An Open Thread
By Erick Posted in War — Comments (134) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Yes, I will celebrate. Yes, I will be happy. While I understand the positions of my friend John Cole and of Rick Moran, I disagree with them.
Saddam Hussein is a murderous dictator who has committed -- and been found guilty of -- mass murders and crimes against the people he claimed to govern.
Good riddance. I rejoice. It's like Caucesceau, but more civilized.
« We need more COIN in the Afghan realm — Comments (0) | Who really believes in assimilation? — Comments (70) »
An Open Thread 134 Comments (0 topical, 134 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
the deat of one village. The idea was that this would be the first case and would be easier to litigate.
...at Kos. According to several posters there (links withheld in the interest of taste), we forced the Iraqis to do the execution right away so there could be no trial on Saddam's more recent adventures. Because such trials would necessarily have implicated Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld in war crimes.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
it seems that the trial that just went down was one of the best cases they had against him. Seems there was actual documentation, audio, hand writing, and above all, survivors that were pretty credible as eyewits
incident. They did that because they had real witnesses, and lots of evidence. I understand that he will be tried inabstentia for gassing the Kurds, separately for a variety of other "crimes against humanity".
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
I feel like I just spent $300 million on a pinto...that shortly there after caught fire and exploded.
Sure Saddam is dead and he's a horrible person, yada, yada, yada....but I wonder if our grand children, the ones who will actually be paying for this hanging, will wish we had spent the money on schools, hospitals, and pension funds instead of burying them in debt.
Call me foolish, but celebrating Saddam's death is kinda silly when you think of the price we...ahem, our grandchildren have paid for it.
Here cometh the "we could have better used that money for schools, hospitals, and yada yada" argument.
If you are going to regurgitate nonsense go somewhere else.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
'Yada yada'? You can't just call these posts in, you know. The idea is to suggest that you actually may give a tinker's dam about the suffering of the Iraqi people, not reinforce the assumption that you actually don't.
Jeebus. No self-respect anymore. No self-respect.
Moe
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
...I can suggest a half-dozen other useless things we can whack out of the Federal budget and save $200 billion a year. Then we can do the right thing for the people of Iraq without going into deficit.
I'm getting so tired of this idiotic "the-grandchildren-will-pay" meme. Someone needs to explain to these people exactly how debt financing works.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
Yes, please do explain how debt financing works. I'm curious how conservatives (Ya know..US!) who supposedly believe in fiscal responsibility have doubled the deficit in a handful of years. I'd like to know why WE are borrowing from the federal pension fund (ya know, the pension our federal employees expect to retire on) to pay for god knows what. I'd like to know why WE have given away the surplus, that Reagan and Greenspan developed to pay for the social security shortfall, primarily in tax breaks to the wealthiest among us.
I'd like to know how we saved the Iraqi people from Saddam by putting the Shia in charge. Ya know, those people who are using government uniforms, badges and weapons to torture, rape and murder by the truck load. I'd like to know how invading Iraq has helped us in the war on terror when it is well established that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11, and since this invasion the number of terror groups and terrorist actions have skyrocketed.
I'd like to know how we conservatives have lost our way.
I'm a conservative who believes in fiscal responsibility, in smaller government and more freedom. I don't believe in fabricated wars, US run black torture prisons, spying on Americans and stealing from the pensions of hard working americans.
Tell me the answers to these things...and when did we conservatives become so damn stupid that we believe any f-ing thing our party tells us. Hell, the conservative party was created to fight the corruption of the democratic party...and now, we have become them.
We are conservatives...but we are Americans first!
It's not as you say fabricated wars and federal pension funds, but real wars and fabricated pension funds instead.
__________________________________________________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
Call me foolish, but celebrating Saddam's death is kinda silly when you think of the price we...ahem, our grandchildren have paid for it.
That logic is so incredibly bad. Let me guess: public school?
You're saying:
We are picking up the tab
We are borrowing to pay the tab
Our grandchildren will still be paying the national debt
The only benefit of OIF is Saddam's death
Since it is expensive, and since we are borrowing to pay for it, we should not be happy at its success.
Perhaps you are beginning to see the flaws already, but I'll assist.
