Iraq Issues

Mahdi · December 15, 2003

Doubtful Big D, they had his Mistress and Tariq Azziz identify him, as well as DNA testing...and DNA doesn't lie.
Edric, I don't want to see him back in office either, but between this and the flying to Baghdad for Thanksgiving with the troops...yeah, you're probably right.

First off, I beleive it is him, and disbeleive any of the numerous conspiracy theories regarding his capture.

That said, Ordos45, you really shouldn't but so much stock in DNA. No, it doesn't lie, but it can mislead. For example, in Patricia Cornwalls recent "investigation" into Jack the Ripper she claimed her DNA proved conclusively that her suspect was the white chapel murderer. In fact, the type of DNA she had matches one out of every thousand people, and there were just a few more than a thousand peope living in London during the late 19th century....

DNA is a usefull tool, but with everything else, be wary when people use it. Find out what type was used, and what the odds are for such a match.

Big D · December 15, 2003

erm I am no dna specialist or a doctor, but how can they determine his indentity so fast by using dna tests?

Mahdi · December 15, 2003

erm I am no dna specialist or a doctor, but how can they determine his indentity so fast by using dna tests?

The delay in DNA testing to results is due to the huge line-up and limited facilities in which to do it. Sadams would jsut have skipped ahead to the very front of the line.

SurlyPIG · December 15, 2003

Mahdi, I wouldn't be worried about the DNA in this case. From my very limited understanding of forensics, there are two types of DNA testing; ordinary DNA testing and mitochondrial DNA testing. Ordinary testing is 100% accurate, as it is unique to each individual (except for identical twins, naturally). Mitochondrial DNA is only used in special cases where the body fluids are very old and completely dry, and the rarity of each different kind of DNA varies. I'm not sure what the range is, but the slimmest margin I've heard of is 1 in 200 having a specific type of mitochondrial DNA.

There's no way they'd use mitochondrial DNA on Saddam. You probably saw them on the news taking a DNA sample straight from his mouth, and the comparison samples they've had all along (and there are undoubtedly several of them) would have had to have been from a glass, cigar etc or maybe even semen. :O

Mahdi · December 15, 2003

DNA can be subdivided much more than that acelethal, and the odds regarding DNA accuracy can very greatly. Nor is any kind 100% accurate.

In my message to Ordos45 I was reffering to DNA in general, not in this specific case, in which the DNA will be very convlusive, as he seemed to believe that anything with those three simple letters involved was carved in stone.

lowzeewee · December 15, 2003

Singapore has no army?Oh,maybe you need to get out of pre-1967 era? ;)

We don't have an army there,just around 10-15 policemen training those Iraqi policemen. :)

Anathema · December 15, 2003

Drat. I was rather hoping that he'd never be found and end up a mystery He should be tried in a completely neutral place that wouldn't be affected by political pressure. Since no such place exists that I am aware of...

There's the International Criminal Court in the Hague, but it can't trial Sadam because it's not allowed to judge pre-2002 crimes, and Iraq didn't sign the statute.

Another reason by senator Lieberman: the Hague criminal court should not handle Sadams trial because it cannot issue the death penalty.

Dante · December 15, 2003

That's just annoying. Not to mention hypocritical. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11 (I) states:

Everyone accused of a penal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

That's paraphrasing slightly I think but you get the idea. To refuse to try him in a court just because they can't kill him is a breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Which Saddam is entitled to.

I don't know whether Saddam's capture is a good or a bad thing. What will this mean for the future of Iraq? They say it will demoralize the Baathist loyalists and bring stability to the region, but will it really? Saddam could become a martyr, or his capture might lull the new Iraqi government into a false sense of security. Many things could happen.
And let's not forget the effect that it could have on the USA - this might get Bush re-elected. *shudders*

I do think it's a bad thing; but it seems we agree on more than just a 'mild dislike' of Bush and capitalism.

nampigai · December 15, 2003

That's just annoying. Not to mention hypocritical. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11 (I) states:
Everyone accused of a penal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

That's paraphrasing slightly I think but you get the idea. To refuse to try him in a court just because they can't kill him is a breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Which Saddam is entitled to.

