I think you are missing my point: we're careful about it, whereas Red China, whose execution count is fourteen million and ticking, clearly is not, and spreads the death penalty unduly wide in any event. A bad habit of the un-democracies, you know, and one of the surest signs of such a thing.

And something a real understander of good and evil never does is mistake "damage control" for "evil also." Familiarity with how somebody gets on death row in the first place is enough to tell the perceptive man that there are some lives over which death is actually an improvement.

Geez UG, I would have thought you'd be happy about all those 'commies' killing each other off.

What, instead of viewing it as commies (and commies' lackeys) killing plain folks?

It has been mentioned earlier that, no, in nations, and in times past, where it has been, and is, used "liberally" plenty of people commit plenty of murder.
A violent culture breeds more violence.
Actually it did not, there were plenty of necks for the noose.
Plus we would have to ignore all the innocent people we would murder (on top of all those we do now) by getting rid of the appeals process... despite the whole "cruel and unusual punishment thing". But, you don't seem to mind that.
There is no such thing as just "nuts", everyone does everthing they do for a reason.
Again... our nation was founded to remove us from tyrants, and keep us from becoming tyrants who practice cruel and unusual punishments.

Well aren't all Chinese communists? Pardon me for asking such a obvious question, but seriously UG, if you live in a communist country then you must be a communist - by the definitions of some cellar dwellars.

Yesman...according to UG, quick death penalties aren't working in communist countries, so it probably wouldn't work in the US, unless of course, you could do it better than the Chinese. ;)

What, UG, the Chinese have no right to self defense?

And you'd insist that I'd have to define it that way because...?

Party cadre is a pretty small percentage of the population, no?

But not repeat offenders. So what? Who cares why they raped and killed your child?Not all tyrants hold political positions, gangsters are tyrants too. :cool:

Hopefully everyone cares if they raped anyone's child. That has nothing to do with the realities of mental health.

What the hell does that have to do with anything?
The same goes for your first comment... a life sentance with no parole means no repeat offenses.

Makes plenty of sense to me, rkzen; dictators do it wholesale, gangsters, retail. It's all coercion, which I believe was Bruce's point.

Would it surprise anyone here to know that some people would consider the US to be tyrants anyway? (in response to this quote - Again... our nation was founded to remove us from tyrants, and keep us from becoming tyrants who practice cruel and unusual punishments.)

Sure, and I have made it clear that I am fully in support of removing said power structure and returning to a strictly Constitutional one.

Remove us from tyrants, not you. ;)
Exactly, mental health has nothing to do with child molesters. I was responding to; I don't give a shit why they molested a child. Fry 'em. It also means there will be no rehabilitation and no reintroduction to society, so what the hell is the point of spending a fortune and considerable law enforcement resources, to keep these scumbags alive?:rolleyes:

Remove us from tyrants, not you.

What do you mean by this Bruce?

"our nation was founded to remove us from tyrants";)

That might be so bruce, but my question had more to do with the second part of that quote which was and keep us from becoming tyrants who practice cruel and unusual punishments.

"Keep us from becoming tyrants who practice cruel and unusual punishments", on us, not you.:D

Seriously though, the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, of the United States of America, were never intended to apply to anyone outside our border. Our relationship with other countries wasn't addressed for years after our revolutionary war was over.

Of course it wasn't an issue until after our civil war, except those uppity Brits needed their ass smacked in 1812 and minor problems with the pesky Mexicans.

But a riff with the Spanish was all that needed attending until WWI. Since WWI our relationship with the World has been in flux. Militarily more reactive than proactive until Vietnam. Covertly, who the hell knows?

By the way, I see the Aussie's have taken delivery of their first C-17 and the Canucks are ordering some. They are a great way to get the UN peacekeeping operations staffed and supplied. I wonder if these purchases are in anticipation of lots of UN missions to come?
We'll fuck 'em up, you clean 'em up. :blush:

well, at least you had the decency to blush....

But, rest of the world, remember...... it is writ into the US constituion that US foreign policy is directed to furthering and protecting US interests abroad.

And they mean precisely that.

Yes, as opposed to all those other countries whose foreign policy is directed to reducing and placing at risk their interests.

well, there you have it from the horses mouth, so to speak.

BTW, just how do you yanks spell 'altruism'? Is there a dollar $ign in there somewhere?

Can somebody please find that bigotry thread? I have an addition to it.

I wasn't going to say anything, but Jay's remark is ill received.

So? Am I wrong?

No, you're ignorant, which is somewhat different.

By the way, I see the Aussie's have taken delivery of their first C-17 and the Canucks are ordering some. They are a great way to get the UN peacekeeping operations staffed and supplied. I wonder if these purchases are in anticipation of lots of UN missions to come?


I suspect it was because we needed a new plane bruce.

Empires breed hate. Of course, being part of a collapsed empire, you'd think Jay would be more understanding... could be that's the problem. It sucks when the sun sets.

ouch, Griff.

Someone in AA is extremely aware of the dangers of alcohol...

...assuming he admits he has a problem.

Thats two ouches today, I better lower my profile a bit.

WRT England and Empire, I think they pretty much have.

Empire and its loss is a vital part of the English psyche......it basically manifests in a dual way of looking at our nation and people, which allows us to simultaneously assume we are absolutely superior and totally naff/uncool.

I wish we'd chosen to skip this particular experience, we are not real good on historical lessons.

They never need a new plane without a mission in mind....what future operations will be and considering the capabilities they require. There are a lot of planes that offer various capabilities for a lot less money. If they are going for the "top banana", they have something in mind.;)

Well if you want my opinion Bruce, it's probably cause they've realised they can't fly Black Hawks around here without killing people.

I assume you were being facetious, considering the C-17 is a humongous transport for moving many tons of men and materials long distances.:D

It's true! Australian pilots can't fly black hawks.

As to the specs on the C-17, I've no idea what they're capable of or what they're used for. Very much similar to the lack of knowledge I have on what my government is intending to do with it. Maybe I'll ask my cousin who's in the RAAF...actually, he's not in the RAAF anymore. He recently started working for Metalstorm, but I'll bet he's still got a good idea about what's going on...being an officer and all at the time of his departure (2 months ago).

Helicopters are very complicated, difficult critters to master. Big ones like the Blackhawk, even more so. Shipboard landings are the most difficult for any aircraft.
That accident on the Kanimbla was unfortunate, but not unusual. US aircraft carriers lose an average of one aircraft per six month training cruise.:(

The incident on the Kanimbla was only the latest in a long list of accidents.

Considering the relatively small size of our armed forces here, our track record is appalling.

Think of a C-17 as a jet-propelled Hercules. It carries about the same tonnage as a Herc and a little faster, gets off short runways nicely.

Oh well, I guess they're going to carry troops and things in it then. An aircraft like that would be useful when bringing emergency troops to our somewhat unsettled pacific island neighbours I would think.

The Vietnam era C-130 is a propeller plane. Its long life because no other aircraft could perform its tasks. The C-17 is a jet version that can fly so much faster, carry maybe three times the cargo (by weight), and can still deploy to unfinished landing areas. No other aircraft that can deploy large cargos to unfinished landing strips and can do so under combat conditions. The C-17 can do this even with only a three man crew.

C-17 was another example of engineering mismanagement (and it was a long list) in MacDonnell Douglas. Massive delays on a plane that air forces so desperately needed in their primary mission - support. Meanwhile, politicians created the C-130J - latest version of a now pathetic propeller plane that was such a design disaster as to be thrown to National Guard Units and (last I had heard) could not deploy (squadron could not activate).

When it comes to military transport, C-17 would be the most versatile and useful aircraft. There is no other large transport that can deliver so close to combat, carry so much, and deliver so quickly.

Back to original topic: looks like Saddam won't see either Valentine's Day or next Ramadan unless they really want to try him some more; the death sentence has been confirmed by the higher court.

Wonder if anyone will want to publish the verse -- I gather it isn't likely to be esteemed as at all poetic -- he was writing in prison?

I hope he doesn't see the new year - then again maybe a just punishment would be to tie him out in the middle of town and let the locals have at him.

Apparently it's going to happen in the next three to four hours.

Sure would make us civilized.:rolleyes:

"The Americans want him to be hanged respectfully," al-Nueimi said. If Saddam is humiliated publicly or his corpse ill-treated "that could cause an uprising and the Americans would be blamed," he said.

You cannot be murdered respectfully, especially strangled to death.

So KR, what would you do with him?

Life in prison. No outside contact. Answering for KR... don't know who that is.

News reports say that he may be hanged by morning.

Any minute now.

It's been done according to Al Hurra TV; Reuters still waiting for confirmation.

Video footage of Saddam's death here.

He's swung; another milestone passed, and the world shithead count is down by one. It will be emphasized that Iraqis, Saddam's most numerous victims (a butcher's bill of about a million and a half offed for unpopular political opinions, a hanging offense with dictators everywhere, and quite outside Iraqi military casualties, also extensive), were the ones who took him out. Mutterings about the U.S. pulling the strings are, in the end, of no consequence.

Ba'athist spokesmen have threatened to... continue behaving as badly as before should Saddam be hanged.

The fact that he was hanged with his brother and one other makes it symbolic of the crucifiction of Christ between 2 thieves, since he is a martyr...is there a mathematical equivilent christ=sadam ?

Ah, memories. But a better theme song might be, "For The Love of Money."

It will make not one little bit of difference ever since the "We got him". He should have been shot at his capture. Would have caused a lot less problems to come.