What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
167 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+65Bin Laden?
You mean the old guy on dialysis that bush never had any intention on finding? - thepompano, on 10/12/2007, -6/+60@Rtaylor32
How about maybe reading the article and refuting the points it makes rather than dismissing it as "liberal drivel"? I'd love to hear your point, but you're not making one. - Fascist, on 10/12/2007, -4/+58Watch the documentary: Why We Fight. Among other things, it describes the ties between Saddam and the United States.
It'll turn on the light in the dark room most of the people call reality. - Sublime059, on 10/12/2007, -22/+66Do you get off by making quotes that sound like stuff Ann Coulter says or something?
Its very creepy. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+47[quote]America is always responsible for death and destruction.[/quote]
The correct statement is: America is often responsible for death and destruction.
We know Saddam was a bad guy, but who put him in power? Who gave him weapons to fight Iran and then commit genocide against the Shiites and Kurds?
Saddam was backed by the US, just like Bin Laden against the USSR. It was a deal with the devil.
Now Bush Jr is doing cleanup for the mess that Bush-Reagan created. Don't you think he should stop lying to our troops at least? They ought to know why they're really there, so they stop blaming innocent Iraqis for their problems. - sovereign3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+36Like it or not, Saddam Hussein was a creation of the United States.
Back in the 80s Saddam was our boy. When his Baathist regime took control of Iraq, we supported his regime. Saddam went to war with Iran at our behest. We even sent military planners (including Rumsfeld among others) to help plan his campaign against Iran. When talk of using chemical weapons started floating around, we not only neglected to discourage this, we provided the technical know-how along with the actual technology. Indeed there were WMDs in Iraq, and we provided them. The almost decade war that Saddam fought for us to eliminate the new Islamic theocracy that was led by a student revolution proved ultimately to be a stalemate. Hundreds of thousands died on both sides, and many died from sarin and mustard gas that nobody (including the US) condemned the use of.
It was until the early 90s till Saddam fell out of favor with us. Saddam was well-feared in the region. If he didn't actually nuclear weapons, everyone in the region (and world for that matter) believed he had them or was close to acquiring them. He held ultimate power in Iraq. No one dared challenged him. He even had the most powerful military in the region. Such hubris lead to what would ultimately lead to his demise when he decided to invade Kuwait. He claimed that Kuwait was "a part of Iraq." He wanted to control their oil resources because Kuwait was selling their oil at less than market value. Iraq was in the process of rebuilding and desperately needed oil revenue. He therefore invaded Kuwait to control its oil supply and boost his revenue. Big mistake. Kuwait was a generally neutral and peaceful country with powerful allies who valued its oil resources. Long story short, Gulf War I began shortly thereafter and Saddam was swiftly defeated.
In all frankness, Saddam's reign should have ended then. We did not (and this is a huge mistake) capture or kill Saddam and failed to depose his regime. We even encouraged Iraqis to do so; especially the Kurds in the north and Shias in and around the capital who were vehemently opposed to his regime. Despite our promise to assist the rebellion, we did not and Saddam crushed the insurgency and remained in power.
It's plain to see we were quite complicit in the brutal and despotic regime of Saddam Hussein. However, he is hanged after a trial that wasn't completely legitimate. He wasn't even convicted of his notoriously well-known gassing of the Kurds in Halabja. The reason is obvious. Had the trial been allowed to continue, especially in a neutral country, the United States' complicity in Saddam's regime would have been exposed and the entire premise of the war would have been completely compromised.
That, is realpolitiks. - captainsodium, on 10/12/2007, -4/+37What is so hard about understanding that actions have consequences, including those of the United States Government?
What is the virtue in ignoring or marginalizing those consequences?
Rightwingnutjobs. Country before party. - smpx, on 10/12/2007, -9/+39Yes, the United States government has committed war crimes. We have contributed to brutality beyond what we're willing to face, and worst of all, we have hypocritically pointed out the faults of others (and punished them for it in name of justice) while contributing to the very faults we point out in others.
