₦airaland Forum

Easyy:
Iraq was without question better off under Saddam than it is at present.

That's true.

alabiyemmy:
@ Mariory

So let America stay put and never leave then? With America still there, hundreds die daily - what can be worse? You seem to be saying it will be worse if America leaves? Well, we wait to see, but if they don't want to leave, let them stay there then.

I never said that. Weather they stay or not is up to them. Obviously they are not very well liked in Iraq. My point is should they leave now, war, not only in Iraq but, also her neighbours will break out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to Saddam. I want to ask one question. If Charles Taylor were tried and executed by the Ghanian government, would that also cause as much sorrow for some here as Saddam? (not based on an anti-death stance)

Easyy:
If you give me a ststement where I have jumped to the defense of saddam, you will make more sense to me

I mistook you for someone else there. My mistake.

At least we are now clear your aim is the US and not actually Saddam. Carry on.

Easyy:
What's Saddam Hussein's death got to do with the beheading of innocent people carried out by Al Quaida?
There's no point in bringing unrelated events together in order to cause distractions. saddam was never a member of Al Quaida and was never part of those who beheaded those journalists. Besides, if George Bush never went there in the first place, the journalists and very many other innocent people would never have had to die.

Totally besides the point. You are the people bringing in the US invasion with almost every post. A topic that has been beaten to death and is now way past it's sell by date of 5+ years. What's so special about Saddam that you jump to the defense of his life? He's dead get over it. He's been on trial, he's been sentenced, he's had his appeal, he's been executed.

Thousands of his victims didn't get to have appeals or spend their last days in American hospitality, dying looking better than they did when they went into prison.

Donzman:
You might want to check out a thread I started concerning Buhari's stance on Sharia. He believes it is not to be subjected to non-muslims which is allright with me.

Isn't that the same thing the governments of the Northern states practicing sharia said?

You think you'll ever find such men in politics? Good luck.

alabiyemmy:
Nobody ever told me why it is left to the USA to go to IRAQ, another sovereign nation.

As stupid a decision by the Bush administration as that was. Does that mean Saddam should not have faced justice?

alabiyemmy:
Why, when America occupied IRAQ and found no WMD, why didnt they leave? Therefore, America knew their aim but they needed to becloud it with spurious reasons just to get at Saddam, mind you, don't be fooled that the whole thing was done to help the people of IRAQ, nope, Bush and his cronies knows what they were after.

You think there is death now in Iraq? This would be child's play compared to what would happen if the US pulled out of Iraq. Not only would Saudi Arabia and Iran be fully pulled in on opposing sides but, Turkey would also move against the Kurds.

Wow the noise about Saddam continues? His victims now some sense of justice. The same law he used to execute many, is the same law that was used to execute him. How many of you were here defending civilian contractors, journalists etc when they were being executed on video by Al-quadia in Iraq? The answer is zero.

What the hell is it with people saying Atiku stopped third term. Please Atiku did not stop anything. The people that did the work are the activists and the National Assembly not Atiku. I don't know how Atiku has become the man known as stopping third term.
Open your eyes Nigerians.

Omolulu:
It's ironic how people can overnight begin to feel pity for one who put sorrow on the faces of many iraqi citizens.No one has mentioned the 5000 kurds he mercilessly gassed with chemical weapons in 1988.

Exactly. The trend of posts in this thread seem to be. "I'm against Saddam's execution because the US invaded Iraq." Where or where has the sane police gone? Very soon some people will blame the US invasion of Iraq for their cold or cough.

Has anyone dared view the tapes of torture under Saddam? Or is this also the product of the US invasion.

The main reason people are here is because of the US. Any excuse to take a pop. That's okay though. If Saddam was overthrown ripped to pieces in front of camera, there would probably be half the noise we're getting now.

The victims of Saddam are the ones that matter and they have been done right. Nairaland users will have forgotten Saddam by next week.