The hanging was done by the Iraqi government, not the US. The US is not the sole source of funding for the Iraqi government, with a 2007 budget of $41B. "Only" about $7B of that comes from the US. Almost none of that funding is to pay for rope.
Iraq may have been ruled by Saddam, but the War on Terror is about making sure those grandchildren with whom you're concerned have a civilization consisting of something other than a prayer rug and a burka. Iraq, like it or not, is the central front in the War on Terror. That, and not Saddam, is why it is so expensive.
It seems to me that the more difficult a task, the happier we are when it is done.
The Academy is open.
Great deflection in your post, Socrates. Okay, so we are only spending 7 billion to support their government this year, but the war is costing us roughly 9 billion per month on top of the original 13 billion in start up costs. What if that money was going to support social security...to build new hospitals, to build new schools? What if that money was going to....well...nothing, but our own pockets in the form of tax breaks. What if that money was going to defer the costs of outfitting average consumers with solar panels so we wouldn't have a monthly electric bill? What if that money was going to the COPS program that Bush cut which has led to a reduction in police officers and an increase in crime? Heck, if we had done that instead of invading Iraq, we'd have more police officers and less terrorists...wouldn't that have been smarter?
As far as the Iraqi government goes, it exists in name only. It controls little and has done nothing. The place is in chaos and its police force willing looks the other way when Shia insurgents wish to commit mass kidnappings. So, big whoop they hung Saddam...I think we could have had that done for a lot less.
which just happens to be a federal responsibility but you DO want to pay for a federal contribution to local police departments, which is a decidedly state/local responsibility. And then you have the audacity to whine about federal spending.
Please, please, please either adjust your meds or go away. Or both.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
Gamecock, DeVine Op-Ed for Charlotte Observer, blogs at Race 4 2008
We should not bother with this War on Terror thing, but instead should simply build schools for the grandchildren of jihadists.
And everything is Bush's fault.
How could I have ever thought anything else.
The Academy is open.
What was the national debt as a percentage of GDP at the end of WWII and today? And why was saving the French and the rest of Europe from Hitler more important than saving the Kurds from Saddam?
I think they were both just causes worth the money in the long run. But for the many who believe the first was but the second wasn't, I want them to explain why.
Hitler was running rough-shod over Europe...Saddam Hussein was contained and de-clawed. The situations are not comparable.
Gamecock, DeVine Op-Ed for Charlotte Observer, blogs at Race 4 2008
you didn't answer the man's question
What was the national debt as a percentage of GDP at the end of WWII and today?
Researching the answer may lead to a whole new level of enlightenment for you.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
***
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
"There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were and ask why not." George Bernard Shaw
fire him from this blog!!!!
Rick Moran should be HUNG for this blog!!!
"Took the nickname Troll long before BlogTrolls existed..."
just refused the stay of execution.......carry on, gentlemen.
He should have been executed on the same timetable as other spiders when they emerge from their holes: An instantaneous squish.
But tonight will do in a pinch.
Gamecock, DeVine Op-Ed for Charlotte Observer, blogs at Race 4 2008
I hope Iraq can now stabilize its country and put Saddam's era behind them. http://www.enewsreference.com
Wow, when was the last time that happened? It must be getting close now.
In a world full of twists and turns, the ultimate twist...is a straight line.
but I'd have him coated with honey and fed to the fire ants. I feel pretty bloodthirsty when it comes to genocidal tyrants.
You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
However he dies.. he should be buried ignominiously at one of his mass graves.
"Took the nickname Troll long before BlogTrolls existed..."
love it! You've got a hit on your hands. Now with a verse about Saddam...you've got the hit parade!
a rope, you can use again; a bullet is hard to recover.
and all those, against it; killing how many people is worth losing your life ? even in the states, you kill more than a hundred; and youre going down permanently.
just think how many the world possibly could have possibly saved by taking out saddam and n. korea's favorite dictator years ago.
no assurance, someone better would have taken over either; but there's over a million dead that would probably liked the world to take a chance, but i'm digressing.
I'm no fan of the death penalty. I also think Hussein should've been tried for everything he did before being executed.
That said, I won't miss him.
I also think Hussein should've been tried for everything he did before being executed.
