is it because it might implement the blame on some of the coalition countries that are in iraq for supplying him with the gas in the first place?
2006-11-05 03:48:51 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ronald_Reagan/Reagan_WMD_Saddam.html
2006-11-05 03:52:14 · update #1
lol do you realy think the guilty would realy put them selves up for trail!!
2006-11-06 05:09:52 · answer #1 · answered by W.M.D 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because you get tried for different crimes, usually you do not group them all unless they are more similar in nature. i know it would seem that killing is killing and they should all be grouped together, but they were different. i'm sure they chose to use this one because it was the most acceptable reason to kill him as it was much better documented. after all, saddam believed he was in the right, even at sentencing he was asking where the crime was, so he had no need to hide any kind of documentation on it, so it was the most easily attainable.
and how many times can you kill one person? most iraqi's who want him dead know that he would be found guilty at any of the trials, so why waste time and money with excessive trials? one and done so they can start moving on.
2006-11-05 11:53:37 · answer #2 · answered by Jenessa 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Either that or they didn't need anything else to hang him for. Or they could have been keeping it for another trial charge if he had somehow beat the first set of charges. But the armes dealers and weapon manufactures have to make a living too. I read somewhere (sorry can't find the link) that Iran wanted to charge him also with the chemical attacks on Iran dating back to the early 80s.
2006-11-05 12:00:30 · answer #3 · answered by lostokieboy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Or because it was harder to prove those charges with available evidence.... so they convicted him of what they could prove.
It's not like adding more murder charges would change the outcome. But by not charging him with those crimes now, that also potentially left open the option of trying him again for those crimes later.
2006-11-05 11:55:26 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They haven't got to that one yet. Besides, if he is sentenced to death on the first set of accusations, they don't have to bother with the rest. They can only kill him once, you know?
2006-11-05 11:52:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
...probably because they didn't need to charge him with every single crime he's ever committed to get the death by hanging sentence he recieved.
2006-11-05 11:51:34 · answer #6 · answered by too funny 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That trial is still going on.
2006-11-05 11:59:38 · answer #7 · answered by cashcobra_99 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