Should Saddam accept Rabbittes Invite?

Cork

"The very idea of the Iraqi dictator setting up home in Ireland will outrage all right thinking people. Deputy Rabbitte should recall that Saddam has caused two major wars, gassed and poisoned his own people, executes all who oppose him and repeatedly defies the international community."

"If we were to act on the recommendation of the Labour leader Ireland would also run the risk of being completely isolated internationally. We cannot be seen to offer Saddam a get out of jail card."

"Deputy Rabbitte must withdraw his proposal now and make clear to Saddam and the rest of the world that there can be no home for the dictator here", concluded Deputy Lenihan.

A purposal that Saddam would come to live in Ireland. It might solve the whole middle east crisis?

Dan Qualye - all is forgiven.

Victor

Originally posted by Cork
"If we were to act on the recommendation of the Labour leader Ireland would also run the risk of being completely isolated internationally. We cannot be seen to offer Saddam a get out of jail card."

So it is OK for the USA to suggest it, it's OK for Turkey to suggest it, but not Ireland?

We have two alternatives consider such offers or face the risk of a terrible war. I think there is an onus on us to consider such ideas.

And should Saddam accept? I think so, it avoids war and stops his regime.

mike65

Plainly we should accept Saddam and then kill him by locating him in the more lively parts of drug dealing Dublin. He would'nt last 10 mins among that lot....

....or Limerick I'm not fussy!

Mike.

sceptre

The US government have stated that an invasion of Iraq will be unnecessary if there is a regime change. They have also stated that they will not pursue Saddam Hussein if he leaves the country of his own free will. Hence, should you choose to believe these two statements, the acceptance of such an invitation by Saddam Hussein would prevent a war and save a large number of lives. Huessein could still be invited to the Hague at any point should everyone feel like it. I see Brian Lenihan would rather see Americans and Iraqis die than set aside half an acre in some remote area. Sounds like the age old attitude of "not in my back yard". Wonder if Deputy Lenihan is also worried about Ireland getting overrun by foreigners*. Ironically if a regime change occurred in Iraq, Saddam Hussein could meet many of the requirements for asylum seekers. Then he still gets his day out in Holland.

(OT but mentioned for some unfathomable reason in the first post)
Dan Quayle is still an idiot. I'm pretty sure (regardless of rumours of his being groomed for a position in the middle east) that he couldn't find Iraq on a map. Or spell potato. He was also a Republican (American-style) for anyone who can't remember (thinking of no-one in particular:rolleyes: ) and thought socialism was something you did every summer over a few drinks in the Hamptons. More in common with a current Taoiseach than an opposition leader then.


* OK, that's a little below the belt but it's based on similar logic - deciding whether things are acceptable or not can't be based on whether they occur in your own country or constituency.

gandalf

Cork in reality you shouldn't have a problem with Saddam coming to exile here if as you always state you care so much for the Iraqi people. That move would surely save thousands of civilians lives and make Iraqis move to a "true" democracy easier (well as long as they vote like Washington wants them).

My only sitpulation would be that he can't join FF or the PD's as he'd fit right in with those lying snakes

Gandalf.

Sand

Id have thought Labour, what with is secularist/socialist leanings and the way hed remeber the way Bertie and co didnt do him any favours with Shannon airport.

Cork

I think that you should not make light of Mr. Rabbitte's contribution.

It is Mr. Rabbitte's proposal . I think Iraq would be better off, if Saddam went to another planet.

Deputy Lenihan (FF) stated "Deputy Rabbitte should recall that Saddam has caused two major wars, gassed and poisoned his own people, executes all who oppose him and repeatedly defies the international community."

I think the FF position is very clear. I think Pat may think that Saddam after getting 100% of the popular vote in Iraq could work his magic for the Labour party.

Guys, whats the problem here? We let in political refugees all the time, and if America invade Iraq, then Saddam will become a political refugee. Also in the cases of gasing his people, and using chemical weapons, Saddam has not been indicted for war crimes, or crimes against Humanity, so on a legal stand-point these reasons shouldn't be used against him.

So what, that he's a dictator, and has personally ordered the killing of people. We let American Presidents come here, and America has killed more people than any other nation during war, than any other nation (with the exception of Germany, & Russia).

If Saddam comes here, he's no longer a dictator. Since no charges were ever brought to bear on him for mass murder (and convicted), he shouldn't be hit by it). As for causing two wars, Christianity, has caused alot more wars, and we still have that here. Oh, and repeatably defies the international community. Theres two points to this: 1) He rules Iraq, not the Interational Community. 2) So has alot of other countries, and we don't see us stopping them from entering out country.

I say let him come in. Hell, at least he'll be spending his 2 billion here in ireland.

