Shouldn't we murder ALL of Saddam's children and grandchildren?

I am especially concerned to make sure that the youngest babies are murdered quickly. These small children represent the greatest threat to US dominence. They make have a family vengenence that could make them terror leaders when they grow up. The US must kill these children immediately.

No child shall be left behind to grow! The enemy must be thoroughly destroyed!


</insanity>

Were bringing them freedom.

"Specifically, the Arab world has no problem at all with showing very gruesome photos of human beings," the (defence)official said."

Those damn ARABS are so uncivilized. Thank goodness we have a Christian pResident to lead us.

/sarcasm off

(very right wing christian coalition) announced the latest poll results of a new survey to determine latest restructuring of the 10 commandments.

'Thou shall not kill' has placed at 11.

/sarcasm

dp

the revenue potential of putting it in a theater and charging people to see it, like we do.

of his family is Saddam himself. His sons were important because they were a major part of his regime. He also has three daughters, but they aren't a factor in terms of the leaders who controlled Iraq.

Gotta get them, too, just to be sure...

Hmmm... I read somewhere that all human beings are cousins, about at the level of fifty-first cousins...

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

OK, bad idea...

</sarcasm>

Unto the seventh generation at least. That oughta do it!

180

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Seriously, do you just have that on the clipboard so you can paste it onto every Hussein brothers thread? :eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Take your patronizing bullshit elsewhere, tex.

I loved your response to young Tex. The subtext of his message seemed to be something like, our "boys" need to go do some killing, unhindered by liberals such as yourself, so don't worry your pretty little head about it, honey.

Granted, that's just my interpretation, but I think you kicked him in the family jewels with the force of a jackhammer. So even though I'm not involved directly, it was good to see you stick up for yourself. I'm from the school of thought that says we should all be compassionate liberals, except when dealing with right-wingers, in which case we should rip their heads off at every opportunity.

Your interpretation of his subtext is exactly how I interpreted it, as evinced by my response. I have no problem with people voicing their opinions, but I'm not going to take any patronizing crap from an obvious troll such as tex. :-)

So now that Saddams offspring have been killed(so they say) the Iraqis will be dancing in the streets?
Remember that we BOMBED THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY! And KILLED CIVILIANS WHO ARE THEIR FAMILY AND FRIENDS!
As long as the US is occupying Iraq, and stealing its oil resources, they will be taking potshots at the troops.
WE WANT THE TROOPS TO COME HOME, NEVER WANTED THEM IN HARMS WAY TO BEGIN WITH!
How is that rooting against them.
Go back to FR, its really getting old!

Killing Saddam is only going to step up the fight, once they know the field is clear.

The next ruler of Iraq is the man who rids the nation of us. How do you think he'll do it? By throwing flowers?

So stop saying that!

think it through. freakin nimrod

However, it is impossible for many of us to consider killing Hussein's sons a significant victory. From all the accounts I have read, these men along with the grandson put up a fight. Some of Hussein's supporters might admire these men for putting up a fight and consider these two creeps martyrs. They might even follow the example of their "heroes" and fight even harder.

It also is very likely that not all the Iraqis who are fighting the United States are supporters of Saddam Hussein. There are other reasons that Iraqis might oppose the U.S. invasion and occupation. One is religion. The majority of Iraqis are Muslims. Some of these Muslims may want Iraq to become an Islamic state. They see the U.S. forces as a barrier to that goal and want the U.S. to leave. Some of these individuals might even attack American troops.

Nationalism is another reason that Iraqis might fight the U.S. Do you remember how you felt after we were attacked on September 11th? Why do you think the Iraqis would feel any differently after "Shock and Awe?" Because Bush claimed we were liberating them?

No one wants to see American troops die. Indeed, the best way to protect American troops is to deal with the reality of this situation as soon as possible. This means we need to start asking ourselves uncomfortable questions about why we are really there and what we hope to accomplish. We also need to come up with a plan that will help the Iraqi people and get coalition troops out of Iraq as soon as possible.

And it was a fine policy for Alexander the Great and Hamlet. Really.

But nowadays, the younger generation just can't be counted on to pick up the grievances of the dead and go out for revenge. Still, the Middle East is kind of backward. They do tend to hold grudges...

Hmmm. Will Saddam's heirs choose vengeance or skiing in Switzerland?

Maybe the old ways are best.

STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guess capturing them and finding out where WMD is a bad idea.

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire021501.shtml
Chelsea is a Clinton. She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law,
in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored. All the great despotisms of
the past — I'm not arguing for despotism as a principle, but they sure knew
how to deal with potential trouble — recognized that the families of
objectionable citizens were a continuing threat. In Stalin's penal code it was a
crime to be the wife or child of an "enemy of the people". The Nazis used
the same principle, which they called Sippenhaft, "clan liability". In
Imperial China, enemies of the state were punished "to the ninth degree":
that is, everyone in the offender's own generation would be killed, and
everyone related via four generations up, to the great-great-grandparents, and
four generations down, to the great-great-grandchildren, would also be killed.
(This sounds complicated, but in practice what usually happened was that a
battalion of soldiers was sent to the offender's home town, where they killed
everyone they could find, on the principle neca eos omnes, deus suos - let God sort them out

n/t

Since when is it legal to assasinate leaders of another country???

He's just as soon murder as to eat (a pretzel).