The Saddam verdict...
SkullLab
58 Posts
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6117910.stm
I can't really believe it. Saddam getting hanged live on TV or something? Surely life in prison is a worse sentance?check out this bit -Saddam Hussein has been convicted of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death by hanging[/b].The former Iraqi leader was convicted over the killing of 148 people in the mainly Shia town of Dujail following an assassination attempt on him in 1982.His half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and Iraq's former chief judge Awad Hamed al-Bandar were also sentenced to death.Former Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan got life in jail and three others received 15 year prison terms....The White House also welcomed the verdict."It's a good day for the Iraqi people," spokesman Tony Snow said.
he got the easy way out?But the BBC's world affairs editor John Simpson said that after his tirade, which was clearly deliberate, Saddam Hussein seemed to have a small smile of triumph on his face as he was led away from the courtroom[/b].
Comments
I seriously doubt it'll be a public execution, While the verdict does seem to be timed for the election in America, the Iraqi govt are trying to not to enflame the already out of control fighting, they;ve imposed curfews in certain areas because they fear more violence, so broadcasting it or having it in a public place would not be constructive. I thought death by hanging was strange though.
While everyone is sure he's guilty of what he's been charged with, most literate in the procedures of international law would say this trial was not legitimate as it was set up by an occupying power, under very shaky security conditions, etc. However, I was explaing to my girl this morning: Even though he's guilty it seems unjust because he was being tried by the Americans- but karmically- if you think about it- all the Shias and Kurds he had killed were done so on a seriously slanted legal basis. So he got what he gave out..
Kind of ironic, because now they're really no better than Saddam. Killing somebody is always a crime against humanity, even when disguised as "justice".
I dunno about that, at least not in this case. I'm not exactly a big fan of capital punishment myself, but when you consider this sentence alongside the level of killing that Saddam sanctioned, as well as that in which he may have actually participated, I don't think it's inappropriate. Furthermore, I doubt the greater body of the Iraqi public would have stood for just a custodial sentence - from what I've been able to establish, there seems a very real belief that, as Lord NO mentions, he should get back what he gave out.
I'm sure I could find you a few hundred thousand Kurds who would disagree.
I'm pretty sure a guy who kills hundreds of thousands of his own people forfeits the right to be considered part of "humanity".
Now, this I disagree with. That's dangerous territory to set foot in, because it becomes a lot easier to validate "our" treatment of Saddam if you suggest he's somehow less than human. Whether you like it or not, he's still very much a human being, in exactly the same way as so many of the other great political criminals of the 20th Century were - Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Ceaucescu, Amin, etc., all did the things they did precisely because they were human. You think a propensity towards genocide isn't a major flaw in a person's basic humanity?
Oh he's still a human, he's just forfeited his rights as a human(imo). Just as a convicted murderer in our country forfeits most of his rights, and in some cases, even his right to live.
Inhumanity.
I don't think you can ever say a death penalty is justified in one case yet not another. You are either for it or against it. Quite frankly I think it's ridiculous to take someone's life as an example to others not to do the same? Plus I think it is a quick way out, another 30 years in prison is surely much, much worse.
What I'm more concerned about though is that they've tried him on one crime, found him guilty and will execute him without trying him for all the other things he is supposed to have done. Seems a bit like the US / Iraqi governments just want to get him out of the picture A-S-A-P. ?
As much as I want Saddam to die I am against the death penalty and there cannot be an exception. I certainly won't shed a tear but how do you say that an Iraqi dictator, tried in a suspect court, should receive the death penalty, but a rapist-murderer tried in an American court should not?
I think the death penalty is not negotiable - either you're for it or against it.
Well, I'd argue he wasn't born that way, which by the way isn't the same as saying, "Poor Saddam, he couldn't help himself". He made some very clear choices which will probably result in him ending his life at the end of a rope rather than peacefully in bed, but I genuinely don't believe that those choices are proof of any inherent inhumanity on Saddam's part; simply that they're characteristic of tyrants, political criminals and dictators the world over. It might have been better for the world if Saddam actually had been a sociopath, as he might never have reached the position he did.
Paul, you might want to check this out. You may not agree with the author's assessment that Saddam's rise was somehow a product of US and particularly British involvement in Iraq and in the region generally but, that aside, it's still a pretty well-rounded picture of how Saddam managed to seize and hold power in Iraq, and provides an interesting insight into the kind of things that drove him, both as a man and a politician.
Much worse for who? For Saddam? Or for his countless surviving victims?
I've always been of the opinion that the only people who should have any legitimate say as to whether or not another person should be put to death for commiting murder are the murder victims themselves.
And since that's a technical impossibility, I'd like to think that such a voice be given to those victims that have survived - ala the relatives.
And quite frankly, I see a whole lot of people in Iraq today who are certainly in favor of the sentence that's been delivered.
Besides, when he's gone he's gone... that's it.
He's not some religious figure who'll end up becoming martyred except perhaps temporarily by a few remaining Bathists and loyalists.
I think he would potentially cause more problems if he were to remain alive - as a focal point for those same cocksuckers.
In other words, if alive, and in prison, his followers can build a Mandela-esque movement around his ass.
(and before anyone starts to accuse me of comparing Saddam to Mandela, let it be known that I'm merely suggesting that the potential for problems would be there if that were in fact to happen)
Again, once he's gone...
As much as I would love to see the guy leave our world, I'm afraid to say / happy to inform you that the US/Iraq will not simply "get him out of the picture" as you suggest.
There will be at least one more trial to come.
This one to answer for over 180,000 slaughtered as opposed to this last trial's 180 or so victims.
So yeah, I'm afraid he'll be here for a minute.