And yes, it was out of greed that we committed all this. Greed for money, greed for power, greed for legacy, we don't need it but yet we desire it. That is our motivation. Agree or disagree, digg proudly up or arrogantly down, stand critically left or emotionally right, this is fundamental truth that cannot be denied. We, as a collective, as a nation-state, have committed wrong.
Symbolic this takes place hours before the dawn of a new year, keep our wrongs in mind so that we may embark on the right, our conscious will not be wiped clean simply because 2006 turns 2007, but that in 2007 we must take the power to do something about it.
Enough of this bs. Let's go change the world. - michaeltime, on 10/12/2007, -2/+31He was a mass murderer funded, supported and given the green light by Reagans government!!
- mjoshi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31Very well mentioned title. It is same case with Osama also when CIA invested in him and his thugs to fight against Russia without understanding fact that it is like riding a tiger, once you get on it you cannot get down. I'd say watch couple of documentaries withing short duration and you will get bigger picture behind what is happening around in world and one might be able to connect dots.
Why we Fight
Inconvenient Truth
Who killed Electric Car
Fast food nation
Dark side of Chenney
Fog of war.
watch all of above and you will learn more than what US media is pouring into your drawing rooms thru 24x7 so called news channels. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+38not really, but in this case they really did help by funding them. It's not so much America, as it is the CIA. Bush and Hitler are nothing compared to Henry Kissinger - he's just pure evil.
http://www.simpsonspark.com/images/whitepages/hussein_saddam.jpg - chase001, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25Democracy is chosen or fought for, not forced at gunpoint. Forcing it makes it decidedly undemocratic.
- fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26"Bin Laden? You mean the old guy on dialysis that bush never had any intention on finding?"
Mark my words: before the next election Fox News will be calling him 'Obama bin Laden' - smpx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21@speedy
Changing the world doesn't equal changing regimes, and certainly doesn't equal changing other countries....
How about starting by changing the way our government makes decisions? - directedition, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22Um, hate to break it to the poster, but he actually was a mass murderer.
That said, the war in Iraq has killed a magnitude more people in the last three years than Saddam did during his lifetime. - Decimit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Is it so hard to believe that the US would put someone in power like this? We have done it several times before. This is not the first time it has backfired either, and it probably won't be the last time.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Saddam, Bin Laden, Pinochet, Noriega... the list goes on.
But just look at how much of this leads back to one man: George HW Bush. - 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -13/+29kind of like that other guy
wait what's his name again
Bin Laden ... - chase001, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Does this mean he won't go on trial for gases the Kurds with the chemicals Rumsfeld sold him?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Don't forget to add 'Outfoxed' to that list of essential viewing!!
- Eggzb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15The people that throw around the phrase "tin-foil hat" are ***** blind to the world. They are too trusting of the people that control populations.
I'm sorry but governments are corrupt and conspiracies do happen. If you cant except those to basic facts then you most likely believe that WMDs are still hid in Iraq.
Not that most of the films he listed have any thing to do with conspiracies BTW. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Why do you think he was killed so quickly!!
The US govt doesn't want any more getting out that already has, and the rummy/sadam thing would open up a lot of dark closets with skeletons in them that bush and co are desperately trying to keep closed! - reugeneg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Yeah, reality definitely has a well-known liberal bias...
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12James Brown, Gerald Ford and Saddam Hussein walk into a bar.
The bartender says, "What can I get you three fellows to drink?"
James Brown says, "Get me something strong to drown my sorrows. I spent my life making great music and entertaining people, and my death gets upstaged by the death of a guy who pardoned a crook."
Gerald Ford says, "Get me something strong too. I helped heal the nation during a difficult time and tried my best to put the ugly past of Vietnam behind us. And yet, my death gets upstaged by the death of a tyrannical, mass-murdering, greedy dictator whose life was spent in a mindless grab for power."
