Talk:Saddam Hussein/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Iraqi government website and Saddam's internet presence

The homepage of the Iraqi government during Saddam can be viewed here: http://web.archive.org/web/20000930170810/http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/

This Wired article talks about his email account:

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:16, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Reading level of lead

The following is not cast at an appropriate reading level concerning a historical figure known to every person on the planet who owns a television, whether formally educated or not.

A leading member of the revolutionary Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, and later, the Baghdad-based Ba'ath Party and its regional organisation Ba'ath Party – Iraq Region—which espoused ba'athism, a mix of Arab nationalism and Arab socialism—Saddam played a key role in the 1968 coup (later referred to as the 17 July Revolution) that brought the party to power in Iraq.

Already discouraging: Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party

Let's do it twice, then: Baghdad-based Ba'ath Party

Twice in duplicate: and its regional organisation Ba'ath Party

With a pedantic flourish: – Iraq Region

Skill testing "which" question: A, and later, B and C—which espoused ba'athism [gloss omitted]—

Stupefying Arrid-extra-dry political gloss: a mix of Arab nationalism and Arab socialism

Long belated SV drop: Saddam played

Extended to belated SVO: a key role in the 1968 coup

Further extended to belated SVO (footnote O): (later referred to as the 17 July Revolution)

Further further extended to belated SVO (footnote O) non-restrictive qualifier: that brought the party to power in Iraq.

I suppose if I had a few years of undergraduate history under my belt, my mind would immediately recognize that B and C are somehow murkily co-extensive with A (there does seem to be a lot of that in politics) and that there really is only one back-reference, however murky it might be, but all I had to work with was a decent background in linguistics, which enabled me to puzzle it all out. — MaxEnt 18:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Would you like to improve it, or discuss improvements here? NebY (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Intro section

The lead doesn't flow very well; maybe the section on his name can be moved elsewhere? David O. Johnson (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Missing cite regarding Halabja attack

I don't have right to edit the article due to semi-protection, and I suggest citing ref. 15 of Halabja chemical attack regarding:

The United States now maintains that Saddam ordered the attack to terrorize the Kurdish population in northern Iraq,[60] but Saddam's regime claimed at the time that Iran was responsible for the attack[61] which some[who?] including the U.S. supported until several years later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsoksane (talk • contribs) 08:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Name

He should be referred to by his surname in the article. (92.0.99.44 (talk) 17:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC))

My edit request concerns the following excerpt in the article's introductory section:

"Whereas some[10] venerated Saddam for his opposition to Israel—which included the use of military force[11]—he was widely condemned in the west for the brutality of his dictatorship."

There are 5 assertions in the above: 1. Saddam Hussein opposed Israel. 2. This opposition included military force. 3. Some venerated him for this opposition. 4. His dictatorship was brutal. 5. The west widely condemned this brutality.

While all of the above statements are veridical, the sentence's syntax creates an inference that goes beyond these five facts. It is made to appear that an opposition to Israel, a subjective stance, is an objectively honorable one. This is done by means of juxtaposing this position against the notion of a brutal dictatorship, which is indeed considered to be universally comdemnable to the extreme. In other words, it is implying that the two are morally commensurate polar opposites, which they are not. While it is of course the case that many are opposed to Israel, it is biased to imply here that as many people in the world are opposed to Israel as they are opposed to brutal dictatorships.

Here is the original quotation from which the excerpt extracts the point: "In attacking the Israeli heartland and openly defying the US...[Saddam] restored to Arabs their human dignity." It is a generalization to use the word 'some' when replacing 'Arabs', as Arabs are an idiosyncratic, ethnic, cultural, regional, and political group with distinct viewpoints.

Finally, it should be noted that the source regarding Saddam's opposition to Israel is from a work by Norman Finkelstein, a highly controversial and noted anti-Israel activist.

Here's a possible replacement sentence:

"Saddam was widely condemned in the west for the brutality of his dictatorship. Some in the Arab world, however, viewed some of his actions favorably, such as his opposition to Israel, which included military force."

Thank you for reading.

