You're trying Odin so you get points for that . . .

You're trying, too. Trying my patience.

. . .(most here just surrender without firing a post) . . .

I've noticed that. Disgusting, aint it? Me and Diogenes are searching for an honest intelligent conservative, but I'm beginning to doubt one exists.

. . .but you'll be hard pressed to find me generating strawmen arguments or paragraphs strewn with hypercritical hyperbole. . .

"Hard Pressed?" It was impossible to wade through your first post in the thread without laughing at all the strawmen and hyperbole.

Here's some reading for you to catch up on. This way when I throw the word millions around you'll realize the figure is not an exaggeration.

Does it mention "millions" of Iraqis killed in any of those documents? The first is from the same U.S. State Department that claimed it was a "fact" that Iraq had recently sought uranium from Niger, so it's a questionable source at best.

The quote from the State Department official in the second doc. should also be regarded as suspect, for the same reason.

The AI documents are a more credible source, but even they don't assert Saddam had millions of Iraqis killed. I didn't notice any of the documents supporting that claim. Do you understand the difference between hundreds of thousands and "millions?"

The exact figure is unknown but 300,000 bodies alone are estimated by an "expert" to be in the 250 identified mass grave sites around Iraq. Unfortunately, these 250 known sites are just the tip of the iceberg. Mass graves are literally everywhere.

Take a deep breath and try to reconnect with reality. "Mass graves are literally everywhere?" You're blathering again.

Like Stalin's purgings the torture and execution of citizens in Iraq for 23 years has easily led to a million or more deaths. (I believe an easy case can be made that roughly 44,000 were executed per year all over Iraq)

Got any credible evidence in support of that belief? Even if you're right, that's 1,012,000. How did the other 988,000 Iraqis Saddam supposedly killed in "deathcamps" die?

We know that after the first gulf war and the subsequent uprising alone that over 180,000 people were taken and disappeared.

How do "we know that?" Haven't you learned yet that all sources aren't credible? Try not to be so gullible.

My choice of the "death camps" to describe how they were killed is not really 100% accurate.

Most if not all of what I've seen of your blatherings haven't been "really 100% accurate."

In Iraq every town and every city was a "death camp" complete with locations to apprehend, torture and execute victims in front of their families/children.

And farms are death camps for plants and animals. Using the term "death camp" to describe every Iraqi town and city trivializes the experiences of the Jews who suffered and/or died in real death camps.

However, would it really make you feel better if I said "an unknown amount in excess of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed in Saddam's death cities?"

Make me feel better? LOL. If you mean would it lessen my disgust, probably not, considering it's still hyperbole and conjecture you can't support.

Does any of this really matter when describing a torturing, mass-murdering dictator?

Only if you value truth and honesty. You're the one who said, "Hypocrisy? No, No! Hitler was a real dictator you see. The millions of Iraqis killed in deathcamps and such events as the gassing of the Kurds will never equal the gassing of the Jews.

You made up a strawman --"millions of Iraqis killed in deathcamps"-- to bolster your attempt at sarcasm. Why not simply admit it and resolve to sin no more?

You've allowed yourself to believe what the left is pushing, namely that Saddam wasn't as bad as the US made him out.

If by "the U.S," you're referring to people like Bush [43] and Bush [41] who've called him a "madman" and "worse than Hitler," you're right, I don't believe he's as bad as they've made him out. I don't think he's a madman or worse than Hitler.

Hitler was responsible for millions more deaths and a lot more suffering than Hussein. Hitler encouraged his people to focus on the dark sides of their psyches and to block out any feelings of compassion or warmth for those the Reich considered subhuman. He fanned the flames of anti-semitism into a conflagration.

However, my personal opinion is that Saddam was even more sadistic than Hitler. Hitler distanced himself from the atrocities.

By that logic, the Marquis de Sade was worse than Hitler.

He was sick but kept up the pretenses of being civilized.

Sick? Like a lot of conservatives, Hitler believed in social Darwinism.

It is well known that Hussein often took personal visits to those being tortured and had a hands-on approach with many of his "important" victims or disloyal family members.

It was well-known that the Iraqis were hiding WMDs, too. Try not to believe everything
everyone tells you.

He also kept video tapes of his victims' tortures and watched them repeatedly. (According to an ex-mistress)

An ex-mistress? With an unimpeachable source like that, it must be true. You talked to her yourself?