Saddam must die

The appeals court in Iraq finalized the previous verdict today, and ruled that Saddam should be executed, within 30 days.

If you still think that Saddam's trial was unfair, or illegal, or you are dubious about "whether a trial of the former Head of State in conformity with international standards is at all possible under the current conditions in Iraq, or whether the case should rather be referred to an international tribunal" like this phony bunch of guys, well, it's time to shut up.

Saddam must die, because he's evil. Saddam is guilty, and here's why:

September, 1980. Iraq invades Iran. The beginning of the Iraq-Iran war.

February, 1982. Despite objections from congress, President Reagan Saddam removes Iraq from its list of known terrorist countries.

November, 1983. A National Security Directive Saddam states that the U.S Saddam would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran.

November, 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta Saddam begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the US government Saddam, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

October, 1983. The Reagan Saddam Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act.

November 1983. George Schultz, the Secretary of State Saddam, is given intelligence reports showing that Iraqi troops are daily using chemical weapons against the Iranians.

December 20, 1983. Donald Rumsfeld , then a civilian and now Defense Secretary Saddam, meets with Saddam Hussein to assure him of US friendship and materials support.

July, 1984. CIA Saddam begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops.

January 14, 1984. State Department Saddam memo acknowledges United States Saddam shipment of "dual-use" export hardware and technology. Dual use items are civilian items such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances and communications gear as well as industrial technology that can have a military application.

March, 1986. The United States Saddam, with Great Britain Saddam, block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the US Saddam becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons.

May, 1986. The US Department of Commerce Saddam licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax.

May, 1986. US Department of Commerce Saddam approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq.

March, 1987. President Reagan Saddam bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North Saddam uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua.

Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq.

February, 1988. Saddam Hussein begins the "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds of northern Iraq. The Iraq regime used chemical weapons against the Kurds killing over 100,000 civilians and destroying over 1,200 Kurdish villages.

April, 1988. US Department of Commerce Saddam approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas.

August, 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the US Defense Intelligence Agency Saddam is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925.

August, 1988. Iraq and Iran declare a cease fire.

August, 1988. Five days after the cease fire Saddam Hussein sends his planes and helicopters to northern Iraq to begin massive chemical attacks against the Kurds.

September, 1988. US Department of Commerce Saddam approves shipment of weapons grade anthrax and botulinum to Iraq.

September, 1988. Richard Murphy, Assistant Secretary of State Saddam: "The US-Iraqi relationship is... important to our long-term political and economic objectives."

December, 1988. Dow chemical Saddam sells $1.5 million in pesticides to Iraq despite knowledge that these would be used in chemical weapons.

July 25, 1990. US Ambassador to Baghdad Saddam meets with Hussein to assure him that President Bush Saddam "wanted better and deeper relations". Many believe this visit was a trap set for Hussein. A month later Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking the US would not respond.

August, 1990 Iraq invades Kuwait. The precursor to the Gulf War.

July, 1991 The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company Saddam had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA Saddam courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians.

August, 1991. Christopher Droguol of Atlanta's branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro is arrested for his role in supplying loans to Iraq for the purchase of military supplies. He is charged with 347 counts of felony. Droguol is found guilty, but US Saddam officials plead innocent of any knowledge of his crime.

June, 1992. Ted Kopple of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush Sr. Saddam, operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980's, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]."

July, 1992. "The Bush Saddam administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. Saddam technology to be shipped to Iraqi military and to Iraqi defense factories... Throughout the course of the Bush Saddam administration, U.S. Saddam and foreign firms were granted export licenses to ship U.S. Saddam technology directly to Iraqi weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories were producing weapons." Representative Henry Gonzalez, Texas Saddam, testimony before the House.

February, 1994. Senator Riegle from Michigan, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee Saddam, testifies before the senate revealing large US Saddam shipments of dual-use biological and chemical agents to Iraq that may have been used against US troops in the Gulf War and probably was the cause of the illness known as Gulf War Syndrome.