Saddam says, "Dick Cheney died?" - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"Yes, lefties, evil people don't need us to be evil. Lay off the kool aid."
Yes, they're evil with or without our help. But they're a lot bigger pain in the ass when we give them money, weapons, training, and support. From helping to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran, to supporting Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, to supporting Saddam Hussein, we don't have a very good track record in the Middle East. Now we're largely ignoring Afghanistan and it will likely fall back into chaos, and Iraq is in an all out civil war that will likely lead to Iran having much more influence in the region.
I wish we would learn to stay the hell out of the Middle East. - ByteGuerilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10The easiest way for a government to get a populace behind it is to tell them they're being attacked. This is why the politics of fear is used so much - it works, whether your government is democratic, or totalitarian. Goering said the exact same thing at the Nuremburg trials. I'm putting what he said right alongside 1984 as things that should have been taken as warnings but instead were forgot and used as manuals by those who would subvert liberty in the interests of personal profit. The small outset to setup a bogeyman is negligible compared to the money gleaned through defence contracts to 'protect' the nation from such threats.
- ptrcd003, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12No.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Are you saying that American is NEVER responsible for death and destruction? That America has NEVER in its ENTIRE history, been wrong on ANYTHING? Learning from your mistakes is what makes you grow and improve into a better person. The same ideal works for a country. Conservatives aren't interested in that are they? They're always right, and when they're wrong, a few payoffs and a re-write of history will fix everything.
"Those who won't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."
"Now Bush Jr is doing cleanup for the mess that Bush-Reagan created. Don't you think he should stop lying to our troops at least? They ought to know why they're really there, so they stop blaming innocent Iraqis for their problems."
and what a bang-up job he's doing! - fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Turn that light off immediately! No one actually wants to see!
- r©ain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Ohhh come on now!
The US has a glorious history of getting bitten in the ass by the puppet dictators it sets up and then executing them. Here's a list of some of our partners in democracy: http://www.omnicenter.org/warpeacecollection/dictators.htm
Sucks that they removed Hussein from the list, we did support him for a good while before not supporting him. And being that Noriega is still on the list, it seems Saddam should be there as well, I mean he was such a near and dear friend when we needed someone to help bomb the hell out of Iran for us in the 80's. Poor Saddam, if he'd just kept gassing little Iranian and Kurdish babies instead of invading Kuwait, we'd all still be friends. - polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Kriskzoo...go back to eating cheetos and watching television........
- m1th, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Original article here: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2112555.ece
May I also suggest reading this too. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2114403.ece - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I love that everyone talks about We want Iraq to be a "democracy", spread "democracy", blah blah blah, The USA is NOT a "democracy", it is a "Federal Republic" that has a "Representative Democracy" which is entirely different than a "democracy"
- physphd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8And please read your history to find out WHY the embassy was stormed. Were we, maybe, supporting a brutal regime that we had helped install and they were sick of it?
- kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Right. While you're at it, why not ask the 650,000 dead Iraqi civillians if we did a good job with the invasion and occupation. I'm sure they'd all say "Mission Accomplished..."
- Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12"America is always responsible for death and destruction"
The correct statement is "GOVERNMENT is always responsible for death and destruction."
Whether it's the U.S., the Iraqi, the Soviets, etc. - BESTenemy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Most people find darkness comforting. They choose to keep the light off. They're not stupid, just ignorant, deliberately ignorant.
- BillDoor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"The Americans will always do the right thing . . . after they've exhausted all the alternatives.” Sir Winston Churchill
- ripe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Anyone watch the execution video and see what the Iraqis executing him were chanting? They chanted Muqtada! As in Muqtada al-Sadr. Naomi Klein, writing in the Nation, has called al-Sadr and his supporters "the single greatest threat to U.S. military and economic control of Iraq." Sadr is the new Saddam and he is likely going to be much worse and harder to control than Saddam ever was. It's only going to get worse in Iraq. I'm no supporter of Saddam, but the U.S. should have found him not guilty and reinstated him as dictator of Iraq. I'm sure with the cost we've spent on this war ( http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182 ), we could have easily made Saddam our puppet. At least then the region would be stable and my friends wouldn't be dying over there right now. Saddam deserved everything that happened to him, but he was not any real threat to the U.S. and we really made a mess of our own country and theirs by removing him.
