World Should Be Glad We Treat Him This Good

[FMeekins]

Media leftists are decrying pictures of Saddam in his BVD’s. They insist such treatment is a testament to the lechery of the West and supposedly brutal tactics used by his captors.

But in reality, the response tells us more about those doing the complaining than about the incarceration policies of the U.S. military.

While most of us would be embarrassed if pictures of ourselves in our knickers made it into the local paper, we need to remember for just a second who Saddam Hussein is and the lifestyle that he has led.

American-hating liberals and their pet savages in the Middle East expect us to have sympathy for this hemorrhoid on the rear-end of humanity that hacked apart his enemies, shipped them back in little bags to their families, and expected to be paid for doing them the favor. To prisoners under his regime, having their pictures taken in their undies would have been a good day.

If anything, Saddam’s calendar layout should be seen as proof as to the beneficence of his caretakers. The cameras are --- as we are told of those cataloging our every move --- there for his own good.

If the devotees of tyranny and terror prefer, we can always have the cameras removed. Then if we’re lucky, Saddam will do us a favor and pull a Heinrich Himmler or Herman Goerring.

At the end of World War II, Adolf Hitler committed suicide in part out of fear of being put on public display. Today it seems the gullibility of the viewing public could be the caged dictator’s best friend.

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins

[Guest charlie]

Here we go; when you see or hear something in the news you just "don't want to hear" attack the source..... Media leftist, American hating liberals????

I've gone from being a far-right conservative to a liberal in the past two years; I love America and I feel closer to God than ever. The problem is that the brain-washed right needs positive strokes all the time and the "right" side is so often WRONG that real news will never please the neo-cons.

While most of us would be embarrassed if pictures of ourselves in our knickers made it into the local paper, we need to remember for just a second who Saddam Hussein is and the lifestyle that he has led.

American-hating liberals and their pet savages in the Middle East expect us to have sympathy for this hemorrhoid on the rear-end of humanity that hacked apart his enemies, shipped them back in little bags to their families, and expected to be paid for doing them the favor. To prisoners under his regime, having their pictures taken in their undies would have been a good day.

Yes, and let's not forget who was big buddies with him back in the 1980s when he was using chemical weapons on the Iranians. Let me jog your memory....it was our govt. who didn't have a problem with this brutal dictator then. Does that make us an accomplice?

But in reality, the response tells us more about those doing the complaining than about the incarceration policies of the U.S. military.

In reality, your complaining and name-calling of those expressing a dissenting view speaks volumes about you.

btw - What was the purpose in showing him in his underwear?? Is that just another way to "bring it on"?

[Guest Zayit]

Anyone reminded of Nebuchanezzer from chapter 4 of Daniel?

[Guest avecaesar111]

Yes, and let's not forget who was big buddies with him back in the 1980s when he was using chemical weapons on the Iranians. Let me jog your memory....it was our govt. who didn't have a problem with this brutal dictator then. Does that make us an accomplice?

I can agree with you to an extent, but i find it annoying when people say that since we aided Iraq against the Ayatollah in the 80's that we aren't allowed to condemn Saddam's brutality now because we are an accomplice. Remember that the U.S. had idfferent leadership back then (unlike Iraq which had the same brutal dictator). So we dont need to follow the same paths as a previous administration. It doesn't make us hypocritical to do so.

Also if you follow that kind of rationale you can excuse any kind of evil on the world today, because this country was involved in similar crimes in the past. How can we condemn Sudanese slavers, when we used to endorse slavery. Not a very Christian idea to think that one's past sins should keep them from confronting current evils.

Peace

[Cerran]

That's a great idea if it were about deposing dictators of brutal regimes, but it's obviously not. If the Bush administration was so keen on toppling brutal regimes why has he done nothing about Sudan, China, Pakistan, North Korea?

