2006-12-27 16:40:55 · 22 answers · asked by thesunshineking 2 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
We are not God to decide someones execution,He should rather bu put to jail than to executed. His execution might cause chaos
2006-12-29 20:57:17 · answer #1 · answered by mhzglobe 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes,
There is little doubt that he was a cruel tyrant. The case that has been applied against him is just one of several cases that the court could have used, but once you sentence a person to death it is useless to do anything else to them.
He was tried by a court of his people under his laws. The court may have been composed of Shiites who disliked him, but the evidence is impartial. The decision was not uninfluenced or fair. In an American court it would have been appealed and ruled invalid, because of all the interference. This is what the jury in the O. J. Simpson case. They probably thought he was guilty, but the case was so badly handled that the evidence proving his guilt was tainted and it would be thrown out in an appeal court.
However, Sadam was not tried in the US and his trial should have had no influence by the US (but there probably was). The important thing is that the evidence of his crimes against his people is strong enough to have convicted him in any fair court. His trial may not have been the best or the most fair, but the outcome would have been the same IF it was a fair trial.
Did what he do warrant execution? He was effectively a mass murderer attempting to commit genocide on the Kurdish people. In pretty much court in the world this kind of crime would warrant the death penalty, except for those nations and courts that do not use the death penalty, Iraq was never one of those countries. In Islamic law the penalties for such crimes would be pretty biblical and death would be the decision by most Moslem Clerics. So Sadam was guilty against the two major forces of society in his nation. This means that the sentence was fair.
Personally I don't care too much. I doubt if Sadam could pull a Napoleon and come out of exile to take over the country again, but if he went to Ticret (his home town) then he could make a good start. If he is dead then there will be no risk of that happening.
I know that Sadam was an enemy of the US, but I don't think that the evidence proved he was doing anything about it. He may have allowed terrorists groups to run free in his country, as long as they targeted the West and Israel. However, there is no proof that he sponsored terrorists or contributed to them in a meaningful way. So I don't think that there should be any legal US interest. That would have no bearing in a court. Therefore let Iraq handle him and do what they want to him. It seems to be the correct and popular decision.
Personally, I say let him swing. He will be out of our hair, and as long as he is alive then his old supporters will try to free him or reinstall him into power. Dead, Sadam will be a martyr in a nation of martyrs. I don't think that he will be more than a footnote in history so I don't care what is done to him, as long as it is done under the laws of Iraq.
2006-12-27 17:04:26 · answer #2 · answered by Dan S 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I've always been one to respect and cherish all forms of life but in Saddams case I would have to say yes because he is responsible for the deaths of countless numbers of people.
2006-12-27 16:56:49 · answer #3 · answered by terran_ghost 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Only if his allies in the 1980s are executed with him. These include Donald Rumsfeld and Margaret Thatcher.
2006-12-27 17:48:38 · answer #4 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No his toppled government was an illegal act and I think the Middle East was more secure with him. The fact is more Iraqis have died since he has been replaced then while he was in power. George W should be tried for war crimes if you ask me.
2006-12-27 16:50:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes.
2006-12-27 16:49:11 · answer #6 · answered by rosey 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
and drawn and quartered boiled in oil and thrown to the desert wind over a camel dung heap .
2006-12-27 16:55:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
If that's what the law calls for, yes.
2006-12-27 16:42:33 · answer #8 · answered by bionicbookworm 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Executed, resurected so he could be executed again.
2006-12-27 16:44:02 · answer #9 · answered by boker_magnum 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
for the many things he has done to his people for as long as he did. like i've stated before hanging is too good for him bring back ole sparky!
2006-12-27 16:50:20 · answer #10 · answered by audrey_halley2004 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