Who thinks that Saddam Hussien's Trial is farcial... but then was it not always going to be so?

Answer 1

I do think the same way. Let clarify one thing or recollect the recent trial, which were of International importance and were under the "flash" of the cameras. What about the farcial trial against the ex-Yugoslavian president Miloshevic( well, he died from natural death, in his comfortable cell) accused of genocide and many other crimes. What happened? We have observed the same approach, the same fake excuses, the same farce. Saddam Hussein was a monster for his own people and he commited most of the crimes he is presently accused, but seems the "soap opera" must continue. Someone has an interest to proceed, don't you think so?
What about another aspect, US Army left opened the Iraqi frontier after the fall of the regime, thus ensured undisturbed access to Iraq of many extremists, fanatics, "tools" in the bloody hands of mad men.Despite all the Higher Administration of USA says they were in capability to "finish" with this tyrant, while he was sleeping!!

Answer 2

This show-trial is, once again, judgement by the victors, a morally bankrupt arena.
There are too many vested interests involved for a truly 'fair trial' to take place.
I fully believe in bringing the many tyrants around the world to justice and Saddam should merely be the first in what is essentially a long list.
But then, that would mean we live in a perfect world!
Wouldn't it?

Answer 3

Of course it's a farce! He has been found guilty before the trial began....This is the U.N going through the motions to appease the rest of us! Amasingly I don't see any of these human rights lawyers rushing to his defence or speaking out in his favour...It's not like he was responsible for killing thousands of innocent people on 9/11 and 7/7...The west should be spend all it's effort getting the perpertrators of that offence before sending OUR soldiers into Iraq to deal with what is in effect an internal problem there.

Answer 4

Of course it is. The removal of the last judge jsut proves it. When they say they want a neutral judge, neutrality means siding with america. The trial is a waste of time because should the judge find in sadams favour, america will appeal until they get a judge that will convict him and sentence him to death. And dont tell me that they cant do that they need to have new compelling evidence bla bla because america will find a way, a 'reason' for that not to apply. Basically Sadams dead and the trial is just a face so that the americans look like they are sticking to the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty. bollocks.

Answer 5

Well I think the longer it goes on the more sympathy he generates for himself.
I think he should be released to live in another country such as Libya.
I remember a time before the first Iraq war and before he invaded Kuwait when, according to the press he was the best guy in the middle east. 'One of ours' as it were. Then he made his mistake and the western press began to demonise him.
I do not think we are given the full truth.

Answer 6

I would like to see him sentenced to death, but a long way in the future and placed in prison, awaiting that death. His immediate execution may create an increase in violence.

Answer 7

absolutely it should have been an internatinal trial. But that needed a UN resolution before the war started.

Answer 8

It is...but I think we all knew it was going to be like this.

Hussein (and his lawyers) object to everything, but in the end it won't matter. He'll be convicted no matter what.

Answer 9

Pretty much that is my conclusions, all smoke and mirrors and theatrics. All designed for public consumption.

Answer 10

Somebody needs to help that guy disappear.
Not released, just disappear