Not to mention it is not the job of the US government to topple other governments through military force. We are to lead by example to show them why a free society benefits everyone. Unfortunately most Americans and our leaders seem to have forgotten this, instead they now want us to force our ideals on others, whether the people in the other country wants them or not.

Now the question to you is, what benefit if any has the American public seen from the Iraq war?

Has it made us safer?

Has it made us richer?

Has it improved our economy?

Has it improved our trade?

Has it made other countries view us favorably?

In fact name one benefit the American people have seen from this whole debacle.

I constantly hear from Christians, "you can't make a omlette without breaking a few eggs". Well I've yet to see the omlette materialize, in fact I'm about 99.99% sure it never will. Every day I turn on the TV to look at Vietnam Part II.

You'd think by now we would have learned from past mistakes.

[Guest charlie]

Remember that the U.S. had idfferent leadership back then (unlike Iraq which had the same brutal dictator). So we dont need to follow the same paths as a previous administration. It doesn't make us hypocritical to do so.

Ah.......you might want to check on that a little more closely. We had a different President at the helm then, a lot of the administration is the same.

So are you saying that it was okay that we looked the other way when we knew Saddam Hussein was using CHEMICAL WEAPONS against the Iranians?

It'd be one thing if we always took a hands off approach when it came to other countries and didn't meddle ever....but our govt. dabbles where it shouldn't all the while shouting, "We're the good guys" and justifying WHATEVER we do or WHATEVER dictator we help put in power. It'd be better to say nothing all the time then to be a bully and a hypocrit. There might even be less evil dictators in the world if the U.S. govt. would mind it's own business in the first place.

Cerran - I agree, you hit the nail on the head. They can put out all the propoganda they want but "humanitarian" is not our govt.'s middle name.

[Cerran]

Perhaps the point you should also be making here Charlie is who gave him the chemical weapons and production capacity in the first place. Saddam did not make those on his own.

[Guest charlie]

Good point.

I think Meekins and aveceasar should go browse thru the national archives, find the info, and bring it here to share with everyone else.

[Guest avecaesar111]

Sorry, if you guys mistook me, my intention was not to claim that America is this immaculate nation with no culpability regarding our past dealing with dictatorships. Now for example we are allied with Pervez Musharraf the military dictator of Pakistan. Obvioulsy he is not perfect, but its hard to find a leader with clean hands in the middle East, (considering none of them are Elected by the people, as they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan) they all come to power through violent means. Lucky for us Musharraf also hates terrorists, our current enemy, because they also threaten his regime. Now unless our country did take the Ultra-Conservative approach of isolationism, not getting involved in these other countries, like one of you suggested, we are going to need allies, even seedy ones. Giving/selling them weapons however, like we did with Iraq, would be a bad idea.

As for the benefits to the war in Iraq...they are few if any for the US, unless you count the fact that deposing a man who supported terrorism in the long run makes us safer. Yes he did have connection to Al-Queda (but none to 9-11, as far as we know) read the 9-11 commission report. He also funded Palestinian terrorists who have killed thousands of Israeli civilians.

Most of the benefit of the Iraq war goes to the Iraqi people, not that anyone seems to care about them. They voted in their first national election ever. Women's rights are vastly improving. 30% of the new parliament is composed of women (pretty cool i think). And Saddam and his degenerate sons are no longer filling mass graves estimated at over 200,000+ people, (The US didn't help in that mess).

There are difinitely some legitimate criticisms of the war to be made, most notably the aftermath/rebuilding/security phase, the initial invasion itself was one for the history books. But saying that deposing Hussein doesn't have benfits is ridiculous and cant be taken seriously.

Also as far as the Saddam army arsenal goes... do you think we supplied him with SCUD missiles, AK-47 and rifles, their entire series of Tanks and helicopters and chemicals or was it perhaps the most perfidious purveyor of arms in the world (especially the arab world) in history the Soviet Union and now Russia, as it continues to fund and provide essential aid in creating Iran's nuclear capability.

