The last minutes of Saddam Hussein
Saddam (as the noose is put around his neck): Ya Allah (Oh God).
Someone in the audience: Mercy be on those who pray for Mohammed and the household of Mohammed (Everyone repeats the prayer, including Saddam)
Executioner and two people in the audience: And hasten his return (the Mehdi), curse his enemy and grant victory to his son, Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada! (This is a common Sadrist chant.)
Saddam (smirking): Muqtada?
NSA Muwafaq Al-Rubai'i: To Hell!
Saddam: (laughing)
Prosecutor Munqidh Al-Far'awn: Please, no.
Muwafaq Al-Rubi'i: Long live Mohammed Baqir Al-Sadr!
Someone in the audience: To Hell!
Saddam (solemnly recites the Shahada prayer): I witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Mohammed is the messenger of Allah.
I witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Mohammed is the- (trap door is opened).
Audience: Prayers for Mohammed and the household of Mohammed.
Someone: The tyrant has fell. May Allah's curse be upon him.
Someone: No. No. Stay back.
Someone: Leave him for 8 minutes. Don't take him down.
Someone: Everyone. Stay back.
2007-01-01 06:56:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ivri_Anokhi 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question, Saddam gassed thousands of people, Bush sent in an army to remove Saddam from power after the UN and countries like Russia and France were doing sneaky deals to prevent UN sanctions from working for oh, the last 13 years. Not to mention teh constant cat-and-mouse games with teh UN weapons inspector. Saddam DID support global terrorism, and after 9/11 it became clear if everyday civilians minding their own business here at home in teh USA were not safe, no one anywhere backing terrorism was going to be safe in their home either, period. Yes, I think one bullet could have resolved the Saddam issue a long time ago, but that is against the rules. All the people and US & Allied soldiers killed by insurgents and foreign fighters in Iraq since are not Bush's fault, but they are the reason the USA cannot withdraw until the job is done. Or it removes the conventional force method of response as a viable option in the future. That means when other nations over there start lobbing WMDs around, they use one on us, and we take them off the map. The bad thing about a national exchange of WMDs is the unprotected civilians die while the leaders are safe in their shelters. I don't have a shelter, I'm guessing you don't, so for all of us, a war involving WMDs is a BAD thing, and stopping nutjobs before they obtain and use them is our only choice. The UN did nothing on Iraq, they did nothing on North Korea, and will do nothing with Iran, except meaningless words of course. If anyone has a better solution, let's hear it, PLEASE!
2006-12-29 15:28:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by theshadowknows 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its all in perception. A lot of Iraqis consider Bush to be just as bad or worse than Saddam. A lot of Americans believe that Saddam was the most evil person on Earth. Personally, they are both just as bad, and neither should have been a leader of any country. They were both influenced by greed and both caused thousands of people to die.
2006-12-29 15:24:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Shifter 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, Bush may have made some mistakes. No person (let alone President) is perfect. But he hasn't murdered half of the country and buried them like Saddam has. And those troops are out there saving your butt so don't you dare complain that we're in a war. You are so ignorant.
2006-12-29 15:24:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
those questions have become older very quickly! there is no rational, smart, and logical assessment between Saddam the criminal tyrant and Bush the legitmate President of a soverign united states. Saddam became rightfully convicted of the deaths of 148 Shiites. it relatively is surely-trouble-free that he ordered the deaths of many extra thousands of harmless human beings. i'm chuffed with the hot certainty that Saddam is lifeless. i'm no longer partial to President Bush and that i strongly disagree with the conflict in Iraq. This comes from a proud Republican (reasonable conservative). it relatively is noted that for the time of spite of your thoughts approximately this conflict, it relatively is a conflict. In conflict, human beings die and are heavily injured. it relatively is problematical to maintain explaining this to persons like your self, yet of course it is not getting with the aid of to you. conflict is undesirable. This conflict is relatively undesirable! Bush isn't a conflict criminal. Is Bush answerable for any wrongdoing? in step with threat. I do have self assurance that Bush must be completely investigated for his section interior the preliminary undesirable intelligence that delivered approximately this terrible conflict that I even have continually disagreed with. yet, Bush should not be tried as a conflict criminal. If an impeachable offense is got here across, then he ought to stand American justice. Saddam's dying became merely; in spite of the undeniable fact that, it won't replace the conflict situation on the floor. we want a clean ideas-set that comprises getting out of Iraq ASAP!!!
2016-11-25 00:09:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think Bush is no different than Saddam. They were both after the same thing. OIL, MONEY AND POWER. If 143 people tried to assainate Bush and over throw the US government what would they do to those people? Would it be right for the EU or the UN to invade the US for crimes againest humanity because the US did what it had to do to preserve the union?
2006-12-29 15:24:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by wilsona1001 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The effect of what bush did is all what we see now in iraq.
the messing up up the mideast is continuing and still bush is on his strategy.
sadam defended his nation against agression bush invades
a nation for a false reason and messed up a nation that no country had seen before in history,so bush is the wrong.
2006-12-30 19:42:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by HeavyRain 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A tribunal has convicted Saddam. Bush is not on trial. Deal with it.
2006-12-29 15:19:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Saddam!
How dare you even think of comparing him to Bush?!
Sadam was an evil man. He and are president a complete opposites. Saddam vs. Bush is like Black vs. White. there is NO likeness!
--Monker
2006-12-29 15:18:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by Monker123456 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
first place Bush is not a murder he not a dictator and he won't hang a tortore people. Bush went to war to catch saddam and there nothing wrong with that. war people are always going to die I thing you being unfair.respect your president.
2006-12-29 15:22:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