Looking back at my original post, I realise that it did come off as if I was being selective about capital punishment. Perhaps what I should have said is that it seems as though there's a strong belief that this is what Saddam deserves amongst a lot of Iraqi people, and that in light of his many crimes it doesn't seem inappropriate. Even if Saddam had received a custodial sentence, it's difficult to imagine him living all that long into it. Of course, this shouldn't be justification for cutting out the opportunity for some disgruntled Iraqi prisoner to shank him in the exercise yard, but I hope you take my point.
Since I've broken one of my personal rules by getting involved in a political thread on the Strut, and am already doubting the wisdom of it, I'm gonna quietly duck out of this one now...
I do agree that the punishment fits the crime, and I see that Iraqis support it...
But I just have to be consistent here and while I would love to see Saddam die a horrible painfully slow death I can't endorse the death penalty selectively.
"Shiites Celebrate Verdict, Sunnis Vow More Death"[/b]
Confirming once again that Islam is the Religion Of Peace
I find it interesting the level this dialogue is operating on, as if the physical elimination of Saddam was at all of importance. C'mon people, the truth behind this verdict is that it will further tensions in Iraq, perpetuate more violence, and little in the way of stability and "self-determination" for the Iraqi people. And as for the above quote, where did you see this news? CNN? One of the major networks? Because there were plenty of people protesting the sentence as well. Sure, Saddam did bad things, but again we see the U.S. playing world arbiter, deciding on the fate of nations to further their own wealth. You're naive to think this is playing out any other way. Do we see Rumseld being held accountable? Bush? Fuck people, all this "he's getting what he deserves" sounds so implacably patriotic.
All Sunnis and All Shi'tes? Idoit.
How can we possibly apply our outsider's logic and humanity to this situation? Trying to debate our conecptions of the death penalty in the context of Iraq's current sociopolitical climate is like trying to tie a tourniquet onto the neck of a man whose head has been cut off: it won't help and we don't possess the tools to deal with the situation because it is what it is.
I'm sorry to sound so fatalistic about it, but in my opinion, our supposed help is nothing more than a guise for the U.S.'s future economic endevors in a geographic location that is rich in oil resources.
Much worse for who? For Saddam? Or for his countless surviving victims?
I've always been of the opinion that the only people who should have any legitimate say as to whether or not another person should be put to death for commiting murder are the murder victims themselves.
And since that's a technical impossibility, I'd like to think that such a voice be given to those victims that have survived - ala the relatives.
I find it a ridiculous notion that the victims of any crime or their family should choose the punishment for the offender. It can hardly be expected that they would choose something fair and reasonable.
Does anyone think that members of the US government should be executed for their roles in the deaths of 60,000+ Iraqis? I'm sure their families do.
An international court would have to try him for his crimes against Iran, which, if I am not mistaken, are far graver than his crimes against "his own people". Or I guess he could be turned over to an Iranian court. (Not gonna happen.) Since the US and Iraq do not morn the death of Iranians, he is safe from having to face those charges.
Ah Paul, are you for real?
You are perfectly describing the cycle of violence that exists in Iraq. On the street it is; you killed my brother I will kill you, back and forth. In the halls of justice it is, you (Saddam) killed my people I will kill you and your people. Which under Saddam was, you tried to kill me I will kill you and half your village. Certainly you are not endorsing this never ending cycle of revenge.
A few remaining Bathists and loyalists? Are you quoting Dick Cheney? The few remaining Bathists and loyalists are close to a third of the population of Iraq. Are you still nursing a dream where those few will be rounded up next week and fighting in Iraq will be over?
Of course, as this article explains, things did not go exactly as planned for dude. But still, he got to see his country totally transformed by massive military force and thus fulfill his own personal little fantasy.
First class asshole, but game recognize game just the same.
You're blaming Chalabi for the fact that the vast majority of Americans, including Bush & co, were anxious to start the war in Iraq? He's a snake, yes, but hardly the reason for the war.
You mean, crimes committed using weapons sold by America and France ? Crimes that he did when American or European governement were strongly supporting him ?
Well, it seems the Douja??l massacre was one of the few that didn't imply any other country, and that's why it was judged first. Now that he has been sentenced to death, nobody will have to investigate on foreign responsabilities...
I wrote that from memory, but a Google search brought this, a poll made by CBS News: Public opinion is now fairly solidly against the war in Iraq. More than half of Americans ??? 55% - think the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq (the highest figure to date), while 41% think taking military action there was the right thing to do. As the war began, Americans overwhelmingly approved of U.S. action against Iraq; 69% said the U.S. did the right thing in taking military action (the highest level of support in our polls for the war). Support for the war waned in 2004. (cbsnews.com, Oct. 10, 2005)
Well, just how "fair and reasonable" is it whenever someone loses their loved ones forever to a murderer?
Life is hardly ever "fair and reasonble" my friend.
And what I was suggesting was obviously hypothetical (LaserWolf).
Something like that would never happen (although I personally tend to think that it's only "fair and reasonable").
And I wouldn't be so quick to assume that everyone would automatically choose the death penalty in some sort of blind rage of vengeance.
You quite often see the families of victims speaking out against capital punishment, if not altogether forgiving the perp outright. As "ridiculous" as I personally might think that to be.
69% sounds high, but not incredibly so... my point was more a semantic quibble, as I consider "vast majority" to = 75% or better.
I think it is a mistake to assume, based on poll numbers, that Americans were very committed to aggression in Iraq. Surely some were, but quite a few were on the fence and decided to voice a guarded support after intense marketing and campaigning by the administration and its allies.
I think that's part of the reason support is sagging so much now - Americans weren't that enthusiastic about it to begin with.