Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Who Sentenced Saddam Hussein To Death Has Been Executed By ISIS, Local Media Reports
zero hedge ^ | 6/22/14 | tylker durden

Posted on 06/22/2014 9:17:58 AM PDT by Nachum

Back in 2006, after the second US invasion of Iraq culminated if not with the discovery of the WMDs (which were the pretext for the invasion in the first place), but the unearthing (literally) and kangaroo court trial of Saddam Hussein, the US was quick to announce "mission accomplished." Recent events have made a mockery of that claim, however what is truly the straw that broke the back of poetic justice, to mix metaphors, are reports from local media that as part of its blitz-campaign to take over northern Iraq, ISIS found and the promptly executed Rauf Rashid Abd al-Rahman, the judge who sentenced Saddam to death: a death which to many was the crowning moment of the second US invasion of Iraq, and the confirmation of successful US foreign policy.

It goes without saying that if true, the murder of the man who indirectly did the US bidding in slamming the book shut on the Saddam regime (and with it US claims of Iraqi "liberation") and was responsible for Saddam's death, means the last "Mission Accomplished" posted can now be safely taken down.

(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: death; iraq; isis; judge; saddam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last
Judge Who Sentenced Saddam Hussein To Death Has Been Executed By ISIS, Local Media Reports

Oh oh oh... way to go O'Bozo

Report: Polish minister says US ties worthless

1 posted on 06/22/2014 9:17:58 AM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


2 posted on 06/22/2014 9:18:20 AM PDT by Nachum (Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
To re-post what I've said elsewhere on FR today ...

Let’s be brutally honest here. The dirty little secret that nobody wants to talk about is that Saddam Hussein was far more effective at dealing with radical Muslims in Iraq than were the @ssholes in the U.S. government who invaded Iraq and toppled his government in 2003.

3 posted on 06/22/2014 9:19:38 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Well the, you should be happy his people are coming back into power. ISIS is essentially Saddam Hussein.


4 posted on 06/22/2014 9:22:09 AM PDT by Nachum (Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Obama continues to be clowned on the international stage


5 posted on 06/22/2014 9:22:19 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I agree.
Where Saddam screwed up was trying to assassinate Bush 1.
I always felt that was the biggest reason Bush 2 went after him.


6 posted on 06/22/2014 9:22:22 AM PDT by nascarnation (Toxic Baraq Syndrome: hopefully infecting a Dem candidate near you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

ISIS is The House of Saud and The House of White.


7 posted on 06/22/2014 9:27:08 AM PDT by The Toll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

And that, for this instance, is the dirty little secret.


8 posted on 06/22/2014 9:28:38 AM PDT by CommieCutter ("For an idea to be too simplistic, it must first be proven wrong" --Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Hardly. ISIS is hardcore Sunni Muslim and all the attached Sharia law that goes with it. Saddam played like he was a Muslim, but he was very secular by comparison.


9 posted on 06/22/2014 9:30:35 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Then you agree with Rand Paul who says this is Bush’s problem. Honestly, I think there is an argument to make that if Saddam were still in power this wouldn’t be happening. Now we’ve got an idiot government in Iraq and an idiot government in D.C. - although I’m not sure Obama isn’t in favor of what is going on.

Took out Gaddifi, now they’re after Assad....and for what? What was Gaddifi doing at the time - far as I knew he settled down. Is this for the caliphate? I think Egypt has a point about zero being in cahoots with Muslim Brotherhood.

Shocking to accept that we elected someone who said he’d stand with the muslims so soon after 911 and that we’ve opened our country to them in every way. Suicide by government, pure and simple.


10 posted on 06/22/2014 9:32:48 AM PDT by Aria ( 2008 & 2012 weren't elections - they were coup d'etats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

USA went into Iraq because Saddam switched off the ‘Dollar’ for oil sales ... (Petrodollar)


11 posted on 06/22/2014 9:36:46 AM PDT by Java4Jay (The evils of government are directly proportional to the tolerance of the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Aria; All
"Islam is a religion of peace." -- U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama

Anyone who can find the error in this statement gets an A+ on their doctoral dissertation, which is titled: The Foreign Policy of the Bush Administration in One Sentence.

12 posted on 06/22/2014 9:37:26 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Saddam Hussein was far more effective at dealing with radical Muslims in Iraq...

Yep. The two greatest obstacles to a muslim caliphate were the Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussein. Carter knocked off the first one, and Bush knocked off the second one. Both were tragically foolish moves.

13 posted on 06/22/2014 9:38:15 AM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

ISIS is not Saddam Hussein. ISIS is a bunch of Sunni Moslem fanatics. Hussein was a secularist Sunni tyrant who kept the terrorists under control in Iraq.


14 posted on 06/22/2014 9:40:45 AM PDT by jumpingcholla34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jumpingcholla34

True, but they are using Saddam’s playbook. Mass murder of their enemies, rule by total terror, and a future launch pad for world wide terror.


15 posted on 06/22/2014 9:42:17 AM PDT by Nachum (Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: The Toll
And Juan McLame is the messenger.
16 posted on 06/22/2014 9:43:56 AM PDT by liberalh8ter (The only difference between flash mob 'urban yutes' and U.S. politicians is the hoodies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Saddam Hussein was a sociopathic Sadist. The things he & his sons did to the Kurds & the Iraqis are unspeakable. It’s like what N. Korea currently does to its citizens. Some crimes against humanity are too great to sweep under the rug. Post-Saddam Iraq hasn’t done a good job of governing. That is no excuse for wishing a monster like Saddam back in power.


17 posted on 06/22/2014 9:48:33 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Saddam Hussein was far more effective at dealing with radical Muslims

Which is why he was "our guy" until he wasn't.

18 posted on 06/22/2014 9:50:29 AM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory and He will NOT be mocked! Blessed be the name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Saddam had a simple rule....local tribes could run their situation up to a point. The minute you dragged Islam into the discussion...the head guy for that issue was dragged off and never seen again. It was a very effective method for ensuring everyone read off the script and played nice.


19 posted on 06/22/2014 9:51:20 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

That is no excuse for wishing a monster like Saddam back in power.


Normally, I’d agree with you. Except, maybe, if the monsters who come after him are worse.


20 posted on 06/22/2014 9:53:19 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
When you're a leader in a sh!t-hole you are either a ruthless, brutal thug or you aren't a leader for very long. Deal with it.

Go back and see how the Hashemite royals in Jordan maintained their power over the years. And those people are considered modern, Western-friendly rulers.

21 posted on 06/22/2014 9:57:03 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Sometimes it’s just very hard to be worse. Saddam had methods for killing people that in some cases took literally a year. I.e.: the torture would begin on a certain day, & be severe, but because some people had tough constitutions & a heroic desire to live, they managed to stick it out for a full year.

Other tortures he subjected the people to were even worse. Without knowing this discussion would come up, I had a ‘flashback’ last night to one of the worst instances of torture Saddam inflicted; it involved a mother & her two young children; I’ll say no more than that. It’s beyond the stuff of nightmares. If you really know what happened, if’s a miracle you can sleep at all. For a while, after I researched it, I literally couldn’t sleep. I wouldn’t wish even the knowledge of what he did onto others, much less the actual experience.


22 posted on 06/22/2014 9:58:13 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Referencing the Mission Accomplished canard, promoted by the late fat Ted Kennedy, makes you look like a child. It was a mission accomplished sign for the aircraft carrier. Not a mission accomplished sign for the peaceful transition of Iraq to a democracy.


23 posted on 06/22/2014 10:00:22 AM PDT by justa-hairyape (The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

‘Deal with it.’

You have no idea what you’re talking about. Read my prior post. Telling someone who never endured even five minutes of Saddam’s worst tortures to ‘deal with it’ is sick. Tell that to those who managed to survive, or to those who lost loved ones—not to execution, but to long, long, indescribably cruel & protracted torture. Saddam was a literal Sadist. Not a tough guy keeping a lid on his country. A literal Sadist. Let’s see you put yourself or a close relative in a position to experience even the slightest fraction of the suffering Saddam inflicted. Then you will be in a position to ‘deal with it’.


24 posted on 06/22/2014 10:02:00 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
Saddam played like he was a Muslim, but he was very secular by comparison.

What does religion have to do with using WMD on the Kurds and Iranians ?

Of for that matter, employing torture chambers and death squads ?

Or for that matter, invading Kuwait and fighting a war with Iran for almost 10 years.

ISIS or Saddam, the results are the same.

25 posted on 06/22/2014 10:03:35 AM PDT by justa-hairyape (The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
You haven't been keeping up with the news out of Iraq over the last 10 years, have you?

I don't know enough to pass judgment on any of this -- and neither do you.

But I do suspect that if Saddam Hussein was even more brutal than you say he was, we may be having a more positive conversation about Iraq right now. That's just one of the great ironies about life in the Middle East, I guess.