Is that he would've died of old age first.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
We could've played some really awful music and terrible movies in his cell while the trial went on. Combine pre-1973 Yoko Ono, Gigli, Snakes On A Plane, and an (un)healthy dose of heavy metal and you wind up with a punishment far more severe than a hanging.
Worth some thought:
When you see a Crime punished, you may be inwardly Pleased; but always shew Pity to the Suffering Offender.
For Saddam, nope.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
I reserve pity for humans and some of the more intelligent animals.
IMO, if you kill enough people, you lose your membership in the human race. Saddam turned in his card a very long time ago. I feel as much pity for him as I do for a squashed cockroach. Less, actually, since a cockroach provides a valuable function in nature and was never capable of being anything other than a cockroach.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
You guys have reached a new low. The guy is dead, isn't that enough?
The Academy is open.
Iraq has just turned a page. Any gains obtained until now will solidify relatively soon, and the course will be set. We’ll know in short order whether Iraq can survive. Our gut says it will survive with Saddam gone. he was the ghostly figure haunting the night watches of many Iraqis. That has been a powerful “what if” that has just become a "not at all." Most Iraqis will see it as a relief, and relief implies an absence (or at least a subsidence) of stress. A good thing when attempting to unite disparate factions.
Opinion Times
Some minds are like concrete, thoroughly mixed up and permanently set. --Rev. Denny Brake
The game was tied at seven all, uh-huh-huh,
When Franklin found he had the ba-hall.
He made a connection
In the other direction,
And the crowd starting shouting out interjections...
Aw! You threw the wrong way!
Darn! You just lost the game!
Hurray! I'm for the other team!
Compliments of Schoolhouse Rock~
Some people seem intent on rooting for the other team. Take your blame America first attitude and terrorist pompoms back to the defeatist dark side.
__________________________________________________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes
First, I pray for our soldiers in harms way because their jobs just got more difficult and their lives are now more then ever before in peril.
I wonder if the first retaliatory terrorist attack will hit here in the US or in Great Britain?
I wonder when the Saudi's will jump into the war to protect the Sunni's who are about to be mass slaudered by the Shia after they conduct mass killings to revenge this execution?
I wonder when Iran will decide to fight the Saudi's to protect the Shia in Iraq?
I wonder when Palestine and Lebanon will decide to erupt in Civil War while Jordan and Egypt conduct 24 hour prayers for the Middle East?
I wonder when Israel will recognize that they are now in more danger then at any other time in history?
I wonder when we will declare WWIII begins? Before, during or after the regional war of the middle east spills over into Israel?
I wonder how many new recruits for the Sunni Al Qaeda was recruited tonight?
I mainly wonder how long it will take for the President and his Administration to figure out that you can't conduct a war without access to oil?
Well at least the military industrial complex is flush with shiny new cash--oops the dollar is sinking in value?
God be with us all because the "turning point" really just begun and the world is truly at war.
Methinks we cut off our nose to spite our face.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
each of your questions will be answered in an orderly, fact-filled and insightful manner.
However, if your questions were purely rhetorical, which I suspect that they were, I'm almost certain your time spent here will bear no fruit.
***
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
how the internet apparently magnifies idiocy beyond those levels previously thought humanly (or even virus-ly) possible.
The idea that the execution of this execrable tyrant will push our enemies over some brink to trigger all of these terrible events is [actually indescribable]. I don't get it: empowered and inflamed by the execution of Saddam Hussein, terrorists will be able to accomplish now what they’ve not been able to accomplish before?
The idea that this execution will empower our enemies is laughable. What, somewhere in the world even now someone is thinking "Oh, they've done it now, they've killed Saddam, now surely I must join/finance/supply the terrorists and destroy America--whereas before this I simply wasn't sufficiently motivated."
The idea that this execution will inflame our enemies is beyond laughable. Seriously, I'm having trouble replying not because this is a difficult rebuttal, but because of the sheer incomprehensibility of the concept that now that Saddam has been executed--the occurrence of which has been inevitable for years--now, we've made them really angry? Perhaps they were only mildly peeved before?
And if this won’t empower or inflame our enemies—beyond their current levels of power and passion—how can you possibly believe that we will fall over this horrendous brink you’ve so presciently portrayed?
