Will they use truth serum on Suddam?
 

He doesn't seem like he'll be talking and giving away valuable information willingly. Will they use truth serum in the end to get him to talk?

Have you seen him?
the man I saw on the first tapes and pictures looked worn, tired and hopeless. He's got no reason not to cooperate. The game is all over for him.
The only thing I'm wondering is: Will he put up a show on his trial, just like Milosevic did? He might use the media attention at the trial to rouse support for him, show that he is still strong. But off camera, and in the coming weeks it looks like he won't be a problem.

Well, from what I've heard he's not really helping. Basically just saying the same BS he's been saying all along.

Honestly, at this point I think he's probably a bit delusional and has been lying so much he actually believes it now. Being on the run the way he was for so many months will do that to you when you're used to living in palaces and having people just listen to everything you say.

He'll be treated with human dignaty, which is more than anyone can say about how he treated his people.

I doubt he'll talk. If he talks, it'll show more of a reason for the invasion and such. If he doesn't, it'll drag on and on.
And I bet he knows that too.
Even though he's been captured, he still has power over us. He knows whether or not Iraq has WMD or not.

These wussy terrorists always give it up. It's not like the good old American mafia (they usually don't talk). But the government will use lots of devious techniques also. Sleep deprivation, hunger, forcing caffiene, withholding vitamins, other mental manipulation... whatever it takes. He will give it up, for certain.

I think that question has obviously been answered during the past year campaign in Iraq...

United States has nothing left to gain from Saddam, why try to deprieve intelligenece from him? Maybe to figure out somethign about the AlQueda or the rebel force but there's no real information to be gain..is there?

I can't think of anything.

We'll never know unless we ask.

I would assume the "Blood work" they were planning to do on him to make sure its him... Is probably more then blood work.

I'll bet they do whatever they have to to make him talk.

Bullies like this are usually cowards. Hitler took the easy way out by suicide. He should sing like a canary.

he'll talk if u offer him a nice bath, a haircut and good meal. but the Goverment will probably extract everything they need out of him, one way or another.

maybe he'll tell us the location of the wmd that didnt exist in the first place ;)

Probably not as the first option, but I reckon it's highly possible somewhere down the line when people get tired of hearing bs over and over again...

so far, i think 4 people in the thread have said that he's telling us bs... but what if he's telling the truth? i see no reason to believe him, per se, but he's got his story and he's sticking to it... might just be the truth... stranger things have happened...

I bet we took so long to capture him so we could see where he goes and nail as many people as possible, then nabbed him before anything bad could happens, he did have 750K on him.

From what I heard he said that he had no WMDs or any intention of producing them at the time of the invasion, and the USA made up that story in an excuse to invade his country. Im guessing they didn't like that one bit.

Oh, and AFAIK no miracle "truth serum" actually exists.

I totally agree with Halx.

I didn't get it, but then again I am slow.

The first thing they did when they got him was drug the shit outta him. If you look at the footage you can tell he's fucked up. He couldn't stand still... his eyes were glossed over... he looked like a college freshman after his first big party.

Yo, do you even know what the possible side effects of truth serum are? Look it up, it ain't good. Basically they run a chance of killing him.

Does "truth serum" even exist? How does it work?

I'll take that chance.

Also, I'd make him wear a frilly pink dress to his trial.

The way you're talking, one would think that Saddam did something to you personally, like running over your dog.

You're acting like he's your girlfriend or something. I do take it personally, he's an enemy of my country.

Well, he could never be my girlfriend, since I don't like girls. :P

Anyway, so you feel that everyone your country considers an enemy should die? (your country, that btw, only cares about human rights when it suits you) No trial, no nothing? How about some justice?

I don't like Saddam, but I can't view him as entierly evil. Because he's not. I just wish that he, as anyone else regardless of their crime, will get a fair trial. I don't belive in "an eye for an eye" and bullshit like that.

I also feel that we have no right to take someonelses life, regardless of their crime.