Lack of section on legacy/views of him

For such a major figure surely there should be a section about his legacy and how he was viewed during and after his death? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.94.46 (talk) 02:31, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Exactly! The articles other major
Arab leaders such as Faisal I of Iraq, Hafez al-Assad, Hussein of Jordan, Ibn Saud, and Anwar Sadat have the same problems. Charles Essie (talk
) 18:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner
:Online 23:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner
:Online 14:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit request: grammar fix

There's an extra word in the third sentence of the second-to-last paragraph of the Iran-Iraq War section.

It says "Neither side had achieved what they had originally desired and at the borders were left nearly unchanged."

The word "at" should be removed, and a comma should be added.

Thanks. Rtdrovla (talk) 06:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

While you're at it, there's a horrible run-on sentence in the final paragraph of that section: "However, this had proven to completely backfire both on Iraq and on the part of the Arab states, for Khomeini was widely perceived as a hero for managing to defend Iran and maintain the war with little foreign support against the heavily backed Iraq and only managed to boost Islamic radicalism not only within the Arab states, but within Iraq itself, creating new tensions between the Sunni Ba'ath Party and the majority Shiite population."

This can be broken up into multiple sentences very easily. Rtdrovla (talk) 07:00, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Saddam Hussein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Political mentors

Saddam is often compared to Hitler, but not long after he came to power he was described in an article as being heavily influenced by Josef Stalin, right down to his decision to wear a moustache. Is there any surviving evidence of this? Meltingpot (talk) 07:45, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

long quote

The block quotation in the execution section should be either summarized or sent to the footnote. The best place for such footnotes are Wikiquote. --Mhhossein talk 12:59, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Removal of "20th-century criminals" category

Hey @Swazzo: We know that "Saddam Hussein was found guilty of crimes against humanity" on 5 November 2006 and that'w why there's no POV if we say that he was a 20th-century criminal. Can you say why you removed that category? Regards. --Mhhossein talk 11:07, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Infobox image

@StjJackson: Hey, I just noticed that you had changed the Infobox image from a more recent version to an older one. I'm in favor of Glide08's edit, since it shows a more recent and realistic image of Saddam. --Mhhossein talk 18:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

  • what does it mean "realistic" for the image? All the images are realistic for they are images, not paintings. There was a consensus to keep the older image because it represents the most widely known appearance of Saddam Hussein - without beard and relatively young. I'll change it unless you provide some more convincing arguments. --Agranome et Chofers (talk) 19:11, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
    • No, there was no consensus for that, where is that? We should not ignore the most fresh version. Pinging Volvlogia for attention. --Mhhossein talk 19:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Here are two encyclopedic instances of 2000s Saddam pictures used as the definitive Saddam.[1][2]. --Volvlogia (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
        • This can be seen in your own sources. --Mhhossein talk 16:37, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
          • I would prefer to use an older picture of Saddam—without a beard—from before his trial, as that would better reflect his public image both in Iraq and abroad during his long time in power. It's not clear why anyone would prefer to use the unshaven, mildly disheveled Saddam on trial as the main infobox image unless the goal is to present the subject of this article in the most unflattering light possible.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Saddam Hussein | Biography & Facts". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2018-04-21.
  2. ^ "Saddam Hussein". Biography. Retrieved 2018-04-21.


Bias

Article nowhere even mentions the persecution of Shi'ite Muslims under Saddam's rule. 500,000-1,000,000 Shia were killed under his rule and around 300,000 kurds. He was hated by everybody but the minority Sunnis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.161.184 (talk) 18:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me? I come from a huge "shi'ite" family, with members who were physically maimed for being politically active, and almost all looked very favorably upon him. He was a dictator and tyrant, but lets not pretend he was loathed by all. Its entirely anecdotal, but to prove 1 million shi'ite were deliberately killed based on religion, you'll have to systematically prove such destruction destruction of shi'ite purely based on religion - you'll have a hard time because he was a secular ruler. 108.0.239.143 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, good that you put "Shi'ite" in "". I'm Iraqi Shia and ther's not one Shia in Iraq having a favourable opinions of Saddam, he is hated by all. Every single Shia family in Iraq lost a family member to his Sunni dominated, secterian government. My wife's father still has marks on his back from tortures he endured at the hands of Saddam's thugs, only for the simple fact that he was a Shia muslim who happened to walk at the wrong time in the wrong place. Between March and October 1991, Saddam killed 200,000 Shi'ites alone. Source: [1] Nowadays, his buddies are the ISIS leadership in Iraq.

