Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who was the bigger war criminal - Bush or Hussein?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:00 PM
Original message
Who was the bigger war criminal - Bush or Hussein?
Hussein slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent civlians, placed people in secret prisons, engaged in systematic torture, and started a disastrous war.

Isn't this exactly what Bush has done?

Which one do you think is the worst war criminal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sean138666 Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Bush is the worst
The difference: to my knowledge, Saddam Hussein isn't three (or more) generations deep in war crimes like Bush is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bush 43 has ordered the killing of more people than Hussein. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
30. Not even close.
Do a little research about Saddam Hussein and e.g. his treatment of the Kurds. If you said "been responsible for" rather than "ordered" it would at least be harder to prove you wrong - the president of America will generally be responsible for more of anything he does than the president of Iraq - but even then Saddam's hands are so bloody and he's been in power for so much longer that it would not be true by any measure that wasn't set up specifically to prove Bush's guilt.

But "ordered" is simply wrong, and massively so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-30-06 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #30
38. Bush ordered the war. The war killed over 600,000 Iraqi civilians. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Monkeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. Bush the nut case of all times
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. bush has killed close to a million
and started two disastrous wars and I am sure bush has tortured tens of thousands more. He beats saddam hands down. When is his trial?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I dont think I would call Afghanistan
"a disastrous war".

I dont like the way we have let it slide to focus wrongly on Iraq, but it's pretty hard to argue it was wrong to go into Afghanistan.

Hussein has killed not just a million but the Iraq-Iran War killed millions plural. So not sure he "beats Bush hands down" either. He used chemical weapons extensively. He has killed and tortured countless more than we have. I understand the disdain for Bush and certainly agree, but let's not minimize the evil of others in order to magnify Bush's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. saddam killed many over the course of two decades
Edited on Fri Dec-29-06 12:39 PM by leftchick
bush has killed close to a million in four short years.Don't forget the use of DU and white phosphorous by the US. I believe that is WMD. And he isn't done yet. The Escalation is about to begin.

So I again say, bush is worse than saddam ever hoped to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. certainly
you agree there is a bit of a difference between DU and white phosporous, the former of which is not intended as a chemical weapon and the latter of which was used sparingly, and the gas attacks of Hussein intended to kill and maim as many as possible?

I would also say Bush hasnt "killed a million". There are lot of people responsible for what is going on in Iraq today. Bush is certainly one, but he isnt the only one. Hussein killed millions and millions, UI dont know what time frame has to do with it. They are still dead, whether it took eight year or four.

Hussein was pretty brutal. Moreso than your average dictator? Prolly not, but good grief must we go overboard to the point of minimizing what he has done so that we can crown our own worstest ever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. DU
the gift that keeps on giving. Thousands of years after we are gone. If there is an earth left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qazplm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #27
36. I'm not really sure
that answers my question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDebug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
21. The casualties count in Afghanistan is rising year by year
In 2006 it was close to 200 soldiers already (50% American; 50% coalition). It is still nothing compared to Iraq, however it is steadily rising. The overall state of the country is steadily deteriorating as well, so progress as far as security and human rights are far too find. The major cities are reasonable, however you cannot go from Kabul to Kandahar by car even though it is the only interstate in the country, because the road is too dangerous and you need to pay approx. $1,600 IF you can find a driver who is willing to it. Doesn't sound like a major success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mikey929 Donating Member (290 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. Hussein
As much as I dislike Bush, I can't really call him a war criminal. He is pursuing a war, which was wrong to start in the first place. But the damage done was as part of the war. Hussein gassed his own citizens, tortured his own citizens, engaged in systematic rape and abuse of dissidents, etc. I think this puts him in a different category.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. So bombing innocent civilians, using chemical weapons, and torturing prisoners is "part of war"?
What, pray tell, would you consider a war crime?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. And Saddam did all of those things, too.
This is a dumb question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. That's not what Mikey was saying
He was saying that Bush's actions were part of the normal course of war. Of course, Saddam did all these things - I stated that in my OP. However, Bush has also used chemical agents on innocent civilians, and encouraged torture. He's responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents.

Why is it such a dumb question? Saddam Hussein is going to be EXECUTED. Bush, however, more than likely will never stand trial for his war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. It's like asking if Mobutu was worse than Idi Amin.
What, pray tell, is the fucking point? They're both war criminals.

Saddam Hussein is going to be EXECUTED. Bush, however, more than likely will never stand trial for his war crimes.