There are countries in the same state as Iraq was, but the US still considers them friends or neutrals and most importantly, don't care about their actions.

How do you feel about Saudi Arabia supporting the Taliban-regime?

There IS such thing as truth serum. It is a mix of different salts in the right proportions, it's salt water basically, but takes a scientist to get it right. I have no doubt they'll use it on Saddam.

But, out of all the different torture techniques the one that is proven time and time again to be the most effective is sleep disorder. I am currently in the naval flight program, and for that you need to complete SERE school. It is highly classified, but what I can tell you is when you graduate they have done (almost) everything a real POW camp will put you through. After 4 days of not sleeping you litterally have no idea what is real and what is not. So when someone asks you the exact same question every 5 min you will tell them the answer eventually, your mind just breaks down.

That is why I think it's dumb with all the news agencies asking to know how the interogations are being taken place at Guantanamo. We dont use physical pain torture in the US because 1) it doesnt work 90% of the time, and 2) our culture simply doesnt believe in putting another human being through something like that.

The sleep deprivation makes a lot of sense. I've heard that after 48 hours its not uncommon to experience minor hallucinations from dozing halfway in and out of sleep.

I think Halx is referring to Metallica's Ride The Lightning. (Give him the Electric Chair)

Aha. Thanks.

I imagine the situation might go something like this.

*injection*
*wait*
Interrogator: "What is your name?"
Saddam: "Saddam Hussein."
I: "What is your occupation?"
S: "Former president of the Republic of Iraq, currently a prisoner of the United States."
I: "At any point in the months leading up to, during, or after the recent invasion of your country, were any weapons of mass destruction present within your borders?"
S: "No."
I: "Fuck."

Guys .. you can only tell the truth when there is a truth to be told.

Have you ever considered that _perhaps_ Saddam has been telling the truth about W.O.M. ? Or are you all still brain-washed about the existence of such weapons?

actually, i think he was referring to the use of metallica for torture. there was a story a couple months ago how it was being used on iraqi pow's or something like that and making them talk.

that's what i tried to say... but i'll reserve final judgement 'till later.

Just out of curiosity, what harm did he do to your country specifically ?

:D :D

AFAIK, there is no 'truth serum' I guess Seaver is in the military and might know more than me, but I haven't heard, read, or seen anything in my lifetime to show that there is a working truth drug.

1) Fought our soldiers in the gulf war.
2) Attempted to assassinate President George H.W. Bush.
3) Repeatedly fired on USAF planes patroling no fly zones over Iraq.
4) Ignored ban on WMD's.
5) Refused to provide proof of the destruction of illegal weapons previously verified a short few years before.
6) Again fought our soldiers in operation Iraqi freedom.


Make him do customer service for AOL while an angry bear skullfucks him in the eyesocket.

There was NEVER a question that he had the weapons. 1448 specifically requested that he prove he destroyed them, or he'd get his ass handed to him.

We're not brainwashed at all, it just turned out that the security council is corrupt, and liberals take advantage of this fact.

I struggle to see how any of that ammounts to actual harm to the United States. If he assassinated Bush Sr or launched a rocket full of Sarin into a major US city, yes that would be great harm and sure justification. But for a man to become an enemy of the state for largely attempted (and hardly proven) harm, in my opinion, is idealised to say the least.

Yes, they used kids music and metallica as torture to get the Iraqi POWs to talk. Our music is like a soul vice to them. It's great.

1) Yeah, he should just lie down and he ha sno right to defend his country.
4) The US sold WMD's/ingredients for WMD's to him and this also happend:
5) He provided proof, reports etc. It's just that you chose to not belive him. He let the inspectors in several times.
6) Again, "Operation Occupation of Iraq" didn't mean he was nto allowed to defend himself.

what's the truth serum?

Sodium Pentothal (what is commonly called "truth serum") is not what many people think it is. It can reduce one's inhibitions but can't take away one's self-control. You can't use it to prevent someone from lying.

Also, IIRC, administering drugs to a POW against his will violates the Geneva Convention.