Mariory:
I can dig up tapes of the last moments of people he had executed in front of camera.

Extreme caution is advised for those willing to view. ABSOLUTELY NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN.

Torture Video:
http://www.aei.org/events/eventID.844,filter.all/event_detail.asp

More videos and pictures
http://fdd.typepad.com/fdd/2006/01/alert_saddams_c.html

The census is not about what part of the country you are from. It's about what part of the country you live in.

I am undecided on the death penalty. However, I won't be losing any sleep because of Saddam. I can dig up tapes of the last moments of people he had executed in front of camera. Ask the Iranians, Saudis, Kuwaitis, Syrians. Hell even Osama was willing to fight the man.

Weather he deserved to die or not is another story which has been told by the Shia lead Iraqi government. Like I said, I won't lose one bit of sleep.

Correction, Nigeria has more than 140 million people. And neither is yours.

ishoras:
The carelessness of Govt or Poverty.

Peharps! But you forgot greed.

Ynot:
Yea, i predict the earth is flat.

I predict it is shaped like a race car.

How would you descibe IBB?

alabiyemmy:
All is in the name of OIL and the security of ISRAEL in the Middle East, America wants a middle east they can control - hence killings in Iraq, Afhganistan, Lebanon and Palestine.

Afghanistan is now in the Middle East? Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon have Oil? America is killing people in Lebanon?

alabiyemmy:
Pinochet was never executed - which is better between Pinochet and Saddam?

Read what Wikipedia said about Pinochet - "His government also implemented a series of secretive and repressive operations, during which around 3,000 suspected or known dissidents and leftists were killed and around 30,000 more were tortured. At the time of his death in 2006, more than 300 criminal charges in Chile were still pending against him for human rights abuses and embezzlement during his rule"

Pinochet is a friend of the British - so its a case of man know man? Isint it?

Did you complain to the Chilean Government to arrest, try and hang him? It's America's and Britain's fault that Pinochet was not tried and executed by the Chilean government?

Easyy:
I wish we will all stop getting carried away by our emotions and sit down to view things objectively. It will become clear from any human perspective that George Bush is a terrorist sponsor and is responsible for signing the death warrants of several thousand innocent Iraqis and nearly 3000 American soldiers in Iraq.

Really? How did you figure that? Bush is the reason some empty headed religious degenerates are killing each other and as many innocent people as they can in the process? If these people really wanted peace, would they still be killing each other? Remember, you said you like to appeal to "rationality and reason" is it reasonable for these people to act the way they do? Is it reasonable for you to blame Bush for these people's actions? What about the Kurds in the kurdish areas of Iraq who have not invovled themselves in the insanity of the Shites and Sunnis?

Easyy:
I was brought up to love and admire America as a country. However, I cannot bring myself to accept the injustice of what George Bush is doing. It appears he has a mission to attack and decimate all islamic nations. Does Israel not have enough to wipe out Lebanon? Yet, when Israel was attacking Lebanon, America was shipping military armunition through UK to Israel. At the same time, it was busy attacking Syria and Iran for supporting the other party. Such hypocrisy!!!

Don't be so naive. Where in warfare has that not happened? Of course the USA is going to try to use it's diplomatic muscle to help it's ally if it's at war. Now no one is saying this is right as warfare in itself to reasonable humans is worng so is all the politics associated with it. This does not make the US a terrorist state, your anger at what you consider to be hypocrisy not withstanding.

Your statement that Bush wants to attack and descimate Islamic states is a figment of your imagination. There are several Muslim countries not just in the Middle East but elsewhere in the world that have benefitted from huge American and Western investment as a whole. There are also many Muslim States all over the world that have very friendly relations with America. Go tothose countries and you will see American architecture, cars and influence everywhere. Some Muslim countries are even allied to America in it's war on terror as they have themselves been victim or come under threats of terrorists (real terrorists, not those you call terrorists) themselves.

