AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 10 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3844 times:
President Bush is scheduled to make a brief speech in about two hours concerning the decision of an Iraqi government tribunal to condemn former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to death.
I think that the President should say something like the following:
"Good afternoon, and thank you for coming.
"I received news today that the Iraqi people, through a duly constituted court of justice, have issued a verdict in the first trial of the former dictator of Iraq, Saddam Hussein. The court has spoken, and the verdict is death.
"I congratulate the court and the people of Iraq for this fair and courageous decision.
"The destiny of Iraq is to pursue the benefits of freedom and determine its own course, and to mete out justice to those who would threaten it. America is proud to have served and to continue to serve these interests on behalf of the Iraqi people.
"Saddam has been judged by a court of law, and he will face justice.
"Saddam's trial was the first such trial, but it will not be the last. Today, there remain other enemies of freedom and the Iraqi people who are causing havoc in that country. But they, too, will be brought to justice.
"America is committed to its missions, and its mission in Iraq is to help its people in their hour of need. The last few years have not been easy. There have been setbacks. But we are making progress. Because of the trial, the Iraqi people know what Saddam and his regime did. The Iraqi people will look to the trial as an example of how a free country works to pursue justice, protect freedom, and secure the peace.
"There will be many more difficult days ahead, but I am convinced that Iraq will achieve the goals we all want. The fight for justice and freedom is not easy. The people of Iraq have won a victory. And I think there will be many more victories ahead.
Baroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3807 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 3): Whether or not he does, freedom from tyranny would be one, I think.
And, so far, just as accurate as "mission accomplished" was. I dare say they WOULD like to be free of tyrants.
Pre-invasion. Saddam and his family.
Post-invasion. US Military, various Shia militias (certainly two large powerful ones, possibly more, they never tell us), Foreign fundamentalist insurgents, Sunni insurgents, all of them tyrannical in their various ways.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3742 times:
Here is the text of his speech:
THE PRESIDENT: Today, Saddam Hussein was convicted and sentenced to death by the Iraqi High Tribunal for the massacres committed by his regime in the town of Dujayl. Saddam Hussein's trial is a milestone in the Iraqi people's efforts to replace the rule of a tyrant with the rule of law -- it's a major achievement for Iraq's young democracy and its constitutional government.
During Saddam Hussein's trial, the court received evidence from 130 witnesses. The man who once struck fear in the hearts of Iraqis had to listen to free Iraqis recount the acts of torture and murder that he ordered against their families and against them. Today, the victims of this regime have received a measure of the justice which many thought would never come.
Saddam Hussein will have an automatic right to appeal his sentence; he will continue to receive the due process and the legal rights that he denied the Iraqi people. Iraq has a lot of work ahead as it builds its society that delivers equal justice and protects all its citizens. Yet history will record today's judgment as an important achievement on the path to a free and just and unified society.
The United States is proud to stand with the Iraqi people. We will continue to support Iraq's unity government as it works to bring peace to its great country. We appreciate the determination and bravery of the Iraqi security forces, who are stepping forward to defend their free nation. And we give our thanks to the men and women of America's Armed Forces, who have sacrificed so much for the cause of freedom in Iraq -- and they've sacrificed for the security of the United States. Without their courage and skill, today's verdict would not have happened. On behalf of the American people, I thank every American who wears the uniform, I thank their families -- and I thank them for their service and continued sacrifice.
Thank you very much.
He hit upon most of the points I thought he would.
Itsjustme From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2768 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3630 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter): President Bush is scheduled to make a brief speech in about two hours concerning the decision of an Iraqi government tribunal to condemn former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to death.
Hopefully it's being broadcast on The Comedy Channel
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3577 times:
Quoting Scamp (Reply 20): From ONE kind of tyranny...how much you wanna bet in ten years they are an Islamofascist "Republic" like Iran?
What an attitude. I suppose that this means that we shouldn't interfere in places like Darfur, either, since in the future there is likely to be more of the same, and yet we see so many liberals clamoring for American intervention there.
Baroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 5): The initial, and prime, mission was to depose Saddam, and that, in fact, occurred, with lightning speed. "Regime change", remember?
Quoting VHVXB (Reply 18): Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 5):
The initial, and prime, mission was to depose Saddam, and that, in fact, occurred, with lightning speed. "Regime change", remember?
I thought It was too find all the WMD that he was hiding as well?????
Well there is one response AF that I could second.
As far as regime change is concerned, are you going to guarantee that the final outcome will be preferable to Saddam? I would not care the make that bet. Mid 80s Saddam did have a reasonable education and health system to go with his tyranny. Now we have Sunni, Shia and who knows who else tyrannies and no education, health, water, electricity or oil.
The Kurds look promising, but if they become independent, then look out for a war with Turkey. That one will be to go with a war with the Shia militias while the one with the Sunnis ++ goes on unabated.
You cannot just go in for change without have something better to put in its place. So far, there are perhaps 500,000 Iraqis unable to tell you life is better, cos they are dead. Probably about 2 million have fled. So what are the benefits of regime change may I ask?
VHVXB From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 5524 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (7 years 9 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3558 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 23): That's a complaint you're going to have to place to Democrats and Republicans alike. Both parties here have taken the position that whatever ensues must be better than Saddam's dictatorship.
Under Saddam, there was no possibility for democracy. That had to be changed, and it was.
So it was never about the WMD's????
: That was one element of the justification for regime change.