Some info:
(from http://www.scienceweb.org/tv/highincident.html)

Remember, the pictures that we see of him are the pictures "they" want us to see of him.

Maybe this was just a misunderstanding of what he meant by "Gulf War" but, if not, you need to read up on your history a bit. The Gulf War was set in motion August 2, 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. The US did very little in the way of attacking Iraq beyond what was necessary to push them out of Kuwait. So, if by defending his country you mean continuing to fight for the ability to continue his crimes, then I suppose you're right. But we never say that someone who murders a police officer resisting arrest "had a right to defend himself." Why? Because he was defending actions which were ultimately wrong, whatever they may be. Same with the Gulf War. Saddam was defending his ability to invade a small neighboring country. He had no right to invade it and thus had no "right" to defend himself.

The UN refused to believe him as well. And he never provided all the proof and documents they asked for. This is an indisputable fact. Maybe it's true - maybe he didn't have WMDs anymore, but either way, proof has never been provide of ALL of their destruction.

Whether or not he had WMD's at the time of this war, I can'ty answer that for sure. I know what I think. But there are certain indisputable facts that apparently you're missing if you think that Iraq was "defending" itself from some injustice in the first Gulf War and if you think they provided proof of the destruction of their WMDs.

Believe whatever you want about the justification of this war. There isn't any PROOF that either side is correct. But believe what you will while understanding that Saddam instigated the first Gulf War - and NO ONE disagrees with this, except perhaps Saddam - and that while they may or may not have had WMDs anymore, proof was never provided.

Opinions are a lot more valid when they're based off the correct facts.

Let's just give him to the Mossad for a weekend and get it over with.
.
.
.
.
. . . . if we haven't, already.

Saddam did instigate it, but the US allowed it to happen. Saddam told the American ambassador (April Glaspie) that he was going to invade Kuwait. Part of her response:
Two days before the war, Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly testified before Congress:
Essentially giving Saddam the green light. If the US was really concerned about the protection of Kuwait, we could have just stated then that we would retaliate against an Iraqi incursion and stopped the whole thing without firing a single shot.

That the Bush Sr. administration allowed it to go ahead makes them, in my mind, partially responsible, even if the primary responsibility is Saddam's. It seems clear that, for some reason (oil, perhaps?) the President was interested in having a war.

truth serum = yes

They have very good stuff. even if they just used sodium pentathol, that would work well, plus you don't have any memory of it afterwards, so he wouldn't even know he gave it up.

They release the false statement that "he isn't telling anything" so that the people he's giving up under drugs won't run so far or fast. This probably won't do much good though. Somehow he isnt' saying much, yet they are capturing many others in rebel leadership because of "papers" they found. yeah, papers...

of course they will. Theyd break fingers and toes and use bamboo shoots in the finger nails and japanese water torture if they thought they could get away with it.

Just think a few more seconds and this thread would be a moot point and Saddam would have been splattered all over the inside of his little rat hole from the grenades that were just about dropped in there.

Personally I think he should be raped publicly, beaten publicly, have all of his bones broken publicly, then be raped again and left laying in the dirt to slowly die. and that would be the nice things I would have done to him.

Yep, you got it. It was all Bush Sr.'s plan to make a war. Nevermind the fact that it was NOT the president who gave Saddam the "green light."

Nevermind the fact that the UN (not the president) gave him an entire month to pull out or face military retaliation. Set on Dec 17th, they gave him until Jan 15th.

Yeah, the ambassador fucked up. But please, there's no Right-Winged conspiracy.

Iraq agreed to a Soviet peace plan that would have met all of the UN requirements on Feb. 21 1991. (http://www.moqatel.com/Mokatel/data/...Docs18_1-1.htm)

It was past the Jan. 15th date but would have ended the conflict without ground combat, which started on the 23rd. Nevertheless, the President refused to accept the plan, preferring to use force. There was clearly more at stake than forcing Iraq to meet UN demands -- something Bush Sr. decided was worth risking American soldiers in a ground attack.