Do think it is a wise move to hang Hussein or would it be better to just keep him in prison?
There are warnings of a possible backlash but I wonder if it’s just posturing by the former Baathists and Sunnis. I can’t see things getting much worse so maybe it is best to just get rid of him.
There will certainly be some sort of backlash. The extent or potency of that backlash remains to be seen. I say get it done with. This seems to be one of those things that can only fester the longer it drags on. He’s already a martyr to his supporters, and I don’t see his execution stirring up significantly more feeling or support.
The only question about executing him is how it could have taken so long. This needs to happen. The sooner, the better.
In terms of a backlash, are those backlashers promising to be good boys if we don’t execute him? Didn’t think so.
In terms of a backlash, are those backlashers promising to be good boys if we don’t execute him? Didn’t think so.
Good point. I agree we might as well get rid of him.
I keep coming back to the thought of how the rebirth of (what the world hopes will be) a free, peaceful, democratic and unified Iraq begins with a government sanctioned execution by hanging.
Considering that the reason we invaded was over WMD that weren’t there, I would not feel good about executing him. I know the execution is for the crimes he committed, but somehow, it just doesn’t feel right.
“onsidering that the reason we invaded was over WMD that weren’t there, I would not feel good about executing him”
Keep in mind that we, as in “the USA,” is not executing him. WMD has nothing to do with it. He’s being executed by the new govt for crimes against the people.
It may sound stupid , but some have written Saddam just did what was required to keep his people in line. Our happy go lucky " freedom for all " only works here.
Then again our press may have painted a nastier picture of MR. S , WMD , torture , killing , to help with the feel good propaganda . We need to hate someone !
You’re exactly right. This is the Iraqi people deciding what to do with him. If he would’ve faced trial for the genocide of the Kurds, it would have been about WMD.
What he did to the people in Dujayl certainly deserves the punishment he has earned.
It’s also a decisive issue for the west as USA supports the death penalty and most other western countries don’t.
UK law for example will not allow US to extradite a UK citizen who would potentially face the death sentence.
So you have the US upholding the decision and the EU condemning it.
Ummm… I think that is what I said.
“onsidering that the reason we invaded was over WMD that weren’t there, I would not feel good about executing him”
Keep in mind that we, as in “the USA,” is not executing him. WMD has nothing to do with it. He’s being executed by the new govt for crimes against the people.
Umm, do you think that he would be on the verge of execution if we had not invaded?? Or would he still be in power??
Saddam is lucky the Iraqi people aren’t hanging him … by his genitals … with guitar string … rusty, drity, guitar string … over a pool of salt water.
Whatever the case with corporal punishment, regardless of modern country, the criminal gets off much easier than the victims.
Saddam kills thousands (hundreds of thousands?) and he’s going to be hanged … and it’ll all be over in under a minute. Imagine what would be done to him if the punishment really fit the crime?
"Umm, do you think that he would be on the verge of execution if we had not invaded?? Or would he still be in power?? "
Ummm, I think it’s plainly obvious that he wouldn’t be in danger of execution by hanging if we hadn’t invaded. However, Monk’s post seemed to say that he was uncomfortable with the hanging because we went in for WMD and found none, suggesting that he was tying our WMD rationale to the reason Saddam was convicted and is being executed. Saddam was tried and is being executed for his crimes. Our invasion simply facilitated the process of capturing him and allowing the Iraqi people to hold him accountable. In other words, he isn’t being executed for WMD, and therefore, the fact that we didn’t find any doesn’t have any bearing.
Execution of criminals fournd guilty of serious crimes, (which I believe genocide qualifies), by a court of law is, and has been, a right and a long established policy of govenrments throughout the world. The notion that execution is ‘barbaric’ is a relatively new idea (in a historical timeframe). If you look back through history and examine those individual who most ‘deserved’ to be executed for their crimes, the list is rather long, but just keeping it to modern world leaders, the list of '“major tyrants” would include Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tze Dung (multiple spellings listed), and Kim Jong Il, not to mention multiple ‘minor’ tyrants to numberous to mention, spread throughout multiple Asian & African countries. NOTE: *Major means killed more than 1 million of his own people, minor means less than 1 million, but greater than 1/4 million. *
**
Saddam is probably bordering in the middle to upper range of minor, but that is a moot point. Some people have already compared his schedule death to creating a martyr, but a martyr can only be created if the media provides it. The only difference between a martyr and a deceased is the amount of publicity.
“Some people have already compared his schedule death to creating a martyr, but a martyr can only be created if the media provides it”
Don’t think I agree. Once Saddam is dead, his supporters will do all the work in casting him in the light of a martyr. The media doesn’t have to be involved at all. There were martyrs long before there was media.
The only question about executing him is how it could have taken so long.<
Yeah, those pesky fair trials and other such principles are always getting in the way. I mean it’s not like we’re trying to spread democracy over there or anything.
Fair trials need to take three years?
the list of '“major tyrants” would include Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tze Dung (multiple spellings listed), and Kim Jong Il, not to mention multiple ‘minor’ tyrants to numberous to mention, spread throughout multiple Asian & African countries. NOTE: *Major means killed more than 1 million of his own people, minor means less than 1 million, but greater than 1/4 million. *
By this definition (“of his own people”), Hitler was not a major tyrant.
Fair trials need to take three years?
When you’re essentially starting from scratch – new government, new constitution, new justice system, new judiciary – three years is pretty damn amazing.
I’m not comfortable with the death penalty in the first place, but I’ve learned to live with it since, to a large extent, it’s a fact of life in the US. But even then, I’m entirely unsympathetic to those that bitch and moan about how long it takes.