Cork

We let American Presidents come here, and America has killed more people than any other nation during war, than any other nation (with the exception of Germany, & Russia).

Saddam has used chemical weapons on his own people. He is not in compliance with with UN resolutions. He is no advocate of human rights.

Yet America is evil.

We let American Presidents come here

& when the come they are even greeted by "Irish Socialists".

Ireland has a proud history with the UN.

Saddam has not.

I am sure many Irish would not even allow this man to step on Irish soil. Mr. Rabbitte is not speaking on behalf of this country - he has put this kite out as leader of the labour party.

Cork, I've never said that America is Evil.

All i'm saying is that the Nation of America over the last 10 years has killed more people than Saddam has, with his chemical weapons.

Ireland has a proud history with the UN.

Saddam has not.

now you're going to compare ireland with Saddam? Come on, be serious. The differences are too great for them to be compared. Its like comparing the success of Supermac's with America's Global Economy.

am sure many Irish would not even allow this man to step on Irish soil. Mr. Rabbitte is not speaking on behalf of this country - he has put this kite out as leader of the labour party.

Maybe you & he should ask the irish people before you make those assumptions. Alot of people will simply not care, since it doesn't really affect their lives. Also the people who care abt it, will be split among the people who know the facts abt saddam, and the other half, which will base their opinions on hearsay.

Most people don't care whether refugees enter this country or not. But as soon as it affects their lives they'll take an interest.

Mr. Rabbitte is not speaking on behalf of this country

Maybe he is, and you're the one thats not. Don't make too many assumptions, without asking the irish people first, Cork.

seamus

Originally posted by Cork
Saddam has used chemical weapons on his own people. He is not in compliance with with UN resolutions. He is no advocate of human rights.

Saddam has not been tried or investigated by the UN for any crimes. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? A man who commits murder, but who has not been found guilty, is still an innocent man in the eyes of the law. Should we abandon all of our legal principles just for this man?

His country is not in compliance with UN resolutions. I don't think a single person can be held accountable for a country's position by the UN. Once you remove the man from the country, Iraq's non-compliance, or any other issues do not involve him, so your point is moot.

You'd be surprised how many of your friends and co-workers disagree with sections of the Declaration of Human Rights, whether they realise it or not. In Arab countries, life tends to be cheap anyway. Many of these people may not be advocates of human rights. Should they all be refused entry too, if/when war breaks out? Perhaps we should do mental profiling on everyone living and seeking to live in Ireland, so we can only keep those who wish to be part of our PC utopia? :rolleyes: A person's beliefs should not be a barrier to their safety and wellbeing (unless they believe in being unsafe and unwell ).

Personally, I think it's a great suggestion. It would probably bring about peace in Iraq, without the need for arms - a perfect example of proper application of our Constitution.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
Saddam has used chemical weapons on his own people. He is not in compliance with with UN resolutions. He is no advocate of human rights.

So what?

The end result of war or exile would be what you keep saying that you think you want - regime change. No more Saddam for the Iraqi people.

You are arguing that a peaceful solution would not be preferable to a war with the potential for thousands of civilian deaths (if not more). Why? Because you dont want the bad man in your country. Lovely. I'm sure the Iraqi's would love to hear that....

"Yes - we are here to help you, but we think bombing and invading your nation and putting your lives at risk would be a preferable solution to exile of Saddam."

Or is it just Ireland who should refuse? Its okay for Saddam to go into exile as long as its someone else who takes him? Super...the "not in my back yard" branch of morality.

jc

Bard

Originally posted by seamus
His country is not in compliance with UN resolutions. I don't think a single person can be held accountable for a country's position by the UN. Once you remove the man from the country, Iraq's non-compliance, or any other issues do not involve him, so your point is moot.
[/B]

Surely he can be held (somewhat) accountable for his country's stance with the UN, considering that he IS the country's DICTATOR.

TomF

I don't think Saddam would consider exile because he has so many mortal enemies who are itching to assassinate him that he needs the Personal Security Organisation that is the modern Iraq. If he left Iraw, his only chance to survive would have to go into a prison like Slabodan Milosevic. Off-hand, I can't think of too many Irish prisons where Saddam would be safe.

TomF

Oops. I should have done a bit more editing on that post!

seamus

Originally posted by Bard
Surely he can be held (somewhat) accountable for his country's stance with the UN, considering that he IS the country's DICTATOR.