But let's risk sanity for a moment and assume that each of the horribles in this parade comes to pass. Every one of them. Even so there is no reason to refrain from this execution.
If this is a turning point, it is a welcome one. Let all the forces of evil unveil—the fight will be inestimably easier for the United States and all allies.
In other words, "Bring it on." President Bush has said he wishes he could take that one back.
Do you think that the guys in the ski masks chanting "Moktada! Moktada! Moktada!" represent the forces of good? Maybe, just maybe, this is not a fight we need to be in the middle of.
...you cut off your head to spite your guts, and now we have another headless horseman of the aKosalypse galloping blindly through Wonderland.
I won't shed a tear over Saddam's hanging - but it won't accomplish anything. It's only retribution - not justice. I guess it will give a sense of temporary glee to some people with empty lives.
"... but it won't accomplish anything. It's only retribution - not justice."
Saddam was executed according to Iraqi law following a prescribed judicial-appeals process, which was authorized by the Iraqi people at the ballot box and codified in the newly-adopted Iraqi constitution.
Seems to me, much has already been accomplished.
***
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
But nothing will be accomplished by the hanging - not even satisfaction of the desire for retribution among those who harbor it. That sort of desire can't be satiated.
but then again, your opinion matters little on this issue.
something was accomplished by the hanging, one less monster on the earth...period.
oh, and that whole thing about the Iraqis handing out justice for themselves thing...but that means nothing...right?
... but if we really thought so, we wouldn't bother having blogs & comments sections.
One less toothless monster on the earth. Hard to get excited about that. Monsters are a bad thing to have on earth because they have the power to do harm. Remove their power to do harm, and they are ... harmless.
It is good if Iraqis are able to secure justice on their own behalf (it isn't a commodity that can be "handed out"). If they chose to impose a sentence of 2 hours of aerobics per day, it would not accomplish anything. The fact that it would not accomplish anything would not change the fact that it would be good for the Iraqis to secure justice on their own behalf. I'm saying this because I want to avoid rabbit trails. I will shed no tears for Saddam, and in a world where dumb or useless things are very common, the execution of Saddam rates very low on the list of concerns. I posted my original comment because I think it's worth *pointing out* that execution is - even in the very "best" cases - pointless. I'd rather not argue about whether the Iraqis are better off empowered or unempowered. Of course they are better off empowered, all else being equal. That's a separate question.
If they could have held out that hope, they are delusional enough that they can find another figment to cling to. I don't think removal of a false hope is necessarily a "setback".
trials in which most of the defense attorneys get assassinated, the execution is carried out without the signatures of the president and vice-presidents (in violation of the nation's constitution) and on a sacred holiday (in violation of the nation's constitution) by militiamen chanting the name of their bloodthirsty sectarian leader, don't give me the most complete feeling of justice.
because some of his thugs managed to commit more murders? Saddam was hanged the day BEFORE the sacred hiliday. Saddam was tried, convicted and executed according to Iraqi law.
Please check your KOS talking points before posting them here.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
As the drunk has a poor definition of dinner, so the retributionist has a poor definition of justice.
As for you - your meaning can be taken more than one way. Saddam's death was not an unjust result for him. If that is what you mean, I agree with you. If you mean that killing him created justice, I would ask how. If you mean that retribution against him created justice in and of itself, then I would remind you that a drunk thinks a fifth of Jack is dinner.
Why do I get the feeling you're using the lefty "Social Justice" definition of justice here? How does any punishment CREATE justice?
--
Run like Reagan!
By preventing wrong results, by creating right results, or by undoing harm. Punishment for the sake of punishment has nothing to do with justice.
An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth. Saddam has fallen short he paid with only one life when he owed hundreds of thousands.
Get serious. The Iraqi people are entitled to exact justice, retribution if you prefer, for the crimes this man committed against them.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
... and what will create a just result, are not necessarily the same thing.
It isn't a matter of what I prefer. I have heard two categories of justification for execution here: 1) fantasies about how it will remove fears of some Iraqis and hopes of others over whether Saddam will return to power. 2) retribution.
1) those fears and hopes were effectively neutralized when Saddam was removed from his spiderhole.
