2006-11-07 12:01:36 · 28 answers · asked by scouser 2 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It is more of politics than justice.If innocent people killed is the criterion,Bush might have killed more people than Saddam.It is the personal grudge between Mr.Bush and Sddam.The judges were biased.No mass destruction weapons were found in Iraq.When the world commmnity wants abolishing of capital punishment,it was an unfotunate verdict.
2006-11-07 18:01:50 · answer #1 · answered by leowin1948 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Saddam ruled his primitive people the he had to . If you were a push over you wouldn't be in power very long. Remember we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction at all! And yet we still went after Saddam. what ever happened to Binladen, I thought we were terribly wrong to stop pursuing binladen and go after Saddam. Now years later after 911 we still haven't brought the correct people to justice.
2006-11-07 12:21:52 · answer #2 · answered by WOODSMAN 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see this a lot like intervening in the animal kingdom. When you watch nature programs and you see a lion attacking an antelope, part of you thinks ,'why doesn't the camera crew stop the nasty lion?!'
One shouldn't interfere in the workings of nature to satisfy one's own impulses and emotions, because there are reasons for what happens in nature which you may not fully comprehend; the lion is only doing what comes naturally to it.
I feel similar to what is going on in Iraq. We'd have best left alone. In that light, everything we do subsequently there is flawed.
2006-11-07 12:18:53 · answer #3 · answered by richy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rather mixed. Does killing a madman make us a better society?
Very few nations have the death penalty on the books, why do we continue to do so? Do we really want to be in the company of countries like Iraq?
A righteous punishment would be to let him loose with the Shi'ite Muslims.
2006-11-07 12:07:56 · answer #4 · answered by Frogface53 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Justice
2006-11-07 12:03:58 · answer #5 · answered by kerrie h 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since there was little question that this was how it would end up, there's not really much to consider. He got what he deserved. Now, if he didn't get the death penalty, then there would be something to ponder...and be pissed off about.
2006-11-07 12:06:48 · answer #6 · answered by Chris J 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have no views on it. In life you get what you deserve. But spare a thought for poor George Galloway he now has to find another fascist dictator who's "indefatigably" he can admire.
2006-11-07 12:19:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Finally!!!! Do you see it now, John Kerry? This is why we are in Iraq! If we had not been there, Saddam would still be killing and ruthlessly terrorizing his own people. Everyone hates this guy. Hitler #2.
2006-11-07 12:07:18 · answer #8 · answered by LiaChien 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
He was a tyrant in a largely uncivilised country compared to the west. I cannot see hanging him being a good legacy of how western civilisation are better than his regime. Killing one person or a hundred is still killing people.
2006-11-07 12:05:34 · answer #9 · answered by philipscottbrooks 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
he is being made to pay the price of his life, I think that's it's justice, mind you, with all appeals etc he will probably die of old age first!! I think when a sentence is passed it should be carried out within a week.
2006-11-07 12:26:39 · answer #10 · answered by pottydotty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