Your information is not factual at all. Saddam Hussein was only accused of ordering the killing of the little over 100 Shite protesters in Basra. Add the several thousands of political prisoners that died or were executed barely totals a million. One million huh?

--185.53.243.248 (talk) 08:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

200,000 Shi'ites killed alone between March and October in 1991, source: [2]. Add to it massacres, tortures, forced disappeareances, Kurdish victims and you gonna end up with around a million people.


This line: "With the intention of discrediting Saddam Hussein with his supporters, CIA was considering[when?] making a video in which he would be seen having sex with a teenager.[144]" appears under family and relationships. I don't understand how that's relevant to that section. 92.232.57.201 (talk) 08:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

More appropriate article photo

The current photo of Hussein here is black and white, appears to be airbrushed and does not represent Hussein well at all. The photo should either be a photo of Hussein as he appeared around the time of the Iraq War (what he is arguably most well known for) or as he appeared later in life, i.e at his trial or prior to his execution. One of the following photos would be more appropriate: Hussein at trial, Hussein in 2001, Hussein in 1979 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan868 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Article needs updating. duper deeduper updating

Near the end of the Obama Admisinstration there was a release of declassified documents that demonstrated the knowledge that the Pentagon had collected pertaining to the existence & implementation of WMD's in IRAQ by Saddam Hussein. Facts are in. The accusations were not false after-all & the article of this page needs cleaning up. It needs a special spring cleaning with PENTAGON AUTHORIZATION, because you know...facts are disappointing.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/9kve3z/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion

https://spectator.org/60689_new-york-times-rediscovers-weapons-mass-destruction-iraq/

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/10/ny_times_admits_saddam_had_wmds.html

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/02/iraq-had-wmds-after-all.php

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/OpenDebateForum/ahc_bAW0CUI/a4N6pEBEEa8J

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/365393-how-quickly-ny-times-forgets-obamas-lies-and-frauds

& finally the Pentagon Papers themselves that vindicate the Bush Administration & delegitimize the stigma of the then leftist narrative produced by the Anti-War crowd that...*sigh*...has no faith in The American Body of Mind of Position & Identity & Senses & Seasons & Challenges & Emotion & Character & Influences & Sovereignty & Tools & Targets & Techniques & Morals & Morale & Virtues & Vices & Irony & Curses Tinhat & Strategy & Rescue & LIVING THE VISION & Particularity & Oblivion.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0

squiggly wiggely weeble wobble time-travel tippy whippy whoppy toppel ….. just say yes to the |swamp-blue-green-dragon-lady-alien. True Premise (talk) 08:14, 27 November 2018 (UTC) True Premise Michael J. Groesbeck Deist Devil's Son

Make an argument beside the sequence you lost child you.

The "leftist narrative" was that Saddam did not possess WMDs. Abandoned materials of a former WMD program are not equivalent to actually existing WMDs or an in-progress program to manufacture them. See: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bush-iraq-wmds_n_5990624 --Ismail (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

infobox image

The current image looks very airbrushed and does not represent Hussein well. I would suggest perhaps this photograph. 78.108.56.35 (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I think that, whatever image the article ends up with, it should be during his time in power. I'd personally pick one circa 1990 since that was when he achieved global notoriety. Bearded pictures can easily be shown in parts of the article on his capture and trial. --Ismail (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Can we get consensus on which image to use in the infobox? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Official portrait per Ismail. As far as I know, it's completely unheard of to use anything else in articles on deceased world leaders, although the most recent picture might be used for BLPs. The disheveled figure of Saddam on trial succeeds in making the subject of this article look bad, but is nevertheless a poor choice for the lede.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 09:26, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Official portrait per Ismail. I agree. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Is it actually wikipedia policy to exclusively use official portraits regardless of their quality? The current infobox photo (b/w) is terrible, especially when compared to other higher res, better representative photos readily available on the page. If not the bearded photo, which I would choose due to its high quality and recency, it should surely be one of the colour photos opposite, when he was president. Nathan868 (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

