike Saddam, who had malice to anyone who looked at him the wrong way.

The UN once estimated Saddam's regime was killing 20000 people a year. I doubt Eki and the like were losing any real sleep then over it. Heck UN sanctions were starving probably close to 2 million a year, while Saddam lived in luxury. I could argue the UN were responsible for as much suffering under that theory but I don't. I know the truth, Saddam was the problem. Now he is "well Hung" and some people don't like the barbarity of it all. I don't either, but when you play dictator poker, sometimes you lose.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Eki and his ilk would not be allowed the freedom to voice their displeasure, and while they may not like George Bush, he is no direct threat to their freedom's or any other ordinary joe.

---

Really, how many of those in Guantanmo bay has been convicted guilty of some crime? I guess you can call them ordinary Joes or ordinary people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

BTW, I think in no way that it is right the Baltic Nations were sucked into the USSR. I don't think it was right and I know most of your countrymen at that time likely didn't want any part of Stalin, but to fight a war, sometimes you have to have a chance and a hope of winning. The way things were then, time was the only way to free Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. At least now though you have an understanding through your forebears of what it is to live in a democratic society. 25 years ago, if the internet came along, you can be sure no one in your world would be allowed anywhere near it to voice your disapproval of the world. Eki and his ilk would not be allowed the freedom to voice their displeasure, and while they may not like George Bush, he is no direct threat to their freedom's or any other ordinary joe.

---

Since when has Finland been like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania?

Internet Relay Chat IRC was invented in a Finnish University in 1988, three years before the Soviet Union collapsed and one year before Germany was united. The Soviet Union never tried to deny us access to the internet:

http://www.irc.org/history_docs/jarkko.html

You claim to know how the Iraqis lived under Saddam. Were you living there at that time? I know you have never lived in Finland, since you seem to know nothing about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Hazell, if something like an invasion like this is so bad, you don't erase it happening, you remember, so it doesn't happen again. I guess you don't remember that your nation was attacked?? They didn't teach you how wrong it was for Hitler to try to wrest away freedom from Western Europe and possibly the UK? I suspect they did, for it was wrong. IF you believe Iraq being invaded is so wrong, you wouldn't want to forget that.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it..... yes, that makes more sense after reading Hazell's take on things

---

Forgetting history isn't the issue here. There is no point thinking constantly about the fact that the UK was nearly (or, at least, fairly nearly) invaded by the Germans and how lucky we are that we weren't, because to do so achieves absolutely nothing. Not thinking about this all the time doesn't leave us any more open to attack or invasion than if we thought of nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Hazell, if something like an invasion like this is so bad, you don't erase it happening, you remember, so it doesn't happen again. I guess you don't remember that your nation was attacked?? They didn't teach you how wrong it was for Hitler to try to wrest away freedom from Western Europe and possibly the UK? I suspect they did, for it was wrong. IF you believe Iraq being invaded is so wrong, you wouldn't want to forget that.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it..... yes, that makes more sense after reading Hazell's take on things

---

You forget that the UK wasn't attacked. It was the UK who declared a war against Germany after Germany had invaded Poland. Hitler would rather have had Britain as an alley than an enemy. His real interests were in the east, but the west interfered him.

I wondered why Canada ranked only 18th in the Press Freedom Index, but perhaps it explains Mark in Oshawa's lack of knowledge on historical facts:

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

You forget that the UK wasn't attacked. It was the UK who declared a war against Germany after Germany had invaded Poland. Hitler would rather have had Britain as an alley than an enemy. His real interests were in the east, but the west interfered him.

---

I think you've gone a bit far down the road of condoning Hitler's actions there, for my liking at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I think you've gone a bit far down the road of condoning Hitler's actions there, for my liking at least.

---

I'm not condoning, I'm just stating historical facts. I didn't say anything about them being morally right or pleasant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war_2#Europe

"On September 1, 1939, Germany, led by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party, invaded Poland according to an agreement with the Soviet Union, which joined the invasion on September 17. The United Kingdom and France responded by declaring war on Germany on September 3, initiating a widespread naval war, with Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa all following suit by September 10."

"As stated in Mein Kampf, Hitler's real underlying goal was to acquire what he believed to be Germany's rightful living space and resources, by invading and dominating lands to the east, mainly in Russia. Also, he sought to attack various ethnic and political groups, to target what he claimed were leftist influences, and other groups outside of the Nazi world-view. By starting with the real grievances of the Versailles Treaty, the Nazis were able to stoke a sense of grievance throughout Germany to redress perceived wrongs, and to present militarism and adherence to fascism as a means of taking aggressive action against the established political order."