2) Fine - but it isn't justice.
let me guess, you think Clinton's "it depends on what the definition of 'is' is" was clever.
You know it is possible to overthink a situation.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
I'm making a serious point about the death penalty.
When you have reached the point that further thinking is "overthinking" go ahead & stop thinking. But that might also be a nice time to quit talking, too.
which consists of utter sophistry. You are arguing about the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin. In the eyes of the Iraqis they have achieved justice: they have punished a monster who cimmitted almost unspeakable acts on the Iraqi; they have written --30-- to a terrible chapter in their history. They have placed a stake in the ground and they now have the opportunity to move forward.
In the eyes of the Iraqis they have achieved justice: and that is all that matters.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
you are really the only one I've heard from that wants to debate the death penalty, ...now! This is about one man, his crimes, and what his execution means.
others here have admitted to being against the death penalty, but have seen value in it's use FOR THIS INSTANCE.
find another place if you want to assume the soap box to discuss the DP as a separate issue...geeeeez
I will debate the death penalty pretty much any time it comes up. At least, I will offer my thoughts on it - if that sparks a debate, I will tend to follow through. This is an opportunity to talk about what good it does in the "best case" - where there are the least number of objections about what harm it might cause.
Since I posted, a two other ideas about how it might work have come out - "closure" for victims, deterrence. I won't comment much on the "closure" theory right now, because it is rather vague and difficult to quantify. Suffice it to say that I do not subscribe to that theory.
Deterrence - that's pretty much a dead issue. There has never been any evidence that the death penalty deters anyone, while there has been a fair amount of evidence to the contrary of that theory.
The serious point I am making is that - even in its best case - the death penalty serves no purpose. When we come out of Iraq and back to our own homes, we find gross potential for injustice from the death penalty. Weighing that potential for injustice against the vanishingly small potential for justice should inform our decisions strongly against the death penalty.
Wrong.
I don't care about deterrence --- it probably doesn't; or closure or any of the other psychobabble that floods our lives today.
What it does accomplish is that it removes from the scene someone who has broken the social contract. The executee will never ever kill again.
I suppose you also believe that old standby cr*pola that "war never solved anything" too. Or the ever popular "we have to behave better than the bad guys or we become just as bad" shiboleth.
John
----------
Why would God create something like whiskey? To keep the Irish from ruling the world of course.
I don't read the LA papers every day, but I don't think Tookie Williams has murdered anyone lately.
With respect to people involved in terrorism, you might be interested to know that the Blink Sheik - who we chose not to execute - has been used to incite terrorism since his incarceration. Same for murderers in jail in Israel.
The only unfortunate thing about Saddam's execution is that he was not drawn and quartered.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
Anti death penalty people always ignore the fact that there are victims and survivors. It does not figure into your universe that these people have to live with the fact that their loved ones are gone often in horrible ways.
Deterrence not effective ? What you are saying is that seeing justice done visibly does not promote a more orderly and lawful society. Yes I have read the studies, if you narrow your window and exclude enough data you can prove anything, look at the global warming people.
Not Serving a purpose. Well you rule out closure without anything to back up your position.
You use flawed studies to rule out deterrence. I will reiterate if you set out to prove something thats arguable it can usually be accomplished.
And then you for the sake of it you define justice in a manner that makes no sense. By your standard of justice should we imprison burglars, rapists, child molesters ? I mean we know there is little chance of rehabilitating them ? If there is little chance of redemption and there is a chance of injustice why should we prosecute anyone ?
Its justice. If your daughter was raped by him or his sons, had dogs sicked on her and then fed while still alive into a chipper shredder Its justice.
If It makes one of the relatives of the victims feel better, sleep a little more soundly or just not wake in the middle of the night angry tearful and frustrated its justice.
Letting him live would be the greatest injustice imaginable.
Malaga, what is your experience that you can decide for millions of Iraqis how to feel? Telling them not to fear Saddam even after he was captured?
I wouldn't wish you the walk in their shoes for a minute in order to take their feelings of fear more seriously. But givem a break, eh?
If you always find yourself arguing the exceptions rather than the rule you just might be rapidly sliding down your own slippery slope to irrelevance. -CommonCents
...when deposed despots need only fear a lengthy show trial, followed by a posh exile in Paris and a book deal.