What about this one from 1979 (roughly same date as the current image, but higher quality and also in color) or this one from 2001 78.108.56.35 (talk) 11:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd go with the 2001 one. I think any picture from about 1988-2002 would be appropriate. --Ismail (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
1979
2001
A picture speaks a thousand words, we should use the official portrait to maintain consistent representation of political figures. Any other approach leads to supporters and detractors warring on the article. If the image quality is low I don't think that's so important provided the figure is clearly recognisable. If official multiple official portraits exist of a deceased person, the period in which they held the highest official possition, maybe with consideration to which position they held was more relevant to their not ability. --Billbarrelrider (talk) 07:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Surname

Like I said with Ivan the Terrible (whose surname has been fixed), is there a particular reason Saddam's surname is under S while Uday and Qusay are under H? Cinefan Cinefan (talk) 03:20, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2019

Uday has a surviving son named Massoud Uday Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein's grandson asks Trump for help against Iran, Dailu Sabah, 27 Feb 2017. 222.164.212.168 (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Massoud is son of Uday's wife, Sevim Torun, with whom Uday's marriage lasted onlly for 8 months, after which she escaped to Trukey. Torun had married Uday after she won the 1982 Queen of Bagdad pageant title, she died in Turkey in December 2010 at the age of 52.Saddam Hussein's bride, Queen of Baghdad died in Istanbul, eKurd Daily, 25 Dec 2010. 222.164.212.168 (talk) 18:10, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. These are not reliable sources that establish the veracity of the claimed lineages. --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Wartime pejoratives being portrayed in the article as commonplace nicknames vs. actual nicknames

Much like the Trump administration and US media are the originator and only real entities to call North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man", the same went for the Bush administration and a portion of US media around the time of the invasion of Iraq with the creation of such monikers as "Butcher of Baghdad", "King of Spades", "VIC", etc. The difference being the Wikipedia page for Kim Jong Un does not have this listed multiple times in the article because this isn't a name for him that exists outside of some US media, while on this page such cartoonish pejoratives are distinctly placed. The edits to the article also make it seem like these were long-time, commonplace domestic and international nicknames, even calling it his "title", rather than a creation of wartime media to build support for the war. This sort of lazy wording is rife through the article as well. If it is to remain, at the very least, it should be made clear where this comes from. Additionally, it should include actual nicknames such as "Amo (Uncle) Saddam", "Abu Uday" (father of Uday, his oldest child and a common way to address people in Arabic culture), "Abu Hala" (father of Hala, his youngest child), etc. SeriousSam11 (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I came here after reading the article to raise serious concerns about the article being littered with facts that are out of context and distort the overall tone, and elements that are clearly not written in a neutral tone.
"He (Saddam) acquired the title "Butcher of Baghdad", is purely predjorative. There is no indication who called Saddam this, in what context, I would contend its predjorative, out of context and damages the credibility of the article. --Billbarrelrider (talk) 07:16, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree with both of you. There is also a 4th person who wanted this change [3]. Therefore, we have a consensus. I will make the change in the article. Tradediatalk 18:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Cause of death needs to be edited

Cause of death being listed as “murder by hanging” is inappropriate.

Murder, according to Oxford Dictionary, is defined as “the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.”

That is very obviously not true in this case. Editing it to “Execution by hanging” or simply “Hanging” and subsequently locking that portion of the article would be more appropriate. Azdk (talk) 09:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

More appropriate article picture

the main picture currently used is not really common and does not depict his facial features fully plus its way too zoomed. I suggest using a more official picture that better presents him. And i already have what i think very good ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HaidarBoss (talk • contribs) 05:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll briefly comment on this as well. The picture currently in place is far too flattering for one of the world's worst and most notorious mass murderers. This is a man who had people thrown alive into giant meat grinders constructed for that purpose. He also would leave plastic bags containing the bones of his victims on the front doorsteps of the victims' families. The evil he perpetrated is staggering. Is it wikipedia's intent/agenda to portray him in such a positive light? I would suggest this image is more appropriate. Tpkatsa (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

For the record, the "meat grinder" (aka the infamous "people shredder") probably never existed. There are many abominable things Saddam actually did, just saying. As for the picture currently in place, perhaps it's a bit too "upbeat" (not to mention airbrushed or something), but it's common practice on Wikipedia to use "official/authorized" photographs for leaders of countries. The articles on Hitler and Stalin are cases in point. There's also the problem of making sure the image isn't copyrighted, which limits a lot of options. I do think it makes more sense to use a photo of Saddam circa 1990 since it's around the time he gained global notoriety. --Ismail (talk) 04:49, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Fragmentation and POVFORK

I am concerned about how several articles about Saddam Hussein have been split from the main article. In the interest of better coverage of the topic I would like to see this content consolidated.