I have a hard time believing that anyone would every come through with ANY evidence that Saddam is innocent. And allthough I'm against death penalty you wont see me crying if he will be executed

Gobalopper · December 16, 2003

Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive

An interesting take on the Saddam story, maybe he was held captive...

Digital Guerrilla · December 17, 2003

So what they have finally caught Saddam tell us just what does that mean for Iraq? Let's see social decay, continued crime and hopelessness are what is in store for Iraq why beacuse these are makers the US administration wants for Iraq it fits the US profile of societial based function. Iraq will never be returned to it's former wealth why because that would mean it would be independent of the US and not a third world country "ruled" by crime warlords, drugs and embezzlers like the other U.S. allies in the region. The US will never create a truly democratic stitution in Iraq it is of no benifit to the US to have a resource rich country as Iraq independent. Yes Saddam should be put on trail for his crimes against the Iraqi people but when and where do the people of Iraq organize and handle their own affairs? If Iraq is the next US project we have Afghanistan, Haiti, the Philippines, Indonesia and Colombia as examples. Who will be next to claim the award for empire of pimps?

lowzeewee · December 17, 2003

If Saddam is a reason for the invasion,I got tonnes of others to recommend them more->N.Korea,Russia,China,African countries[pick one],Iran,Chechnya,other than N.Korea and Chechnya,the rest have resources,so why not invade them and get rid of the 'evil' in them[and take their resources ;)]?

Dante · December 17, 2003

If the leader was the reason Bush would invade every country the could simply for not having an American in charge...

What's wrong with Russia's leadership?

And while we're at it, invade Britain, remove the leader, and then get lost!

lowzeewee · December 18, 2003

They are trying to cover up the "Where's the WMD" question with as many matters as they can. :O :P

Oh,lol,maybe Stalin walked out of his grave and ruled Russia again? :D

Gobalopper · December 18, 2003

Russia to Ease Iraqi Debt

This is after France and Germany have agreed to the same thing earlier in the week.

Gobalopper · December 22, 2003

Photos on the way to Basra:

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/basrah1.html

nampigai · December 22, 2003

one thing I've been wondering about. Saddam has status as POW right? If so the americans are violating the Geneva Convention as much as the Iraqis did....

Dunenewt · December 22, 2003

No, he is an exception to the rule. People who have comitted War Crimes are exempt I believe.

nampigai · December 22, 2003

hmm I haven't hear of that clause, but if you say so...

Digital Guerrilla · December 22, 2003

How is it that Richard Cheney's former company, Halliburton, was awarded the petrol transportation contract from Kuwait to Iraq for more than twice the price of other competitors and on a exculsive basis?

Gobalopper · December 22, 2003

Can you name those other competitors? And also the amount of experience, both in contracts and time spent, that they have had working with the US government?

As for the fuel thing here is an article on it:

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=5394

Acriku · December 23, 2003

Is there a point you're making by pointing out that Cheney was once part of the Halliburton company?

Digital Guerrilla · December 23, 2003

Some of the other competitors were Fluor Corp, AMEC Plc, U.S. Parsons Corp. and Australia's Worley Group but Gob I know you know about these companies.

Acriku the point is that he used to be the head of the company it's more like a statement. ;)

Andoreion · December 23, 2003

No, he is an exception to the rule. People who have comitted War Crimes are exempt I believe.

Even if he was caught wearing a T-shirt with the text "I am a War-Criminal", they should wait until he is found guilthy of these crimes in court. "Innocent until proven guilty" is one of the differences between our cultures and his.

Gobalopper · December 23, 2003

Sandwraith I know there are other companies out there but I was more interested in whether they had the same qualifications that Halliburton and KBR had. In the amount of work they had done with the US govt during wartime, the type of security clearances they had, and also whether or not they could move out under short notice.

Andoreion Saddam has the "status of a prisoner of war" but I think they also said that it could change depending on how involved he was in the current attacks.

Sign In

Iraq Issues

Recommended Posts

Mahdi

Big D

Mahdi

SurlyPIG

Mahdi

lowzeewee

Anathema

Dante

nampigai

Gobalopper

Digital Guerrilla

lowzeewee

Dante

lowzeewee

Gobalopper

Gobalopper

nampigai

Dunenewt

nampigai

Digital Guerrilla

Gobalopper

Acriku

Digital Guerrilla

Andoreion

Gobalopper

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information