Anyway The U.S. is not perfect, but it is the most humanitarian nation in History, (not to say that we are only motivated by humnitarian motives...if we were Clinton would have stopped the Rwanda Genocide....Just like Bush should stop the Darfur conflict by force...which he probably won't).

Remember to place blame where it is really due. No one "MADE" Saddam kill millions of people, even if we sold him some weapons.

good discussion though. Peace all

[Guest charlie]

If that is the case, how about telling us your past far right views and what changed them so drastically?

anti-gay marriage ..... still am

anti-abortion ...... still am

small government ..... still am

fiscal responsibility ..... still am

helping the poor ..... still am

support stem-cell research ..... still do

against sending American jobs overseas ..... still do

against giving big business tax breaks .... still do

against a federal income tax ..... still am

in favor of freedom of speech ..... still am

in favor or no separation of church and state ..... CHANGED MY MIND ON THIS ONE BIG TIME due to the attitudes of people at this forum and doing a review on my own of American history and church history. Salem witch trials, European inquisitions...I could easily see that happening again in this country if chuch is mixed too heavily with state.

another issue that's come up since the 2000 election:

The Patriot ACT ..... I'm totally against that

I could go on and on. I voted for GWB because of the Clinton administration; because I was a lifelong republican and I thought he was a Godly man at the time.

I wish I could undo that vote. I've changed my mind because I think he's a liar. I think the republicans have not done nor do they really represent the things they tell us they do. They've gotten a lot of young servicemen/women killed in Iraq based on a lie instead of going full force after those who attacked us on 9/11. And they've spend anywhere from 200m - 300m of our tax dollars thus far on this failed endeavor while creating more terrorism and making us more unsafe than we were before.

If I had known at the time what GWB had done to John McCain I wouldn't have voted for him then in spite of the Clintons.

Since you feel the need to attack the President for the sins of prior administrations that gave Sadaam his ability to make weapons of mass destruction, how about Clinton giving North Korea the ability to make nuclear weapons?

Uh Butero, you really need to do a little homework in the history department. Many of the people in his cabinate were in those previous administrations and actually did the "deals" that put biological weapons in the hands of Saddam Hussein. Go have a look at the national archives; it even has some pictures. Donald Rumsfeld is just all over the place isn't he? Don also sold N. Korea a nuclear reactor when he was working for a private company during the Clinton years. Cheney's company Haliburton was doing business with Saddam even though the U.S. had sanctions against that. These people have done so much personally to put this country in harms way while padding their own pockets; now they're running the show. It's like having a fox guarding the henhouse.

I don't think they're moral people despite all their God talk; their actions speak louder than words.

I've only been calling myself liberal for a couple of months now. It feels strange to say the least but my idea of conservative and the current definition of conservatism don't mesh; the definition imo has changed over the years. I think I fall more into the liberal camp these days even though I vehemetly disagree with them on a few issues. But those issues, gay marriage and abortion are issues I also see as a tool, a smokescreen, for the republicans. I don't really think they want to overturn Roe vs Wade and I think they're not going to put the brakes on gay marriage too hard unless they do it at the last minute.....before an election. If these two issues go away...What would the republicans have to run on? Basically nothing. They've proven that they're fiscally irresponsible; they're war-mongering chickenhawks for hire; they won't even show respect for returning dead servicemen/women at Dover and won't allow the families to either... and they favor their corporate buddies over the little guy. They had me fooled for a long time but thanks be to God I've wised up to them.

I'm on all the far-right calling lists and as soon as something big is coming up for a vote I get a call. Every single time without fail, I'm asked what I think about gay marriage or abortion. The last time I asked the girl why they never call and ask me what I think about the war in Iraq or social security or Tom Delay? She didn't know what to say.

In retrospect I think God opened my eyes because I'd been praying for discernment for years. I didn't want to leave the far-right camp at first and I resisted but God just kept at me. In a way the following slogan applies to me:

I didn't leave the republican party; the republican party left me.

Does that answer your question?