  1. The summaries of the detention, trial and execution of Saddam Hussein are key events in his life and are not covered in adequate detail. While I understand that the article is already long, I would contend that less pertinent content should be summarized if the length of the article requires it.
  2. The summaries of the detention,
    POVFORK
    ; it effectively hides content likely to be challenged and in this pages edit history we can see many cases of this. I would challenge any assertion that this content is not relevant, important, would make the article unduly long; or pose difficulties for users.
  3. There is also an article "
    POVFORK and if this is not merged with this article should be merged with the article on the execution
    - as the two clearly pertain to the same event and neither of these two articles is particularly lengthy.

The reason I have not proposed a merger in because I wish to seek consensus on which of the three articles ought to be merged (if any), so I can make a more straightforward merge proposal. Essentially I am concerned that the result of a long series of edits has been to split several controversial events in the life of Saddam Hussein in a way which biases the main article. It would be like removing every scandal from Micheal jackson or Silvio Belusconi by splitting them all off individually and only giving them cursory mention in the main article, such considerations are explicitly made in WP:splitting and I think this a relevant case of this --Willthewanderer (talk) 19:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Willthewanderer, I would support a merge of the three articles. There is enough redundancy/fork to grant it. Summarizing some sections make sense, which will become clear with the merger. --MarioGom (talk) 07:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect Citation on UNESCO award

Two citations have been given for Saddam Hussein having received a UNESCO award but I cannot find an official source to verify this. Both sources given repeat the claim but give no context and the primary source remains unclear- I could not find a UNESCO source which is strange. --1.159.83.152 (talk) 07:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-procted edit request

Saddam's DOB is said to have never been recorded. As with Gaddafi's page, please change the DOB listed.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:12, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is a source that backs this up. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:1526:450B:9D31:C0F:CBE7:9D1D (talk) 23:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

This source seems to say the same thing that we're currently saying, that it's the official birth day but that people have challanged that. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Good article

Is this page good enough to be considered a good article? Bear420 (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Is Saddam Hussein officially a terrorist in America or any other countries?

I was wondering whether he would be categorized as such. George W. Bush said as much, does that make it encyclopedic? Has President Obama since said Saddam Hussein is officially not a terrorist in America; unlike Osama Bin Laden?

talk
) 03:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I doubt Obama has made any statement regarding that as Saddam Hussein has been dead since 2006. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:DA8:D800:279:529:4617:D278:C962 (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein is officially considered a terrorist all over the world. - Zorobabele — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.36.84.137 (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

can this quote from section 3 really be trusted?

"Fifty-seven boxes were recently returned to the Kurdish city of Sulaimaniya in Zeit trucks—large Russian military vehicles—by the Iraqi government authorities. Each box contained a dead child, eyes gouged out and ashen white, apparently drained of blood. The families were not given their children, were forced to accept a communal grave, and then had to pay 150 dinars for the burial."[2]


This David Pryce-Jones was an outspoken shill in favor of the invasion back in 2002-3. Can his writings be considered trustworthy? Are there any third-party accounts of the event he mentioned? It could perfectly be yet another stunt to gain public support in favor of the war. --Spafky (talk) 14:29, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

The cited source is from January 1989, more than fourteen years before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, and the atrocities described are in keeping with Iraq's policy towards its Kurdish minority during the well-documented 1988
Anfal genocide.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk
) 17:53, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

صدام حسين ارهابي؟

صدام حسين كان يعدم ويقتل من يعارضه بكل جبروت وقسوة قلب وهذه افعال منافية للدين والاخلاق والآن هو نال جزاؤه وهذه هي نهاية كل ظالم. Mohammed AL diwani (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2021

Remove the word "Iraqi Criminal" right now before I take your page down The Great warrior88 (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

do it and let me know The Great warrior88 (talk) 13:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Run n Fly (talk) 14:09, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Btw nausea: why official, "nice", smiling pictures?