Of course he won't. Is that releveant in determining who was worse? No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Sorry - I forgot to run this thread through the Thread Police on this board
I'm sorry that my thread isn't quite as deeply philosophical as you would like. Maybe next time, I should send you a PM asking if a thread is worthy for people to discuss?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. You're more than welcome to post whatever you want.
And I'm more than welcome to ridicule it if I see fit. And you're more than welcome to call me an asshole, with some justification, for doing so. It's a discussion forum, geez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. The one who deserves our contempt sits in the Oval Office
He's the real asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. All of the bloodlust for only one of the guilty tyrants makes it relevant.
If you are going to pick and choose to whom you administer justice, you are not administering justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. I think you just justified my post, thanks!
IMHO, they both should be rotting in prison for the rest of their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #25
35. But by executing one evil, you are doing the bidding of the other evil,
while knowing (or becoming complicit in the fact that) that justice will not be brought to the other evil.

That's not "justifying" your post, it is revealing its fundamental inner contradictions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. I don't advocate the execution of either
I wish they would both rot in prison for the rest of their lives.

I was merely pointing out that one will be executed, the other will live scot-free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mikey929 Donating Member (290 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
28. War vs. Citizens
I guess my point was that Bush is engaging in a war, where these bad things are happening. Versus torturing, raping, and mass murdering U.S. citizens. That is where Hussein outstrips Bush in his evilness, for lack of a better word. I did not say torture is part of war.

War crime is an imprecise term, actually, that is hard to quantify. By its very nature, war is a messy, ugly, bloody thing that is defined by death and destruction. If one is trying to artciulate a definition of a war crime, how does one distinguish between civilian deaths as collateral damage, for example, verus civilian deaths as the intended target. Somewhere in that vague mist is a war crime, i.e., the targeting of civilians that has no military justification.

I would point out that the O.P. gave us a choice -- Bush or Hussein. Don't attack me just because I picked the other option as you did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
itsmesgd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. who has killed (or been responsible for) more US troop deaths?
Who has affected your civil liberties? Who has shreaded our Constitution?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lowell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. I'm not sure about Bush vs Hussein
but Bush has killed more Americans now than Osama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. Honestly, this sort of question
is something a ten year old would ponder. For anyone older, it's just silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. One is about to stand trial, the other will probably live the rest of his life in luxury
Of course it's a stupid question. But how many "rhetorical" questions do we see here in DU every day? Just merely pointing out that everything that Saddam has done, Bush has done moreso.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
12. Oh, Jeez
They're two miserable motherfuckers who should burn in Hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Syncronaut Seven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. Rhetorical question, right?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
22. Both fought wars of corporate convenience
Hussein against Iran, Stupid against Hussein.

However, Stupid has better toys, so I'd have to put Stupid on top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
29. Undoubtedly Saddam Hussein.
Edited on Fri Dec-29-06 01:23 PM by Donald Ian Rankin
Do a little - just a very little - research about some of the things Saddam did, and you'll realise just how silly even bothering to ask the question makes one look.

Bush is a very bad leader indeed by the standards of Western democracies,, but not merely many but most other nations are lead by people who make him look like a saint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I'll argue that.
I'm not in the camp that compares bush to Saddam or any other notably horrid leader, dead or alive, but bush is a greater danger to the world than any 10 of your corrupt, nasty leaders. He has managed to ignite a terrible civil war in Iraq, destabilize the mideast, handle N.Korea in exactly the wrong way, and alienate the U.S. from much of the planet. He doesn't look like a saint by any standard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. That's a very different claim.

"How bad a ruler is X" and "How big a danger to the world is X" are two very different questions.

I don't dispute that Bush scores very highly - probably higher than any other living leader, although one could make a case for a few others - in the latter category, because he's the president of by far the most powerful country in the world, but he doesn't score nearly as highly as most other heads of nations would if their nation were as powerful as America.

A slightly bad ruler of America will be a far greater danger to the world than a very bad ruler of my back garden, but that doesn't make him a worse leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
32. I'd say Bush.
Bush had the opportunity to use our country's assets for good and instead used them for his game of domination. Saddam actually had to fight many factions to maintain power. Bush was handed everything he wanted on a silver plate yet he used what he got for death and destruction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-29-06 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
33. This Matters Why? Is It An Attempt To Diminish Saddam's Atrocities? Isn't He War Criminal Enough?
What's the point of comparing the two? Each stand on their own merits. Saddam was enough of a war criminal to deserve any and all of the animosity he's receiving; Period. Let's not so easily lose focus that an atrocious brutal evil human being is receiving justice. Even if we don't agree the DP is the right justice, or ever justified, we still don't need to take a stance of minimizing or deflecting from his brutal and evil actions. He was enough of a piece of shit evil scumbag to not need comparison to anybody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 16th 2014, 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC