Will the last Arab Dictator to leave, please turn off the lights?
Hunting is not a Sport: In Sport, Both Sides Should Know they’re in the Game
Being put down, flushed into the sea or hung by a leash; you would immediately think that I am referring to slaughtered animals. But in actual fact, these are the final moments of dictators no other then Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden and the latest kill, Muammar Gaddafi.
Just as I am apprehensive of capital punishment; the shoot-to-kill technique employed by U.S. and British troops reiterates the fact that ‘Revenge is a dish best served cold,’ and not ‘Innocent until proven guilty.’ Why is it that justice seems to fly right out of the window when it comes to the West’s perception of the Middle East?
The ‘assassination’ comes under a long list of former dictators and apparent terrorists being killed and then swept under a military rug. In no way could I ever excuse autocratic regimes promoting genocide, as well as ‘religious racism,’ but I would rather sit in a jury shaking my head to ridiculous claims then never getting the opportunity to ask the vital question- “Why did you do it?” and more so “Here’s how I can prove you wrong.”
It is the least that the individuals are responsible for, answering to the people that they have persecuted for decades and not laying it in the hands of foreign governments to be judge, jury and executioner. Besides, the nations involved are less likely to be ousting their former leaders to become filthy-rich oil barons and trading with the U.S. and the U.K., unlike organisations such as NATO with ulterior motives.
Even a civil war didn’t stop Valmont Industries Inc. (VMI) of Omaha, Nebraska from growing wheat in Libya this year. Most U.S. companies pulled out of Libya when the unrest started, despite Libya holding the largest crude-oil reserves in Africa. Since Gaddafi’s death, many U.S. companies are likely to gradually resume or open operations in Libya as long as conditions improve. It comes as no surprise that National Transitional Councils (NTC) were itching to remove any obstructions.
Ali Aujali, the Libyan ambassador to Washington, has said companies from the U.S. and other NATO countries that aided the rebellion will be favoured in deals and investments according to Bloomberg.
So who is left on the roll of leaders? Former Egyptian president, Muhammad Hosni Mubarak seems to be avoiding the hit list, already afflicted with cancer and slipping back and forth into a coma. Counting his blessings, the politician has managed to stand trial, allowing charges of pre-meditated murder of peaceful protesters and corruption to be bought against him despite pleading ‘not guilty.’
Whilst the next target Bashar al-Assad, President of Syria is increasingly feeling the rope tighten around his neck; I hope that the Syrian demonstrators will actually get the chance to obtain validity before the West kicks the chair from under him.
Anti-Box Democracy 
Saddam was turned over to the Iraqis and they tried him – after we Americans forced them to use a trial instead of just tearing him apart – convicted, and humanely executed with as much dignity as could be managed.
That sort of puts the lie to your anti-American, anti-Civilized World rantings.
As for the others, they’re proven guilty by their very natures and applying justice to them would be an insult to the term. Once doesn’t put a plague rat on trial for spreading diseases, one just exterminates it.
I understand where you are coming from. However, that cannot be applied to Osama Bin Laden, when a lot of the evidence based on him in the first place was flawed. Using footage of when he trained in camps under the American government when they were publicising his terrorist acts, disproves a lot of propaganda. On top of it, the British media even refuted the existence of Al Qaeda this year, so the least that should have happened is that he be put on trial and answer for the crimes that he is charged for. Instead, there are so many questions to the actuality of the incidents, in which an entire false war was pledged.
Osama was a proven threat that needed to be exterminated but it would have caused far greater harm to let him be tried in a court because he committed no actual crime within the jurisdiction of any court body.
To try him would have tacitly expanded the jurisdiction of one court or another and that’s far worse than what Osama set in motion.
Unfortunately the proof that was used was ambiguous seen through the time codes in the footage. It has been disproved since they were released. And unlike Bush, the main culprits in the UK such as Blair were put on trial for starting an illegal war (no WMDs were found,) despite all of the allegations. So there was still just reason for a trial, mainly for the 10 million who marched against the war and realised they were having the wool pulled over their eyes, and the thousands of civilians killed in the name of a war against terrorism.
You’ve decided that the proof was ambiguous, as have the Muslims’ allies and all the others who hate America. That doesn’t mean you’re right, especially when every rational person is confident of the accuracy of the data about Osama.
As for Iraq – inaccurate intel doesn’t a false war make. They were wrong, that’s all. They weren’t willing, after at least 2 administrations had decided that the intel for the then upcoming 9/11 strike wasn’t credible, to take that chance again.
I think even more importantly, the outright assassination or kangaroo-court trials of deposed dictators makes it impossible to really dig in and get at the truth of how they obtained and maintained power in the first place. The world deserves a chance to find those truths and learn those lessons, and we’ll never get that under the new standard-operating-procedures.
No point, Michelle – those lessons have already all been learned. Why do you think it keeps happening. You’re just weak and squeamish, which is why others like me do what needs to be done to protect you and your comfortable life.
I like your use of ‘muslim allies,’ as if the war on terrorism is the world against ‘Muslims only.’ Sad really, first it was communism with the MacArthur witch hunts and now this. We have something similar called the ‘English Defence League,’ waging war in the name of extremism using extremist force. Doesn’t work that way. That’s what they used to call those who wanted a second opinion -‘communist sympathisers,’ as a way of ignoring what was being asked in the name of human rights. And labelling our fellow commenter ‘weak and squeamish’ for wanting to get to the bottom of this situation for future reference, is unfair. Hers is an intelligent manoeuvre, and one that every one can use to stop future mistakes.
Comment edited for violating policy terms
As for Michelle, it is just her weakness and squeamishness speaking. I can’t fault her with enough ignorance to actually believe that the truth of how tyrants obtained and maintained power in the first place aren’t well known to everyone that matters.
Hell! We have everything short of “Dummies” books for the would-be dictator.
This comment has been moderated. As the comments policy states: “Derogatory remarks against race, religion, gender, sexuality or disability will not be tolerated. Any attacks on individuals will equally not be tolerated.”
Fine. If you consider an honest observation of the facts at hand as “derogatory,: we have no room for discussion. Your censorship prevent such, since you decide that unpleasant facts – even when delivered objectively and without insult or even motive attached – are unwelcome.
I’m done here, as you are part of the problem and make it that much more clear that bullets are the solution, not words.
No I think prejudice is part of the problem not the solution. Do not mix up hate speech with freedom of speech. They are two very different things promoting different ideas. And censorship has been coined for too long by people who continually want to advocate discriminatory ideas. It’s not welcome anywhere, especially on this anti-discrimination blog which allows all faiths to be part of the discussion including Christians and Muslims. So talking about the “civilized world” against Muslims, is not dangerously prejudiced, (only assuming the rest of the world is ‘uncivilized’ as they are non-American) it is also part of the reason why racist right-wing groups such as the EDL exist spreading an anti-Muslim rhetoric in the name of combating extremism. And if it means protecting people’s human rights here, then I am happy to be of service.