Does the death penalty provide a benefit?
If there is an effective way to vanquish such fears, what makes you so sure that execution rather than imprisonment or exile will serve that purpose? I've seen no evidence that such is the case, though I do agree with you that those fears should be vanquished where possible.
It lets decent men know that justice will be done. It lets society know that we aspire to the good. It serves to show all the members of society that the state will undertake the most offensive of tasks in the pursuit of the fair and correct.
The most important thing that any society can posses is the certainty the guilty will be punished. Honesty and integrity cease to be personal virtues and become public goods with this, without it life becomes what you can get away with.
I already see far too many people that think life is about what they can get away with mostly because justice is not what it once was.
Theres far too many oppressed people in the world that have no hope. Saddams execution by his own people will be a spark of hope for them. They will know it is possible to throw off their shackles and bring justice to true tyrants.
For the tyrants, they will be reminded that they can be brought to task. Perhaps the next time one is given an ultimatum they will think a little more seriously about it.
Having received legal authorization, it was wise for the Iraqi government to put Saddam to death earlier rather than later. Delay would have been viewed as evidence of weakness/ambivalence that would only have encouraged Saddam's supporters to ramped up opposition to his execution from Europe, the UN, more legal motions, etc., making it increasingly more politically difficult for the execution to proceed. Unlike to many of us in the West, the Iraqis know to strike while the iron is hot.
On the other hand, given the Jerry Springer Show nature of Saddam's first trial, it's doubtful that would have worked out.
Good riddance.
The Academy is open.
The death penalty is to get rid of sick monsters like this. I firmly believe that our world will be a better place now that he is gone.
Cool. Personally I didn't think they had the 'nads to do it.
The only downside is Ramsey Clark wasn't swinging next to him.
"Don't forgot what we did"...Ozzie Guillen
What I've seen in this post and related comments is basically: We're glad Saddam is dying and we should have killed him when we found him without a trial.
Can any of you really wonder why some people see conservatives as close-minded, gun-toting, death-penalty-loving, heartless jerks?
Wearer of Muppetskin and Bearer of No-Nonsense
"Can any of you really wonder why some people see conservatives as close-minded, gun-toting, death-penalty-loving, heartless jerks?"
Can you really wonder why some people stereotype liberals as soft-headed, feeling-not-thinking fools who are so "non-judgmental" and "tolerant" that they are unable to make a value judgment, even when they are staring at pure evil in the face?
You know, it is *just* possible to be conservative and NOT take pleasure in an execution. Hard to believe, I know, but true.
Wearer of Muppetskin and Bearer of No-Nonsense
This is the Mystic and Antient Society of the No Neils!
But you already have Neil Stevens!
Well duh! It's the No NeilSSSSS! We're allowed one!
--
Run like Reagan!
but your pleasure in unleashing stereotypical epithets at conservatives who disagree is unseemly and belies you.
BTW, which muppet's skin do you wear? Or is it a "Silence of the Lambs" kind of patchwork?
...I'm criticizing some of those I've seen in this thread. It's a cartoon conservatism, not a real one. Can't you see that the response to my original post confirms this? I point out that delighting in death - anyone's death - is a stereotypical conservative reaction, and the response is "Dirty liberal!", which plays even more strongly towards that stereotype. Kinda proves my original point. Tarzan say stereotypes bad.
Personally, I don't think one must be liberal to NOT take pleasure in death, even when that death is meted out to a man who dealt death far too freely. I also don't think that to be conservative is to be pro-death-penalty. Conservatives have all kinds of opinions on the death penalty. Like most people.
Oh, and in regards to muppetskin: Grover. Kermit doesn't have fur, Fozzie is orange, and I wouldn't dream of skinning Cookie Monster. He is the man!
Wearer of Muppetskin and Bearer of No-Nonsense
That liberals don't actually take joy in the misery of those they dislike.
After that, you can try for liberals are actually tolerant of ideas other than their own, they believe in a market place of ideas and that they believe in racial equality even though some while equal need a lot of help.