Anyways we are discussing terrorism here and the fact you mentioned weapons shipment is a classic example.
America was shipping smart missles to hit specific targets when Isreal could very well have used cheaper, much more plentiful, dumb bombs. Isreal did not have enough of these missiles to begin with. Of course we already knew that because the Isrealis were not the ones preparing for war.
Iran and Syria were shipping upgraded, outdated unguided rockets to Hezbolla to simpy hit Isreal. (The whole of Isreal seen as a target). Even hezbolla themselves tried to use the idea that Isreal will not bomb civilian buildings so they stored their rockets and set up firing positions from these areas.
Unfortunately for the fuckheads, when you do that, that building then becomes a military target. Hezbolla's line of thinking was that Isreal would not attack such locations because they are not and do not want to be seen as attacking civilians.
You said you to appeal to "rationality and reason". I'll leave that to sink in.

-------------------------

In your reply to my previous post where you said you like to appeal to rationality and reason. You then said

Easyy:
Warfare is defined relative to the capability of each party. If someone engages a weaker opponent and the opponent uses his teeth instead of his fists, it's his own way of defending himself from the aggression of a more powerful opponent who, in this case, seems to be responsible for defining what the rules of the warfare should be.

Does that mean that if the isreals some how lost their military technological superiorty over the hostile Arab states that it would be ok to use whatever means avaliable to them to defend themselves from attack? Including of course, massacaring as many enemy civilians as hmanly possible?
Remember, we're being rational and reasonable here.

McKren:
146. (1) The Vice-President shall hold the office of President if the office
of President becomes vacant by reason of death or resignation, impeachment,
permanent incapacity or the removal of the President from office for any
other reason in accordance with section 143 of this Constitution.
(2) Where any vacancy occurs in the circumstances mentioned in subsection
(1) of this section during a period when the office of Vice-President is
also vacant, the President of the Senate shall hold the office of
President for a period of not more than three months, during which there
shall be an election of a new President, who shall hold office for the
unexpired term of office of the last holder of the office.
(3) Where the office of Vice-President becomes vacant:-
(a) by reason of death or resignation, impeachment, permanent
incapacity or removal in accordance with section 143 or 144 of this
Constitution;
(b) by his assumption of the office of President in accordance with
subsection (1) of this section; or
(c) for any other reason,
the President shall nominate and, with the approval of each House of
the National Assembly, appoint a new Vice-President

What about 3(c) for any other reason,? I read in a newspaper article that this is the part of the Constitution the PDP used to convince OBJ that the VP can be dismissed.

Here is my problem with nigeriaone's analysis. Even if you could count each house one by one, you would still have to make an assumption of how many people live in each house. This value would then have to be a constant used in his calculations. This makes calculations grossly inadequate as you'll either end up overestimating or underestimating the population. As a result, i don't believe it can be used as a comparison to the census.

I think the NPC got it right. use Satellite images to find population concentrations, and then go into those locations to count the people.

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/news?ch=1105621&cl=1551471&lang=en','playerWindow','width=793,height=608,scrollbars=no

Donzman:
@Nigeriaone

Akure being capital means nothing. Awka is the capital of Anambra and it isn't anywhere close to as populous as Onitsha. Have you ever heard of "Onitsha Main Market"?. . . It is the biggest market in all of W. Africa, it is the people who trade there that make it big, not ghosts.

I have no idea which is bigger but, any number of people from any location can trade at the market. It doesn't mean that all people who trade there live there.

IBB to hopefully follow.

nigeriaone:
Now on calculation please this link, where we tried to explain how they calculate population with satellite picture, just a rough idea,

http://www.nigeriaone.com/smf/index.php/topic,1712.msg4509/topicseen.html#msg4509

Based on how your formula works, you appear to be assuming one of it's variables. How do you obtain your human density figures? Is this based on number of homes found in an area? If so, it means you would have to assume a constant number of people per house.

Apparently, the population is growing at about 3.2%