Saddam Hussein Execution

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<And we were willing to overlook his "transgressions" and abuses of his own people at that time. So it's more than a bit disingenuous for us to then condemn him for the same offenses - twenty years later. We didn't seem to mind before, but now we do.>

You're revising history again.

 

Originally Posted By SuperDry

<<< You're revising history again. >>>

And we're left to wonder once again what part is allegedly wrong. By not pointing out the specific part that's wrong, it conveniently removes the possibility of such an accusation being shown to be incorrect.

 

Originally Posted By SuperDry

<<< I don't even have to be sorry cause the things I did were BAD, I just have to be "sorry" because hell is scary.

I love it. 1 ticket to heaven please. >>>

It would seem that we've found the ultimate FastPass machine.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

I guess purgatory must be like one of those attractions where you show up with your "fastpass" only to have to wait 30 minutes longer!

Who runs purgatory anyway? I mean, God is in charge of heaven, Satan takes care of the books in hell, so who runs things?

I can't understand how GOD could be in charge of a place with shackles, bars and fire torture...but wait, he MUST be, since purgatory is in essence a waiting room adjacent to heaven right?

Do the Mormons have to do purgatory too? I thought they just got in automatically.

 

Originally Posted By Lisann22

Gee, in my dream where I died it was just a big warehouse. People mulling around waiting for their "holy" paperwork to process then permitted to finally meet up with loved ones.

I like my version better.

 

Originally Posted By gadzuux

"The god you are trying to reach is unavailable at this time".

 

Originally Posted By onlyme

"Purgatory"-Having your cake and eating it too.

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

>>Who runs purgatory anyway?<<

A division of the Department of Motor Vehicles.

 

Originally Posted By Lisann22

That's where all the Rocket Rods went.

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

>>Gee, in my dream where I died it was just a big warehouse. People mulling around waiting for their "holy" paperwork to process then permitted to finally meet up with loved ones.<<

Sounds like the 'new members' line at Costco.

 

Originally Posted By Lisann22

I'm not remembering hotdogs and eye exams!

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

LOL! No hot dogs? It must be hell!

 

Originally Posted By DlandJB

>>Who runs purgatory anyway?<<

A division of the Department of Motor Vehicles.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I love this. Thank you 2oony.

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

<<We aided Saddam in his war against Iran.>>

<We sold him weapons, and we sold Iran weapons. Our "aid" to Saddam was fairly minor, when compared to others. We "aided" Kim Jong Il during the 1990's. Again, it doesn't mean we sanctioned or condoned any of his actions.>

Please. Surely you're not trying to equate our support for Saddam in the 80's and our "aid" to Kim in the 90's. Did we give Kim any weapons? Help him plan war against South Korea? Was there any equivalence at all, short of your desire to create a false equivalence?

Was there anything like this (from the link I posted earlier):

"According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

Iraqi chemical attacks on Iranian troops--and US assistance to Iraq--continued throughout the Iran-Iraq war. In a parallel program, the US defence department also provided intelligence and battle-planning assistance to Iraq."

Did we do anything remotely like this for North Korea? No? Then your post is completely disingenuous.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<Surely you're not trying to equate our support for Saddam in the 80's and our "aid" to Kim in the 90's.>

Equate? No. Point out that there are some similarities, yes.

<Did we give Kim any weapons?>

No, but neither did we give Iraq weapons. We sold them. We did, however, gave North Korea nuclear technology.

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

<<Surely you're not trying to equate our support for Saddam in the 80's and our "aid" to Kim in the 90's.>>

<Equate? No. Point out that there are some similarities, yes.>

There were no similarities. We had dinner with him? So what? We had big lavish dinners with Soviet leaders at the height of the cold war. That's called diplomacy, and you need it with your adversaries more than with your friends. There's nothing wrong with dinner. And there's no similarity between dinner and aiding a country with chemical weapons.

<<Did we give Kim any weapons?>>

<No, but neither did we give Iraq weapons. We sold them.>

Oh brother.

<We did, however, gave North Korea nuclear technology.>

This is a common assertion, but always vague. Of course, "nuclear technology" can refer to nuclear power as well.

(And by the way, who sat on the board of the company who was behind the big reactor deal? Don Rumsfeld.)

<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0" target="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/kore
a/article/0</a>,2763,952289,00.html

For weapons technology North Korea relied on others, especially Pakistan.

Your attempt to excuse the 80's policy towards Iraq, which helped Saddam use chemical weapons on Iranians, by bringing up a dinner with Kim remains disingenuous.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

Right. Democrats meet with despot, just good diplomacy. Republicans meet with despot, indication of some scandal. Got it.

 

Originally Posted By gadzuux

Republicans did more than "meet" with a despot - they supported him, provided him with valuable intelligence against his enemy, and sold him weapons.

Not comparable at all with north korea and kim at all.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

I think you're inflating what happened with Iraq in the 80's, and deflating what happened with North Korea in the 90's.

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

<Right. Democrats meet with despot, just good diplomacy. Republicans meet with despot, indication of some scandal. Got it.>

Nope. Considering what happened in the two situations, your versions is more like: Republicans provide weapons and logistical help to despot, no biggie! Democrats have dinner with despot, huge deal that we can insinuate has moral equivalence!

<I think you're inflating what happened with Iraq in the 80's, and deflating what happened with North Korea in the 90's.>

No, we're pointing out that having dinner with someone is far different from selling him chemical weapons and providing logistical help so that he can use them against the people of another country.