26 posted on 06/22/2014 10:08:25 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Let’s also be brutally honest about Saddam Hussein being responsible for the deaths of over a million innocents; for using chemical weapons against the Kurds; for having his scientists working with the Libyans to develop a nuclear weapon; for admitting to his CIA handler while in prison that he planned to ratchet up his nuclear program when the heat was off. This man was going to get a nuclear weapon unless he was stopped. What would we all be saying now if he developed a small nuke, a terrorist came in through Mexico, and it was detonated in New York or DC? I know what people would be saying -— WE SHOULD HAVE STOPPED HIM! WHY DIDN’T WE STOP HIM? God help us if someday it is too late and “We should have stopped Iran.”

The world learned an horrific lesson by not stopping the Nazis earlier when they had a chance to limit the damage and the deaths.

What went wrong in Iraq? Three words — Barrack Hussein Obama. But some on this forum talked about Romneycare (one jerk in particular who kept putting up the same worn out graphics on thread after thread after thread), Romney would be just as bad as Obama, and how horrible the Mormon would be. Well, look what we got. Thanks to the fools here with that attitude. The guy currently occupying the White House is systematically destroying this nation.


27 posted on 06/22/2014 10:09:11 AM PDT by doug from upland (Obama and the leftists - destroying our country one day at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I decided to give you a slight clue. Just a very minor insight. As a young man, Saddam used to heat a poker up to as hot as he could get it. Then he would jam it through the midsection of a dog or a cat. The key was not to kill the animal immediately, but to torture it to death as severely & inhumanely as possible.

As an adult, Saddam went way beyond his ‘child’s play’ with dogs & cats. He did to men, women & children far worse. Far, far worse. I thank God Saddam is gone. God alone knows just how much I thank Him that Saddam is gone. The dogs & cats didn’t deserve it—but neither did the men, women & children. The monster is dead. Be glad about it.


28 posted on 06/22/2014 10:11:25 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Fascinating. Did you grow up in that guy’s neighborhood and attend the same elementary school with him?


29 posted on 06/22/2014 10:13:41 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Saddam Hussein was far more effective at dealing with radical Muslims in Iraq

And Qaddhafi was more effective at dealing with radical Muslims in Libya, and Mubarak was more effective in Egypt, and Suharto was more effective in Indonesia, and Ferdinand Marcos was more effective in the Philippines. Armed dictatorships are easy; teaching people to rule themselves, and protect themselves against those who would take their liberty, is hard.

And one more thing. If Wendell Willkie had been elected President in 1940, all the blunders that occurred in the first two years of America's entry into WWII--everything from the loss of the Philippines and Wake Island, to the early losses in North Africa, to Tarawa and Anzio, would all have been loudly trumpeted by the Democrats in Congress, by the NYT and the Hearst newspapers, and by the radio networks, as the unforgivable bungles of "Willkie's War," and President Henry Wallace's first act in early 1945 would have been to sign an armistice allowing Hitler control over continental Europe and Hirohito control over the Western Pacific, with his second act being to sign a strategic alliance with Stalin to "contain" the Nazis and the Japanese--except, of course, Stalin would have eventually conquered Japan and Europe with the atomic bomb, the plans for which would have been handed over to him as part of the strategic alliance. Thank God it was a Democrat in the White House in WWII, otherwise the Democrats would never have let us fight it the way we had to--just as they do not let us fight the present war the way we have to.

30 posted on 06/22/2014 10:14:25 AM PDT by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

OH OH


31 posted on 06/22/2014 10:14:44 AM PDT by SevenofNine (We are Freepers, all your media bases belong to us ,resistance is futile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

some people are pretty OK with political monsters who break a few eggs (for Saddam it was in the millions) to make an omelet.

The man started a war with Iran that killed millions, and for what?

Easy to pine for the good old days of Saddam Hussein when you sit 7,000 miles away, never lived under the rule of a genocidal psychopath and his family, and assume that people who did were better off and grateful for social order enforced by the terror of a knock on the door in the night- whether they were coming for you, your wife or daughter, or coming to order you to kill your neighbor

this judge’s execution bears the mark of the old Baathists not the new al Qaeda- and these are the people for which that obama hillary and kerry want to depose the democratically elected maliki in order to form a “more inclusive” government


32 posted on 06/22/2014 10:14:54 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This situation in Iraq makes me sick. Just sick.


33 posted on 06/22/2014 10:15:03 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
What I do know is that 3,000 Americans perished on 9/11 at the hands of radical Muslims -- most of whom were Saudis. The leaders of radical Islamic terrorism are in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and there they stay without so much as a word of protest from the U.S. government.

At some point even the staunchest apologists for the Bush family will probably admit that the U.S. was on the wrong side in the first Gulf War in 1990.

34 posted on 06/22/2014 10:16:16 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
ISIS or Saddam, the results are the same.

The bottom line. Crazed curs killing for power over the same sh!t pile.