Both for the article here AND the category (there with flag & flowers). Continuing his personality cult on WP? Shameless. Arminden (talk) 09:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Saddam was leader of a country, and most leaders tend to have "nice," smiling pictures of themselves for use as official portraits. Wikipedia tends to use official portraits when it comes to politicians. The article does contain unflattering images of his capture by American troops and the tearing down of his statue, while most of the other images are just generic "leader of country meets with someone" stuff. The one image that is unambiguously propaganda is accurately described as "propaganda art to glorify Saddam." --Ismail (talk) 06:41, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2021

Boyalemlawbandana (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

change the photo of saddam in the court.

? Boyalemlawbandana (talk) 14:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2021

change Hussein to -> Hoessein Halgurdh (talk) 07:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

No. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 10:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Out of all the ways to transliterate his name, "Saddam Hussein" is by far the most common and is seemingly standard in the English-speaking world. Even English-language materials published in Ba'athist Iraq used it. There have been multiple discussions as far back as 2003 over whether to change "Hussein" to "Husayn" or some other transliteration, they've invariably been turned down for the reasons I gave. --Ismail (talk) 05:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Edit Request

I feel like the interrogator, Eric Maddox, who spent months trying to capture Saddam Hussein should receive credit during the comment on his capture. Moments before his departure he was able to pinpoint the precise location of the "Spider Hole". Without him Saddam's Capture might not have taken place. Suggested Edit In 2003, a coalition led by the U.S. invaded Iraq to depose Saddam, in which U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair accused him of possessing weapons of mass destruction and having ties to al-Qaeda. In December 2013, after months of interrogating detainees, Sargent Eric Maddox was able to pinpoint the precise location of Saddam’s “Spider Hole” in Tikrit. Saddam's Ba'ath party was disbanded and elections were held. Following his capture on 13 December 2003, the trial of Saddam took place under the Iraqi interim government. On 5 November 2006, Saddam was convicted of charges related to the 1982 killing of 148 Iraqi Shi'ites and was sentenced to death by hanging. His execution was carried out on 30 December 2006.[11]

[3] [4]

I think it'd make sense to mention Eric Maddox in the
Operation Red Dawn article. Mentioning him in this article, which is about Saddam Hussein's life, would come across as distracting trivia. --Ismail (talk
) 13:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://archive.org/details/saddam00conc_0/page/2/mode/2up
  2. ^ Pryce-Jones, David (1989-01-01). "Self-Determination, Arab-Style". Commentary. Retrieved 2017-02-15.
  3. ^ www.ericmaddox.com
  4. ^ Mission: Blacklist #1</Bookref>

Portrait spelling error

Field Marshal is misspelled as "feild marshall" under the portrait at the beginning of the article. Please fix.

Fixed. --Ismail (talk) 05:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hussein's rule was a repressive dictatorship[12] notorious for its human rights abuses.

I forgot to sign my edit request so I will make it again. "notorious for human rights abuses" needs a citation" Krisandtim (talk) 18:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

WMD

How does the lack of WMD reconcile with this link?

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to-have-bought-and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html?referer&_r=1

Evidently SOMEONE had them... Jokem (talk) 22:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

As the article says, "These munitions were remnants of an Iraqi special weapons program that was abandoned long before the 2003 invasion, and they turned up sporadically during the American occupation in buried caches, as part of improvised bombs or on black markets." When the Iraq War was launched, the Bush Administration argued that Saddam was still manufacturing WMDs and had lied when he said he had dismantled the program. This is quite different from insurgents and other persons locating abandoned weapons from many years ago and using them against American troops in Iraq or hoping to sell them. --Ismail (talk) 03:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Image used for saddam hussein

We should use an image used by the iraqi government at the time such as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Saddam_Hussain_1980_(cropped).jpg . This image is a portrait unlike the current photograph. Can I have permission to make this simple change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IraqiEagle1001 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I will edit this and change the photograph and description IraqiEagle1001 (talk) 16:32, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

You'll have to get consensus. Until then, you have no claim to change the picture. And I don't support your desired picture change, as the picture is less recent and not in color. Fijipedia (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by IraqiEagle1001 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Theories about execution

Although It is widely accepted and acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death and hung, there are rumours that Saddam was not hung and/or was exiled.[1]

Any suggestion that the
WP:FRINGE theory. Unless this theory has major, prominent adherents it is unlikely to be sufficiently notable to justify coverage on Wikipedia. Furthermore, your source does not contain any mention of this claim.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk
) 02:11, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2022

Change the word "Kurd" to terrorists because Saddam gassed terrorists and not Kurds. BombogorTR (talk) 09:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Princess Persnickety (talk) 10:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Lack of information

You lacked of information and haven't his crimes against kurds for example anfal and halabja chemical attacks... 95.159.95.71 (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2022

I would like to edit a part of this text. The text states "His body was stabbed 6 times after his execution" I believe there was a typo, as it was actually stabbed 16 times, after his execution. Aykn224134 (talk) 17:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. It's six in the reference. Please provide a
WP:RS. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk
) 19:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Daughters' exile

"Raghad Hussein (b. 1968) is Saddam's oldest daughter. After the war, Raghad fled to Amman, Jordan"

It would be good to specify which war. --Rcaetano (talk) 16:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

I changed it to say "After the 2003 invasion of Iraq". Medarduss (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposed new section - modern-day reputation of Saddam Hussein

Would it be appropriate to add a section talking about Saddam Hussein's reputation today? In Jordan he is really popular, his picture is on lots of cars, shops etc. I think most people from the West would find this suprising so maybe it's good to include. See these articles: [4] [5] [6] Medarduss (talk) 17:40, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Fritz Edlinger mention links to his brother

Currently, the section outlining Fritz Edlinger's connection to Saddam Hussein (in the 2002 section) links to his brother, Rudolf Edlinger, via a redirect. I think that needs to either be rewritten or the link should be removed altogether to avoid the impression of guilt by association. SimonRaoul (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Birth date discrepancy

There is a discrepancy in the date of Saddam Hussein birth date In the overview the date is 28 April 1937 however in the Wikipedia detail page the date is 28 April 1935 70.29.114.229 (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

WMD

US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair erroneously accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction Whart about this? https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to-have-bought-and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html?referer&_r=1 Jokem (talk) 01:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

You asked this same question last year and I answered it in what is now Archive 14 of this talk page: "As the article says, 'These munitions were remnants of an Iraqi special weapons program that was abandoned long before the 2003 invasion, and they turned up sporadically during the American occupation in buried caches, as part of improvised bombs or on black markets.' When the Iraq War was launched, the Bush Administration argued that Saddam was still manufacturing WMDs and had lied when he said he had dismantled the program. This is quite different from insurgents and other persons locating abandoned weapons from many years ago and using them against American troops in Iraq or hoping to sell them." --Ismail (talk) 02:20, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
It shows Iraq still had WMD in country when GWB spearheaded the invasion. The article says some were purer than expected. Jokem (talk) 04:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
The article shows that US troops uncovered the remnants of a WMD program which had been abandoned years earlier. To give a hypothetical, let's say the United States disbanded its nuclear arsenal, but individual bits and pieces were scattered around in an unused and forgotten state, permitted to decay. One might criticize the US government for negligence since even those scattered bits could be misused in the wrong hands, but it would still have disbanded its nuclear arsenal. --Ismail (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Your response is POV. Jokem (talk) 21:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Editors aren't required to refrain from expressing a point of view on article talk pages. What they are required to do is to adhere to Wikipedia's NPOV policy when it comes to the articles themselves. The claim that Iraq actually did have WMDs as of 2003 appears to be WP:FRINGE, nor is it sustained by your source referring to "remnants of an Iraqi special weapons program that was abandoned long before the 2003 invasion." --Ismail (talk) 07:34, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Note that you did not deny your response was POV, but only that it was permitted here. Regarding WP:FRINGE, just because it departs from mainstream does not invalidate the truth of it. There was a time when declaring the world was round was WP:FRINGE, claiming disease was caused by cadaverous particles was WP:FRINGE, claiming Piltdown Man was a fraud was WP:FRINGE. In any case, the article claims the purity of Sarin was better than expected. Jokem (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
You claim that Iraq possessed WMDs in 2003. My only "POV" is that it did not. Discarded remnants of a WMD program abandoned in the 90s are clearly not what Bush and Blair had in mind when they claimed Saddam was continuing to develop WMDs. The fact "the purity of Sarin was better than expected" just proves my point: there would be no question as to its purity if Saddam actually had an active WMD program, since the Sarin in question would be properly maintained rather than allowed to deteriorate. Also, whether you think you've made a profound discovery, Wikipedia relies on the consensus of what are deemed reliable sources. --Ismail (talk) 10:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
No point in discussing this with you. There were chemical weapons in Iraq, that is a fact borne out by the article. There was Sarin in Iraq during the time in question. That is what is called a nerve gas. You are continuing to argue there was nerve gas in Iraq, but it was not important. Jokem (talk) 00:16, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
The intended purpose of a talk page is to discuss ways of improving the article in accordance with Wikipedia's rules. If there's "no point in discussing this with" me then you ought to feel free to edit the article and "correct" what you regard as an error. But I will reiterate that Iraq was not invaded on the basis of claims that the country just happened to have abandoned, decaying bits and pieces of a former WMD program. When the Bush Administration claimed Iraq had chemical weapons it was in the context of arguing that Saddam had never abandoned his WMD program and was instead continuing to actively maintain and further develop such weapons. --Ismail (talk) 23:10, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

