I hate Bush and politics of the USA

PB · Post by PB » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:28 am

> the usa and bush politics dont have the right to kill this person! If so, the
> USA is nothing better as saddam

I see... so you think putting Saddam to death is the same thing as him slaying
148 innocent Shiite men and boys, not to mention countless others? If you can't
see the difference, then I feel sorry for you.

LuCiFeR[SD] · Post by **LuCiFeR[SD]** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:29 am

Having fought in the first Gulf war back in 1991, when I was in the royal signal corps and proud to have defended the Kuwait people from such an EVIL man as Saddam Hussein... I am not sorry he is dead, but the whole gulf war part II is a joke! I know for a fact I would have refused to go over there if I had been ordered to this time around. And although that would have meant prison for me, I would not loose any sleep over it.

Trouble is, The present President Bush is trying to finish what his father started, and has made a big horrible mess of it all.

Sadam could have been removed from power 15 years ago! Hell, the SAS were ordered to "stand down" with Sadam in their gun sights, for whatever political reason... and at least then, it would have been justified for the trigger to be pulled. But hell, what do I know, I'm drunk on a new years eve. Replying to some random interesting post on a forum I visit

.

I mean no offense or nothing, Just venting some steam.

Happy new year to everyone.

Regards, Ash.

Nik · Post by **Nik** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:37 am

Aren't those wars prove enough for rthe USA playing world police.

PB · Post by PB » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:43 am

Somebody's gotta play world police... so choose: Iraq or the USA?

LuCiFeR[SD] · Post by **LuCiFeR[SD]** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:43 am

Nik wrote:Aren't those wars prove enough for rthe USA playing world police.

The first war was a "good" war, ok, ok, I know all wars are bad, but I was happy to fight to defend a country being attacked. This current war is bad, and so bad that it makes this so called "civilised" western world look like the evil aggressors.

It's a shame that the American public voted for Bush, but hell, it's easy to say that when the shit has already hit the fan eh?
but what can I say... I voted for Tony Blair... gah! Hindsight is a brilliant thing

va!n · Post by **va!n** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:46 am

@PB:
What i mean... in general nobody has the right to kill another. What sadam did really suxx... but does the hanging of sadam solve the problem? I dont think so... If you agree the hanging of sadam then I feel sorry for you.

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:54 am

Europe has a BIG problem now: its Constitution laws don't include the Euthanasic Sentence (or whatever you want call).
And i get very angry every time i ear about human rights, human lefts, or stupids like that. Thus i will try to not enter anymore in this thread.

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:03 am

PB wrote:> the usa and bush politics dont have the right to kill this person! If so, the
> USA is nothing better as saddam

I see... so you think putting Saddam to death is the same thing as him slaying
148 innocent Shiite men and boys, not to mention countless others? If you can't
see the difference, then I feel sorry for you.

What difference between killing a human and killing a human?

PB · Post by PB » Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:06 am

> does the hanging of sadam solve the problem?

It stops Saddam murdering again (if given the chance) which was the point.

> What difference between killing a human and killing a human?

Saddam murdered. His death penalty was not murder, but punishment.
An ultimate punishment, but definitely not the same thing as murder.

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:14 am

Trond wrote:What difference between killing a human and killing a human?

Please allow me my answer:
That concept (idea) is very extended, but it is completely wrong.
The correct idea is to understand that the second case is not supposely a human killing a human, but an aproved human laws carried out.
(However I support an included law of "Euthanasic Sentence" instead of "Death penalty" for extreme people like Saddam for example).

LuCiFeR[SD] · Post by **LuCiFeR[SD]** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:07 am

va!n wrote:@PB:
What i mean... in general nobody has the right to kill another. What sadam did really suxx... but does the hanging of sadam solve the problem? I dont think so... If you agree the hanging of sadam then I feel sorry for you.

Sorry va!n, I have to defend PB on this point. Sadam was a murdering SOB. The hanging of him was too easy. If it had been up to me, I would have put Sadam in with death row prisoners to use as they saw fit. So if he died (tomorrow/yesterday/twenty years from now) by being somebody bitch (eg. being arse raped/buggered to death), then he would have deserved it.

I may not agree with the reasons for the second gulf war, but the goal I do agree with. Sorry if that upsets you, but unless you lived through/saw what that guy was capable of... (sorry, I know this sounds horrible) but you have no rights to say what is wrong or right. I know the bible kinda says "an eye for an eye is ultimately wrong", but in the case of humans like sadam and hitler before him, they deserve the wrath of man and god! (again sorry if it offends)

Killswitch · Post by **Killswitch** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:14 am

know the bible kinda says "an eye for an eye is ultimately wrong",

Well...

That all depends on which part of the Bible you read, and which you actually pay any attention to. In the Old Testament it says the idea of taking an eye for an eye is wright, however the New Testament includes a passage where Jesus talks about the turn the other cheek mantra.

Just goes to show that justifiying anything from the Bible is idiotic, as a lot of the time there's already some evidence for the reverse view.

GeoTrail · Post by **GeoTrail** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:21 am

The US had nothing to do with the death sentence and the fulfillment of the sentence. He was sentenced in an Iraqi court and sentence carried out there after!!

LuCiFeR[SD] · Post by **LuCiFeR[SD]** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:36 am

Killswitch wrote:
know the bible kinda says "an eye for an eye is ultimately wrong",
Well...

That all depends on which part of the Bible you read, and which you actually pay any attention to. In the Old Testament it says the idea of taking an eye for an eye is wright, however the New Testament includes a passage where Jesus talks about the turn the other cheek mantra.

Just goes to show that justifying anything from the Bible is idiotic, as a lot of the time there's already some evidence for the reverse view.

Fair comment

I'm no authority on all things biblical. I was just using it as an example to show I am trying to remain as unofensive as possible. I am not out to offend people, I'm am just trying to say that unless you were there with missiles with unkown payload exploding near you and ultimately not knowing if it was carying a radioactive/explosive or chemical payload... how would you feel?

it's just so easy for people to say Sadam has been murdered by <insert country here>... but again, what do I know? I'm just a drunk englishman

PB · Post by PB » Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:41 am

> The US had nothing to do with the death sentence and the fulfillment of the
> sentence. He was sentenced in an Iraqi court and sentence carried out
> there after!!

Yes, Vain needs to realise that before starting these political posts and getting
us all fired up.

I should've ignored this thread, but I couldn't help myself.

PureBasic Forums - English

I hate Bush and politics of the USA

Re: I hate Bush and politics of the USA

Re: I hate Bush and politics of the USA

Re: I hate Bush and politics of the USA

Re: I hate Bush and politics of the USA