August, 2002. "The use of gas [during the Iran-Iraq war] on the battle field by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern... We were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose". Colonel Walter Lang, former senior US Defense Intelligence officer Saddam tells the New York Times.


Anonymous said...

Euh comment dire... je ne sais pas si tu comprends le français mais je n'ai de toute façon pas un assez bon niveau pour laisser un commentaire dans la langue de Shakespeare. Peut-etre que ton article contient une certaine dimension ironique que je n'ai pas saisie, auquel cas je me ridiculise "shamefully", mais sinon, je ne peux laisser dire que la mort d'Hussein, qui a eu lieu aujourd'hui, doive etre reconnue comme un évènement légitime et édifiant pour l'humanité... Et de quel droit les USA l'ont-il mené à l'échafaud (arretons de dire que c'est une décision du peuple souverain iraquien!), alors que les G. Bush et autres dirigeants des "States" ont été à l'origine d'actes dont l'horreur n'a rien à envier à celle reprochée à l'ancien dictateur iraquien? Enfin, je m'exhalte peut etre inutilement, et si tu es réellement convaincu qu'oter la vie à un homme en lui passant la corde au cou (ou en le faisant griller sur un fauteuil) est une façon humaine de lui faire payer ses crimes, un message ne suffira pas à te faire penser le contraire. Bien le bonjour à tous les "barbares" qui adhèrent encore à la peine de mort.

Nick Brismut said...


Actually, I don't speak French, but from what I could make out of your comment, I think I left the wrong impression.

1. This post was intended to be, well, ironic. (I personally agree with all 3 of the links I provided in the intro)

2. Again, for the sake of irony, I striked out all the real people in the quoted part (which are all true news stories with references to sources, which you might find at as I linked), and replaced them with Saddam.

3. I'm not a fan of Saddam, nor most of what he did. But I think there are many bigger "evils" out there, and Saddam has just been hanged for nothing, compared to what these "other evils" have done to Iraq. Take the issues about Weapons of Mass Destruction," for example. Saddam was telling the truth all the way from the beginning, while Bush and Blair were the liars. Yet Saddam gets to be executed.

4. And about death penalties, I don't personally support them. I think a lifelong jail sentence is much more "punishing" and ethical.

Thanks for dropping a comment, and I'd be even more glad if you respond again, just to see if I got you right. As I said, I don't speak French, and Shakespeare's language isn't my mothertongue, either.

See you around!

Nocturnio, alias the rude french boy said...


I would like to apologize for two things: Firstly, I beg your pardon for what I wrote, which was uselessly violent, since I didn't understand what you wanted to express... I'm really ashamed, and it's maybe better you didn't completly understand what I 'd written ;p And, please, don't care about the horrible mistakes I'm going to do (and the one I've certainly already done), my English isn't very good actually.
So, don't think I'm a foolish anti-american gay... OK, what I've said isn't a good exemple, and I've to admit that as far as I am concerned, it's difficult to keep control in front of certain events which concern the USA, and the way I reacted to your article was stupid. But be careful not to listen what my ex girlfriend could say ;D (she is half American and was about to kill me when she read my commentary). She is convinced that I want to burn all Anglo-saxons people (sorry Masha ;) but I'm not really wrong, am I?).

I hope you've understood this message and maybe you don't think anymore I'm a narrow-minded eater of snails :)
I would be really happy if we could discuss more... directly, and maybe do you have msn?

See you soon!

Nick Brismut said...

Hi again, Nocturnio

Like you said, I didn't understand the rude parts of your previous comment anyway, so it's ok..

I'm pretty much anti-American meself, but I don't want to burn all Anglosaxon people. Or any of them, for that matter.

I'm just against the stupid and ignorant ways of the American government. Not the American people, themselves. In fact, there are quite a number of American citizens who are anti-American in that sense. Take Noam Chomsky or Michael Moore, for example.

Thanks for dropping by again. I don't use any instant messengers, but you can always find me around this blog.