BRD cycle please

Hi

WP:NPA). Thanks. --Mhhossein talk
05:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request: spelling of Mustafa/Mustapha

“In July 2003, his sons Uday and Qusay and 14-year-old grandson Mustapha were killed in a three-hour gunfight with US forces” This sentence from the Capture and interrogation section of this article has Hussein’s grandson’s name spelt as Mustapha, while this Wikipedia article and all other reputable sources I can find about the death of his sons and grandson have it spelt as ‘Mustafa.’ 2A02:C7F:2C25:8C00:7519:1CA3:743B:4BC3 (talk) 12:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2023

In the execution section, it says “he was hanged”. Did a 10 year old write this? Please use the correct tense of the verb. 2600:1702:10A0:7860:E83A:A2AE:618A:52C9 (talk) 09:53, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: [7], [8], [9]. Please remain civil when editing or making suggestions. Actualcpscm (talk) 13:25, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@ 119.73.115.32 (talk) 21:06, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

memorial?

Should we make it a memorial, since he is DEAD. 2601:603:4940:2D50:C9B3:6B96:A2DA:E7C3 (talk) 03:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Make what a memorial? ---OuroborosCobra (talk) 20:48, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Soviet Union

Nothing is mentioned about Iraq being aligned with the Soviet Union and changing towards the west back in the 1980s Capitalistone (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes there is, in the "foreign affairs" section. Heck, elsewhere in the article, there's even a picture of the signing of the Iraqi–Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Co-Operation. I suggest you do a word search for "Soviet" and you will find what you are looking for. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Photo

Proposing that the following photo replace the current infobox photo. It's much clearer than the current one and and shows Saddam's face better. Skornezy (talk) 02:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Support The current image in place is too grainy and unfocused, this one is much clearer. Comitialbulb561 (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
I am pinging recent editors for their input:
@tintinthereporter226 @SonOfBabylon1 @Helloftd @Skitash
Skornezy (talk) 01:33, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Word usage

Is there a reason he is described as "hung" in the Execution section, rather than "hanged" (the correct past tense for the form of execution)? TBicks (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Use of CNN and POV activism

That last line stating "Donald Trump supported Saddam's militant suppression" is a blatantly misleading statement, especially when the source, itself notoriously-biased in its activism and propaganda, even provides the context that Trump was referring to Saddam's prevention of Islamic terrorism within his country. 172.56.50.90 (talk) 11:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Short description

I am adding short description, which is displayed in search results and other locations.

Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Profile Photo

I have changed the lead picture, by replacing it from a better one. Thank you Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 19:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Sections

How does

Foreign policy of Iraq
. Better is two design the article in this way

Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2024 Copyedit (minor) Suggestion

Positions of power in the country were mostly filled with Sunni Arabs, a minority that made up --only a fifth of the population.

Replace this with "about". The word "only" connotes that 20% of a population is "small" in a sentence that already comes off as an attempt to sway the reader's opinion. Justintimefordinner (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done Bazza 7 (talk) 09:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

Please replace the signature file of the English Wikipedia 'Saddam Hussein' document with 'Signature of Saddam Hussein.svg'. Zegras (talk) 10:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done Skitash (talk) 10:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
  1. ^ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-wrong-iraq-saddam-hussein-cia-interrogator-john-nixon-george-w-bush-invasion-a7482456.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saddam_Hussein/Archive_14&oldid=1219046892"