I'm not criticizing conservatives in general, or praising liberals in general. People of all stripes take pleasure where they shouldn't, and are intolerant, and so forth. MediaGirl.org is a great example of liberal bigotry, for example.
All's I'm saying is that some of the comments I've heard in these comments really play to the conservative stereotype. Personally, I don't see anything conservative about being pleased at the death of another human being, but judging from a few of the responses maybe I need to be a bit more closeminded about that.
Wearer of Muppetskin and Bearer of No-Nonsense
Conservatives support due process and the rule of law. The trial of Saddam skirted close to the edge of that; the freakshow of his execution had nothing about it that a true conservative could approve, let alone take joy in.
Saddam was one of history's true monsters. Nonetheless, we are not going to derive much joy from the band of fundamentalist Shiite thugs into whose hands we have delivered the nation of Iraq.
...the death of a deadly hated foe. Just ask Kos about the Blackwater contractors. If you are worried that celebrating the execution of Saddam reinforces ignorant stereotyping of conservatives, don't celebrate. And tell that cute Leftie gal at the party tonight that the execution was regrettable and you question the timing. That should get you a phone number, at least.
Nobody called you a liberal, much less a "dirty liberal". If you reread the supposed offending comment, you'll find that I didn't call you anything.
Now, granted, I assumed you were a liberal. To me that's quite reasonable, considering the pejorative phrase "close-minded (sic), gun-toting, death-penalty-loving, heartless jerks?"
So what's wrong with toting a gun? Really?
Personally, I'm not celebrating Saddam's death. It's not the end of anything, as was V-J Day, for example. If others want to celebrate it as a significant milestone in the War on Terror, I understand.
For the type of liberal I described as "soft-headed, feeling-not-thinking fools who are so 'non-judgmental' and 'tolerant' that they are unable to make a value judgment, even when they are staring at pure evil in the face?": who gives a crap what they think? These people think it was a bit harsh to confine Saddam in a cell that had really bad Feng Shui.
Just for the record, one can be thoughtfully pro-death penalty without being "death-penalty-loving". In this case, the primary purpose it serves is guaranteeing this genocidal beast can never regain power. Since the Left is intent on taking away the really secure ratholes we could have thrown him down, I guess the necktie party will have to do.
So, no, we don't all relish it, but like a lot of the unpleasant tasks in this life, sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. Saddam's fate was a just one.
And, BTW, I don't own a gun.
death-penalty loving, heartless jerk, AND a certified member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, your signature line does not relate to your post.
Your post is 100% nonsense.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
reminds me of the Muslims dancing in the streets following 9-11. The behavior is overtly uncivilized in both cases.
Recall what it looked like to us when Muslims were cheering 9-11. Yes, I know it's not the same thing when innocent civilians are killed by the thousands, compared to a brutal dictator executed for crimes against humanity. However, the public merriment in both cases is repulsive.
While I'm sticking my neck out around here--I think the hanging noose cartoon in the RS headline is juvenile and downright tacky.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
got kicked out of Afghanistan, sometimes the enemy of your enemy is not your friend. The one great beneficiary of our work in Iraq is Iran.
how about this one from Flopping Aces?
They've also got a cool video and some other neat stuff.
Thanks for dropping by.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
You will have to help me out here. How does people celebrating the death of 3,000 innocent civilians compare to celebrating the end of a psychopathic dictator who mercilessly killed and maimed ten of thousands? As I watched my friends and neighbors jump out a 100 story building rather than burn to death, I assure you my thoughts did not come close to celebratory.
We can be vexed and discuss all day merits of the death penalty. But please try not to be so ridiculous. It makes people think your opines are sophomoric.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
[b]the protests against us "imposing" our values on others?[/b] This is what they do over there. Frankly, if we did things like that with our convincted murderers and mass-murderers over here, we'd have less of that going on. Ther more I hear it from these Lefties, the more I think that they would rather see people crushed under the heel of a tyrant like Saddam Hussein (why, I can't quite comprehend... maybe it gives them a sense of power over us "common" folk).
--
"Straight Talk Express"? My bum feet! -- Me, on Senator McCain and other "moderates"
are the atrocities committed against the people of Kuwait also part of the indictments against SH?
I think he was terribly brutal to them when he invaded.