US offers immunity to Saddam

sounds like a good plan, no war, madman gone, Iraq liberated.

Rumsfeld and Powell back exile plan

Richard Norton-Taylor and Helena Smith in Larnaca
Monday January 20, 2003
The Guardian

The United States last night offered Saddam Hussein immunity from prosecution if his departure from Baghdad would avert war.
With only seven days to go before weapons inspectors deliver their crucial report to the UN security council, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary and one of the Bush administration’s leading hawks, dangled the prospect of a peaceful way out, despite the massive military build-up.

“If to avoid a war,” Mr Rumsfeld said in a TV interview, “I would … recommend that some provision be made so that the senior leadership in that country [Iraq] and their families could be provided haven in some other country.”

Hours later, in what appeared to be a series of choreographed interviews, his more doveish rival in the US administration, Colin Powell, backed his remarks. Asked about a reported Saudi initiative to grant amnesty to senior Iraqi leaders, he said: “I would encourage Saddam Hussein, if he is getting any messages of this kind, to listen.”

The hints from Washington added weight to an Arab initiative, backed by Saudi Arabia and others, that would urge the Iraqi leader to go into exile.

Even if the US granted President Saddam immunity from prosecution, the viability of the Arab plan would depend on his willingness to give up power, something many believe he would never contemplate. Allowing the Iraqi leader to avoid a trial for alleged war crimes might also prove controversial. In London, the Foreign Office maintained its view that the main issue was disarming Iraq rather than removing President Saddam.

US offers immunity to Saddam | World news | The Guardian

There is no way in hell Saddam will leave Iraq, he will not go into exile, that is the worst thing to a human being, death is far more better. Dying in his land would be what he would want, not dying in someone else's land. Exile would kill someone from the inside, the US and other Arab nations are just soo arrogant to even think about that. Yes, of course Saddam is not an angle but he is no different then any other world leader. Just look what happen to the Shah of Iran, dying in exile. Saddam would rather die then leave and thats what he will do, he will never leave, never.

SO Maj, are you with Saddam?

LOL!!! Finally... that didn't take too long coming! And all this while I'd thought they'd offer it to him right at the time of the bombing.

Well well. Saddam will now run and hide. Typical.

But would that be a regime change? I dont think so, what this will change is the oil minister in Baghdad.

and by the way who is the host? Egypt

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by MiniMe: *
But would that be a regime change? I dont think so, what this will change is the oil minister in Baghdad.

and by the way who is the host? Egypt
[/QUOTE]

You are right, Egypt is the host

Chaltahai who ever you dislike I will like

I hate Ariel Sharon and Georege Bush.

:k:

Nadia wants to see the Oil minister in Baghadad changed? I am confused.

I propose we exile him to Tuvalu, he will find some other people there as well as you will see in the thread in general titled living in USA while hating it.

If that is not possible can we have him sent to either burkina faso, burundi or lesotho?

I think it would be a total regime change and thus liberate Iraq, none-the-less this gives an option to avoid war, so let's here those against the war demand Saddam step down!

Nadia, I'm curious if you would support this solution? To me it is the best way to solve the existing problems... Saddam is gone w/out a single drop of blood having been shed and the sanctions can be lifted.

Why would you object to this?

Fraudiya..are you not being paid by the Burkhina Faso toursim board anymore, man? What's up with the new allegiance to Tuvalu?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
I hate Ariel Sharon and Georege Bush.
[/QUOTE]

BULL SH*T

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Stu: *Nadia, I'm curious if you would support this solution? ...] Why would you object to this?
[/QUOTE]
*

Stu,
i know i am beginning to seem like your typical extremist wacko on this board, especially today, but anyways - here is my answer. i would object to it on the principle that i do not believe anyone, except the civilians of Iraq, have the right to decide the nature & structure of their government. That being said yes i realize that there has never been an election in that country, but i still do not believe that that justifies regime change. If it does, then i propose we start with the country where i was born - the United Arab Emirates, whose people have never seen a ballot box let alone an official list of independent political candidates running for office.

May i ask you a question now, Stu - if Hussein is gone, who would you prefer to see in power in Iraq? i would appreciate a precise name of an individual you believe would be most suitable for the job (and preferably not Ahmad Chalabi or anyone else wanted in Jordan for embezzlement). Thx in advance,
nadia

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
Fraudiya..are you not being paid by the Burkhina Faso toursim board anymore, man? What's up with the new allegiance to Tuvalu?
[/QUOTE]

Guv'

well, I am sending these guys there cuz that island is sinking, what better place than that to send saddam in exile? I would have said top of mount etna, but when it erupts is kinda iffy.

otherwise I am still promoting Burkina Faso, Burundi and Lesotho.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *

Guv'

well, I am sending these guys there cuz that island is sinking, what better place than that to send saddam in exile? I would have said top of mount etna, but when it erupts is kinda iffy.

otherwise I am still promoting Burkina Faso, Burundi and Lesotho.
[/QUOTE]

hahahahahah...you crack me up kid...

Fk Saddam..I hope he has an accident in exile or steps on a bunker buster.

Nadia, I have to admit that I'm very disappointed by your answer. You must realize that what you say is highly impractical. For all your talk of peace, I'm beginning to think you are really more in the anti-US camp.

It's obvious that the people of Iraq should be allowed to choose their own leadership, but it's even more obvious that Saddam's gov't would never allow that reform.

The sanctions were intended to incite the people to replace their current leadership and that failed miserably. The people of Iraq are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he doesn't step down then hopefully someone, with the UN's participation, will intervene and end the stalemate.

Furthermore, so far as I know the UAE doesn't have a track record of attacking it's neighbors, not to mention using WMD against other countries and it's own people.

As far as my vote for the new Iraqi leadership, I do agree that it should not be a US stooge. Perhaps the UN could help conduct elections, with the help of neighboring countries.

Nadia, what is the solution? Wait until he dies and let him have free reign to terrorize his people and neighbors until then? Do you honestly believe that left unchecked he would not resume an active WMD program?

Alright, fine.
Just to prove that i am not rigidly stuck to my views in a narrow-minded way - fine, let's say that i agree with US-sponsored regime change in Iraq. (Please appreciate that it takes a great deal of compromise, and probably even sacrificing of my values, on my part to state this). He's never going to go peacefully - granted, so alright go ahead with regime change. Next step - no one has yet given me a precise name of an individual to succeed Hussein - who will be 'democratically installed' as the next President of Iraq? A precise name of a real individual. Please.

>>The sanctions were intended to incite the people to replace their current leadership and that failed miserably.<<
Stu, you endorse punishing a people for the crimes of a dictator they never even elected in the first place?

Whether or not Hussein goes tomorrow, or the year after that, sanctions should be lifted NOW. You've punished a people for the crimes of one man, a man whom they never even elected in the first place, never even brought into power. Sanctions are not a very smart way to endear yourself to the civilian population while simultaneously further entrenching the rule of a dictatorial govt. Get rid of them now, whether or not 'regime change' is a success.