35 posted on 06/22/2014 10:16:52 AM PDT by Jagdgewehr (It will take blood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

So you find reading about the sadistic torture deaths of dogs & cats ‘fascinating’. I can think of a hundred words to describe it. ‘Fascinating’ is not on the list.


36 posted on 06/22/2014 10:17:07 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: chajin
Armed dictatorships are easy; teaching people to rule themselves, and protect themselves against those who would take their liberty, is hard.

That's why you don't bother "teaching people" anything of that sort until they're ready, willing and able to learn it themselves. Teaching radical Muslims to rule themselves is like teaching a dog to read Shakespeare.

37 posted on 06/22/2014 10:18:42 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

No, I find it fascinating meet someone here on FreeRepublic who apparently grew up with Saddam Hussein.


38 posted on 06/22/2014 10:19:53 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Well I can understand, from our brief exchange, why you would be fine with Saddam back in power. Some people are bereft of empathy. There’s nothing one can say to such people. The worst level of animal torture elicits no more of a reaction than ‘fascinating’. I.e.: you can’t be bothered to spend five seconds actually imagining what it’s like to be a human being, perhaps a child, living your entire life at the mercy of such a monster. The best you can do is, ‘fascinating’.


39 posted on 06/22/2014 10:24:17 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Worst ... Pres[ID]ent ... ever ...


40 posted on 06/22/2014 10:25:00 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jumpingcholla34

not true

ISIS is the tip of a spear of cobbled interest groups, including Baathists from Saddam’s former regime. Some are known to be intelligence and military officers who escaped the coalition. One is suspected to be saddams former in law whose daughter was married to Uday Hussein. These men are nominally religious, more like virulent arab nationalists and ruthless opportunists with a golden opportunity to use an alliance with ISIS to settle old scores and to get back in power
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/saddam-husseins-son-in-law-and-head-of-baath-party-may-be-behind-a

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2014/06/19/saddams-baathist-henchmen-are-making-isiss-advance-possible/


41 posted on 06/22/2014 10:25:35 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

They had to go back to G W Bush’s “mission accomplished” statement to blame Iraq on him???

Bush WON the war, Obama LOST the peace.


42 posted on 06/22/2014 10:27:17 AM PDT by Mr. K (Palin/Cruz 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Wow. Hope Saddam’s first judge, Rizgar Mohammed Amin watches his back because they may go after him too!


43 posted on 06/22/2014 10:28:43 AM PDT by Dave346
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

We had plenty of success in dealing with postwar Japan. I naively envisioned a military government set-up within Iraq that would operate similarly...and I still believe could have.

Though, damn, was I ever wrong.


44 posted on 06/22/2014 10:28:52 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

One is an asshole who can be pragmatic.

The other will torture and murder ad infinitum b/c his god says it’s cool.

They’re both monsters, but at least one is a more predictable monster.


45 posted on 06/22/2014 10:30:38 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
even the staunchest apologists for the Bush family will probably admit that the U.S. was on the wrong side in the first Gulf War in 1990.

The wrong side in 1990? Saddam should have been allowed to swallow up Kuwait? His next step would have been the Saudi oil fields, then north to Syria, and finally become the greater "liberator of al-Quds."

There is only one right side in any Mideast conflict, and that is whatever is best for Israel.

46 posted on 06/22/2014 10:30:58 AM PDT by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dave346

The first judge for those who don’t remember resigned because he couldn’t control the courtroom (the defendants including Saddam were constantly interrupting and going on crazy rants).

Not that the second judge had much luck either in that respect.


47 posted on 06/22/2014 10:31:52 AM PDT by Dave346
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
We had plenty of success in dealing with postwar Japan. I naively envisioned a military government set-up within Iraq that would operate similarly...and I still believe could have. Though, damn, was I ever wrong.

The Japanese are a monolithic people, willing to join together to do whatever it takes to ensure the future of Japan, including bowing down to temporary American hegemony. Iraq is made up of at least four separate groups of people (sunni, shia, Kurds, Christians) with four separate agendas, and convincing them to work together would have taken much longer--and it's too late now, thank you Barack Obama.

48 posted on 06/22/2014 10:34:18 AM PDT by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

I am bereft of empathy when it comes to something I read on the internet ... posted by someone with a screen name who posts messages in complete anonymity ... about subjects with no supporting evidence or references to outside documentation. If you want to criticize me for that, then fine. LOL.


49 posted on 06/22/2014 10:36:30 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

William
William J. Clinton
Statement on Signing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
October 31, 1998

Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.” This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:

The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and lawabiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq’s history or its ethnic or sectarian makeup. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council’s efforts to keep the current regime’s behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.


50 posted on 06/22/2014 10:37:39 AM PDT by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson