Saddam Hussein will hang within the next month for the crimes against humanity which he has committed over his lifetime. I wouldn't ordinarily celebrate something so solemn and grim, but I see this as an important milestone in humanity's march towards freedom. As any regular reader of this blog would know, emancipation is a common theme for me, and when I perceive that an act of emancipation is being performed, I pay respectful attention to it.
So good riddance, Mr. Hussein, and may the souls of those you've tortured and slaughtered over the years be at peace. And may the survivors of your regime look forward to a future of freedom.
"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson
About Me
- Rocketman1200
- Neurotic, Self-Absorbed Capitalist with a keen desire to take over the world
5 comments:
What about the mayhem that could follow his death?
how can it be a march toward freedom when in fact it is one country invading another country, and deposing it's leader.
dictatorship is a legitimate form of government, whether you like it or not
if some countries are being told that they can't have a dictatorship government anymore, then who is the dictator, hrm?
First of all, fear of retribution shouldn't disuade the persecutors of justice, and secondly CS, dictatorship is not a legitimate form of government. Lastly, some countries forfeit their right to self-determination when they are deemed a threat to their neighbours and the rest of the free world. Would you call the Americans dictators for ending World War II and then dividing Germany into different parts, etc.? Would you call Hitler's government legitimate, and let it do whatever it wanted? That is the logical conclusion your relativist position comes to.
if you're looking for a kneejerk reaction to mentioning the worldwar2 holocaust you've got the wrong guy. My platform of devil's advocacy does not exclude hitler.
quoting directly from wikipedia.org, "Saddam repressed movements he deemed threatening to the stability of Iraq"
so how is that different from the US leading an invasion AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE UNITED NATIONS?
I'm not saying that saddam hussein is a kind and gentle man, but I feel that a dangerous precedent has been set here. I mean, a country has invaded another country against the wishes of a large sanctioning body, replaced it's government with a new one, and executed the previous leader in an extremely brutal fashion. The media may say that it was Iraq's new government that ran the trial and execution, but if you don't think it's a puppet administration then maybe I'm beating my head against a brick wall here
don't bruise yourself on my behalf there CS. And besides:
1. The UN is irrelevant, because it's composed of many nations who wish America harm, and because it's completely corrupt and toothless.
2. History will vindicate America's actions in the middle east, mark my words
Post a Comment