No doubt, but I know nothing about UN law/policy. Cork was using the fact that Saddam is not complying with UN resolutions as a reason not to have him in our country, but once he's here, he's no longer a dictator, so the fact that he once upon a time ran a country that refused to comply with the UN is an invalid point, since it would have no bearing on him, while living here.

growler

hmmm , perhaps a regime swap would keep everyone happy , we give them Bertie to help run the country during its transformation into a democratic republic along the lines of the ideal fianna fail state (ideal really, no opposition just like home, and the promise of huge backhanders for everything to mineral exploration rights to planning permission ..just like home) , he could even promise them a football stadium and the world cup , and monuments to outshine all others etc etc.

in exchange we could install saddam as a new tribunal head to determine innocence or guilt in the never ending corruption tribunals that have bored everyone to death , he may even learn a thing or two about evasive tactics, nepotism and mis-appropriation of funds

Give Saddam a house in Leitrim, probably the funniest exile the world would ever see.

Cork

I think by issuing an invite, Rabbitte was expressing his openion as leader of the left. He is entitled to his openion but

but once he's here, he's no longer a dictator, so the fact that he once upon a time ran a country that refused to comply with the UN is an invalid point, since it would have no bearing on him, while living here.

This would not change that mans past of gasing his own people.

He is a complete undesirable.

I woulder will Rabbitte now take on the cases of other undesirables. They is one former singer who comes to mind.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
He is a complete undesirable.

Well of course he bloody is...why do you think they want him out of Iraq in the first place? :rolleyes:

What is the issue is whether or not exile is a preferable solution to war. If it is, then unless there is a reason why we should not step up and offer it, we should do exactly that. Otherwise, it is hyprocacy in the extreme to say that exile is a better choice, as long as its someone else who has to suffer the guy.

So - is exile a preferable solution to war?

What reasons exist as to why Ireland should not be amongst the nations offering asylum.

jc

gandalf

So Cork what your saying is that Saddam should go into exile to solve this problem with Iraq but your not prepared to have him come here.

You prefer to soundbite about Socialists & Communists without offering anything constructive. Sounds a bit like "Rightwingwhingyitus" to me. I believe Mary Harney suffers from it as well along with "Losttouchwiththeelectorate Flu".

I recommend a week in bed with some Anadin and stop reading the "Irish" Sun its bad for you :rolleyes:

Gandalf.

seamus

Originally posted by Cork
This would not change that mans past of gasing his own people.

My point was, that
He is not in compliance with with UN resolutions.
is no good reason to refuse him asylum in Ireland. Don't selectively quote me.

He is a complete undesirable.

Oh no! Maybe we should start casting out and refusing all the other 'undesirables'. So you would be happy that the U.S. et al would go to war, simply because you'd be afraid that Saddam would bring down the tone of this country?

Bunreacht na hÉireann, Article 29
2. Ireland affirms its adherence to the principle of the pacific settlement of international disputes by international arbitration or judicial determination.

Pat Rabbitte has shown a bit of vision here. I would never have thought of it in a million years. This is a perfect solution.

4 scenarios:

Saddam stays where he is. The U.S. come up with some reason to attack Iraq, and kill more than Saddam ever did in the name of 'democracy'.

Saddam flees, and is welcomed by some cash-starved, 'oppressed' country, where he quickly regains power and building another force. Iraq becomes stable and gets a U.S.-friendly government/ruler.

Saddam flees to Ireland. He spends the rest of his life locked up in a large mansion, and attracts scumbag British paparazzi(sp?) wanting to get pictures of an incontinent, slurring dictator on death's door. Iraq becomes stable and gets a U.S.-friendly government/ruler.

Saddam flees to Ireland. The UN tries him for crimes against humanity and lock him up for the rest of his life. No-one dies, and no-one has to go to war. Iraq becomes stable and gets a U.S.-friendly government/ruler.

If Saddam came here (or the possibility was presented), then either of the last two scenarios could at least be a possibility (as opposed to the first two).

Saddam living here can have absolutely no negative effect on this country, as far as I can see.

mike65

...I've just realised this is an idiotic topic being taken seriously!:eek:

Mike.

Miguel_Sanchez

Saddamm will never leave Iraq. He'll shoot himself first (or so he says).

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Seamus, you're assuming that America can make Iraq stable after they invade. They can occupy, but consider, Israel has been in Palestine for decades, and no-one in their right mind can call that place stable. Iraq will probably turn out the same way.

He is entitled to his openion but

But? But what?

This would not change that mans past of gasing his own people.

Cork. This has been thrown back and forth hundreds of times in the last month. Read some of the other posts regarding this, before you make such a concrete assumption that it happened.

He is a complete undesirable.

No, His actions have made him an undesirable. You don't know the man. He could turn out to be a bunny rabbit, that has been forced into being a schmuck through circumstances.

I woulder will Rabbitte now take on the cases of other undesirables. They is one former singer who comes to mind.

Cork, for someone who makes broad sweeping comments about human-rights, you seem to be very selective as to who can have em.

Saddam living here can have absolutely no negative effect on this country, as far as I can see

I agree. Its not as if he'd be allowed to bring his supposed WMD's with him, or anything.