- thomasprebble, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Well its not like you have MUCH to be proud or patriotic about after everything thats happened in recent memory having SOMETHING to do with the US Government. And by the way YOU ARE the US Government, I know 2000 was a *****-up and electronic voting is a mess but if you WANT liberty, you'd overthrow your government today!
- Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah @5280becca like the U.S. is going to let an unapproved tyrant take power in the Middle-East.
- Johnpaine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7People need to stop fighting and strive to make better this world of which we are all human....to invent things...educate youth, and help move our world forward in technology. Who gives a rats ass if anyone remembers this 50 years for now? Concentrate on where we are now, and what can be done to positivity effect the future.
- ejpusa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Quick survey among friends:
If Saddam had held the price of refined gasoline a dollar below everyone else would we have hung him? Results to date: 100% say NO. Ask your friends, take the survey. and so it goes . . . - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6And The Power of nightmares
- 60days, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The link goes back even further, to 1959 (iirc) when he was part of a CIA-approved team sent to assassinate the leader of Iraq. It was bungled and I think he ended up getting shot by one of the other assassins, but it was the first time he appeared on the US's radar (and was described as having 'no class' and being and 'a thug').
There was a great UK satire on the history of Iraq and the west, including the 4/5 separate invasions this century and the similarities between the politicians hopes and the eventual realities. It was called 'between iraq and a hard place' and is worth tracking down.
EDIT: its on google video - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1489095819211128615&q=%22between+iraq+and+a+hard+place%22 begins a bit slow, but picks up after 10 mins or so. - ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The film is here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4924034461280278026&q - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I wish the article had been more detailed about how the US government supported and supplied Saddam. There was substantial help from the CIA, in getting Saddam into power. There was also substantial help when Iraq was at war with Iran, in the forms of weapons, and knowledge. We really did set Saddam up, just to turn around and knock him down again.
- Ajajadude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's really disturbing how we build up and fund people like Hussein and bin Laden and once they've become a nuisance or unwanted by our government, they're left on their own until they become a thorn in our side. I just wish that our government could step up and say so-and-so was our fault and we need(ed) to take them out.
Saddam may be evil, but would he have done the things he did if we didn't push him along at first? Not to say we made him this way, but we gave him too much leeway in the beginning and it bit us in the ass. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7No.
http://digg.com/world_news/Will_Bush_Be_Lynched_For_Warcrimes_Too
And seriously, think about what you're saying sometime, because comments like that aren't helping anyone. - sovereign3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You shouldn't digg him down. He's not inaccurate.
I think however, that they were chanting for the other Sadr. Or Muqtada al-Sadr's father, Mohammad Mohammad Sadeq al-Sadr. It is believed Hussein had him assassinated because he was an emerging political threat.
This is the reality of the Iraq we have created. We have eliminated the primarily Baathist Sunni Arab regime only to roll the red carpet for a Shiite controlled regime that will have close ties to our nemesis Iran. It is only inevitable that Iraq will become a Shiite controlled government. This is the reason the Sunnis are engaged in a sectarian struggle against their counterparts because they fear a largely Shiite government that might seek reprisals against their former oppressors.
This has implications for the entire region. In practice there is no Arab Shiite led government in the region (Iran is Persian and does not identify with Arabs). To the Sunnis, Shi'as are heretics. If Iraq ultimately becomes a Shiite-led theocarcy a la Iran, it could embroil the entire region in a sectarian clash. -
Show 51 - 100 of 167 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 