eek, I hadnt thought of this before

Maybe the boy's father should have thought about that before he holed his son up with criminals. I think the father should carry the guilt on that one for putting his son in that position.

That why i nominate the Mcrock for the presedent of Iraq , he can take on BUSH.

actually his son was growing up just to be like his father. from pretty much when he could stand up he was being taught how to fire and having the idea that the Iraqi people are below him and there to serve him was being drilled into his head.

the boy was shooting from an AK-47 at the soldiers, i don;t care how old u r or not if ur firing a machine gun at me u better believe im going to shoot u up.

In America, how many granddads/fathers teach their kids how to use guns from a young age? for example the columbine I think it was - their parents taught them how to use the guns (they also stole them from their grandad)

Prince William / Harry / any other member of any royal family - what exactly do you think they are taught? That they are equal to their subjects? methinks not!

Yes, but the majority of those grandads and fathers are not teaching their kids to aim at human targets, unlike this particular scenario.

just what i was about to say. teaching someone fire a gun at a wall or something like that's not doing any harm. teaching someone to fire specifiaclly with the idea of thems hooting people is.

right, so you guys are saying this was the first time they had fired guns??? Thats what you're saying

Its only a war if both sides declare it

Invading a country doesn't make it a war.....

She's saying that the kid was firing at the Americans..

& imagine if they'd got away.... 'Americans fail to show they r really here to liberate Iraq by sending an undermanned group in to kill or capture Saddam Husseins two sons.' Outcry!!

You really thought we'd let them stand trial? I doubt we'd let them live even if they walked into a checkpoint, surrendered, and started praying to Bush. They had to die. Alive, they can be figureheads for the Iraqi resistance, and not only that, they'd inspire more resistance just by being prisoners. Plus, we don't want them to tell the world about the atrocities we've committed there, or that they're father really didn't have weapons of mass destruction. If they're so high up on the Iraqi chain of command that they would've known about WMDs, they could've blown our shaky rationale for war apart like a house of cards.

Also, now that his sons are dead, do you think Saddam is going to be more or less prone to terrorism? He's got nothing left to lose. He's out of power, a fugitive, his sons are dead, and the US is slowly closing in. My guess is he's going to go out in a blaze of glory, or at the very least set one up for some one else to implement. We've given him a reason to hurt us now. Before we dethroned him, he didn't have any reason to hurt us. Now we've taken away his children, his grandchild, his bodyguard, and the only life he's ever known.

The grandson was probably could've been subdued. He was 14 for crying out loud! Bottle him up in there for a couple of days and he would've starved to the point where we could've easily subdued him without killing him. I know I would've done the same thing in his situation. An invading army kills my father in his own home, I'm gonna put a bullet in the face of the first one through the door, and try and take out as many as I can before they get me. And maybe just maybe, he was acting in self defense. I haven't heard that we tried to get them to come out peacefully. I've heard that we showed up with half the dang army at our backs and started shooting. The police in my city wouldn't do this. They'd try and talk them out. All we did was put up a 6 hour gun battle. Just goes to show you, we don't care about civilian casualties. Something I've been saying since we invaded Afghanistan.

Adrian