Forums | MacLife

I believe it. . . and I'm not going to shed a tear.

but. . . I think it's disgusting that they feel a need to show the pics.

Well the poor quality creates doubt.  I suspect better pics are coming, but who knows.

And you may not see it as parading, but that's what it is.  It's distributing photos of your defeated foe.  So while they aren't dragging the body through town, to me it's the same thing.

Kennedy is different because he wasn't a conquered enemy.

Kennedy is different because he wasn't a conquered enemy.

To some he was...

yeah, but they weren't the ones distributing the pics.

you want proof the brothers are dead.  how do you go about doing that?

A. tell people "hey, the brothers are dead"

let's see...about 10% of the population would believe that

or

B. show pictures of the dead brothers

about 95% of the population would believe that

i know i wanted to see proof.  i went to a site that showed the pics.  if i didn't wanna see proof, i didn't have to go to a site that showed the pics.  pretty simple, i think...or one would've thought.

So the way this needed to be handled was let the Iraqi people string the bodies up a flagpole?

I'll agree to that if that's the way they want it handled. It's much more gruesome then the US's way of handeling it though. Maybe that's why we did it our way.?

This still doens't address why "our way" includes putting this on American TV.

how else would you have suggested showing people the pics so they would know the brothers were dead?

THE BURNING QUESTION:

If the Bush Administration is trustworthy, why do we need pictures?

Ow. That one burns too much.

So the way this needed to be handled was let the Iraqi people string the bodies up a flagpole?

I'll agree to that if that's the way they want it handled. It's much more gruesome then the US's way of handeling it though. Maybe that's why we did it our way.?

This still doens't address why "our way" includes putting this on American TV.

how else would you have suggested showing people the pics so they would know the brothers were dead?

By putting the pictures on, I don't know, TV that Iraqis would be watching? You know, since that's who we're trying to prove things to? Just a thought.

what about the people in america that wanna see that these evil people were taken care of?

what about the people in america that wanna see that these evil people were taken care of?

"Taken care of?" That kind of euphemistic term makes it sound like we wanted to make sure they had clean sheets or something.

Americans who want to see dead bodies of their countries' enemies want two things: to satisfy bloodlust and indulge their  macabre curiosity.

Kennedy is different because he wasn't a conquered enemy.

To some he was...

yeah, but they weren't the ones distributing the pics.

Are you sure? 

THE BURNING QUESTION:

If the Bush Administration is trustworthy, why do we need pictures?

Because no matter if Bush (or any other President/Politcian) was Mother Teresa herself, there will still be people who would doubt. We have seen the pictures, dental records have shown that it's them, Tariq Aziz and Abid Hamid Mahmud al-Tikriti (Saddam's now ex-bodyguard) as well as 2 other captured ex-Saddam party members have also confirmed that they are dead.

Game, set, match... Now Saddam is next and it won't be long.  Will he surrender? Or will he fight to the death? I think everybody here already knows the outcome when we have him cornered...

From CNN:
"Laws of war established in the Geneva Convention prohibit showing the bodies of dead or living prisoners of war. The Hussein brothers were not in that category, and human rights group Amnesty International says disseminating the pictures was not a Geneva violation."

If AI is cool with it that's good enough for me.

Really no question that the pictures are of them, the shape of our ears are unique to each of us, and Uday's are rather distinct in both photos.

On the other hand if I was there--I might have been tempted to tie their carcasses to the hood of a humvee and take them for a spin around town.

Dont show the bodies:
Libbies: They really aren't dead....

Show the bodies:
Libbies: HOW DARE YOU SHOW THE BODIES!!!!

Now if a democrat did this........

THE BURNING QUESTION:

If the Bush Administration is trustworthy, why do we need pictures?

that's not a burning question, that's a terrible question.   ha.

please please please tell me you understand why people like to see things with their own eyes.

Perhaps because they don't believe the person that told them?  e.g. if Einsetein tell me that E=mc2 then I believe him.  If GWB tells me that Iraq is buying Uranium from Niger, then I don't believe him [anymore].

If it's not credibility, I don't know.  Why?

then they show pictures to PROVE that the bodies are dead...

"oh my!  how dare they show us proof!!!"

loose loose situation.

that's pretty funny you thought "taken care of" meant that they had clean sheets.  i'll stop there with that.  i don't think i have to explain any further.

I guess I do, then.
I didn't think that. I just thought it was funny that you use a euphemism commonly used by people who don't want to use a more accurate, but less pretty term.

call me crazy, but i like it when criminals are put to justice and since most people want to see the results instead of hearing about it, it's pretty self explanatory.

Which is exactly what I stated above, that you have  a morbid fascination with death, or want to satisfy some kind of bloodlust. If all you really wanted was proof, you would have just taken Bush's word for it, like R_U said.

Why don't you just go to www.rotten.com? They have plenty of pictures of dead murders and dictators there, including Saddam's sons. Print a few out if they really turn you on.

Edit to clarify: everything I ever heard about those two (Uday, especially) indicated they they were sick, twisted, sadistic people, which I'm not arguing. I am glad they're gone. I simply get no satisfaction out of gawking at a dead body, that's all.