: So if that's the litmus test, why isn't Saudi Arabia next on the regime change list? Would that the US had put in equal effort in bringing "friendly"
: Wow. The fact that you sat down and wrote a prophetic speech including the greeting and the sign off only goes to show how much time you have on your
: This wasnt about regime change for the sake of doing the right thing, otherwise we would be in North Korea, the KSA and any number of other undemocra
: The United States is not a global social worker. America does what it can do to protect its national security and the security of the West. The argum
: I am going to reply ASF just for further debate purposes. So besides doing what is right for the Iraqi people concerning the removal of Saddam, what a
: The removal of Saddam was an end in and of itself, and it was accomplished. The problem has been that there are factional differences in Iraq that ha
: Then why are we not only portraying ourselves as being such, but forcing our way of life on others? Other than getting dead? Hmmmm, I'll have to get
: We're not. As the President said, freedom is God's gift, and not America's to bequeath.
: Fair enough, but 15 of thier citizens KILLED nearly 3000 innocent American citizens. What sort of punishment have we brought forth on the KSA? I agre
: True, but there only so much we can do as long as it isn't proved that they were agents of the Saudi government. Basically, that was the prime missio
: @Cedars747... I have a full sized poster of that
: Interesting you dont mention WMDs or Democracy in that entire paragraph. We shouldnt need to be patient. We have the best military in the world. We s
: Dea Presidnt Bush Thnk u for hunging Saddm Hussein. Yu r so greatest man in all of world. I feel so safe now. I type this lettr to you with my one fut
: Just so, plenty of other dictators in the sea, why pick on Saddam? Oh yes, there was another ME country that did not like him. A few suitable inscrip
: No superpower ever is. But there are a lot bigger fish than Sadam out there. It's interesting that GWB took Sadam to task for being a dictator, yet t
: As an offset against Iran. Ironically, critics of the Bush Administration today, many from the left, have pointed to the fact that Iran benefits from
: The bit about Israel not disobeying binding resolutions because the US always vetoes them, that does not remind you of catch 22? Realpolitik has its
: Possibly. I guess one could file arming and training individuals who would later become Al-Qaida under the same category. But there's "offsetting" an
: And possibly not. Fine. Let's assume that what happened in the 1980's matters. So what? And? Not a litmus test. Democracy is an adjunct of what occur
: Blowback is blowback, no matter how you slice it. Institutional memory is a bitch, ain't it? The Right-wing commentariat would not kindly stomach the
: And even more of a bitch than Institutional memory too, because this time it is your opponents who remember! The US seems to be very slow to learn ab
: The concept of "blowback" is fairly pejorative in this context. But one could just as well say that the recently difficult nature of President Putin'
: True, are we to assume that the current version of Mother Russia is an ideal state? I seem to remember the Russian state mislaying around a couple of
: Ameliorative, it ain't. So what? I will file that under the who-cares-politik school of thought. Who cares, right? After all, everybody knows that un
: Well there DTWclipper, Your Elite buddy John Kerry scored lower on the SATs & also has a lower IQ than Bush ! More biased mis-information from the El
: More like the real school of politik. Certainly one could dispute that. And yet the concept of "blowback", I think, would be critical of the West nev
: One matter I forbore to mention is that Al Q seems to have interacted to a major extent with the Chechnyans. While the USSR knew it had trouble with
: Not really ! A democratic Iraq in the heart of the mid-east is a threat to all Totalitarian regimes / terrorists sates in the region . Also , we can'
: Yes, I would tend to agree that it was relatively predictable in some sense; however, regime change was even then a viable concept among the right. W
55 ME AVN FAN
: here an interesting comment to that from an Iraqi blogger : --- start of quote : ------------------------------------------------------------------ M
56 ME AVN FAN
: at least a new ghostwriter ! some new words in his vocabulary
57 ME AVN FAN
: rubbish. Present day KSA is a result of things like the military take over of Hedjaz (Mekkah&Medinah) and the Asir Province (Yemen) , etc .
58 ME AVN FAN
: the KSA is keeping its people under an iron political-religious regime which is nothing else than a "benevolent but harsh dictatorship" - if so, I wi
: Fits nicely with the current White House view, brilliantly encapsulated by an aide who said that WH creates its "own reality."
: Ok lets go kick Saudi's ass then, and get a bollocking from the world I saw yesturday that Al Qaeda is planning Nuclear attacks on the west, yea the
: This could be said of many countries. For example, France still considers itself a Great (or Great-ish) Power, fielding as it does a nuclear deterren
62 ME AVN FAN
: -- Country -- GNP -- Per Capita USA ---- $10,533 $38 Japan $ 4,852 $38 Germany $ 2,242 $27 Britain $ 1,544 $26 France $ 1,543 $26 Italy - $ 1,260 $22
63 ME AVN FAN
: Here you go again into doubtful comparisons. In Europe, countries like Spain and Poland by surface would be the most important ones outside Ukraine a
: May I just respond with a couple of quick points, as time is short this morning: 1. If Britain is actually a slightly better-performing power from the
: What do you mean by this? That Spain and Poland are each geographically larger than France? That's not true. France is physically larger than either
66 ME AVN FAN
: ever been to France ? ever heard about "Gloire et Patrie" ? ever taken note of that trend towards "grandeur" even in public parades ? ever realized t
: And so prestige in other countries is not important? Remember that the question wasn't one of prestige -- it was one of reality. The reality is that
: As beautiful a country France is .They have many unique problems that other nations have yet to experience . France suffered far more deaths in the d
69 ME AVN FAN
: in a way NO. Few people have such an extreme "lust" for prestige and "gloire et grandeur" like the French. The French are a kind of "prestige-whores"