If Killing Is Wrong, Why Is It Right To Kill Saddam?

Question

Surely there is a more humane and civilised way to deal with this, even though Saddam was not very humane himself.
Two wrongs wont make a right.
George Bush has been responsible for thousands of deaths.
Why is he not in the line of fire?

I am astonished at the reaction of some Americans to this question.
They still idolise him in spite of all.
He sent over 3000 sons of America to their deaths.
Not to die for their country, but to bring him glory, which never materialised.
He only made a fool of himself.
American families mourn the loss of their loved ones.
And other Americans say "well done George".
In the name of God what way to they think?
Can they not see Bush for what he is?
Even he now finally admits that he has lost the was in Iraq.
Why did it take him so long to realise this?
Any fool could have told him, and maybe saved a lot of lives in the process.

Answer 1

Yes, killing is wrong. That is an absolute. It is not right to kill Saddam. Bush has always thought killing was ok and as governor of Texas he executed more prisoners than any governor of any state in modern history, 152. Since he seems to find the death penalty justified and seems to glory in its use it would be ironic if, after his own war crimes/crimes against humanity trial, he was to follow Saddam to the gallows. Ironic, but still wrong.

Answer 2

Two wrongs definitely don't make a right. Unfortunately, it is what it is. George W. Bush has yet to take the high road on dealing with this issue. It stinks that his children aren't the ones at the battlefields, risking their lives, while others that are so proud of their country are dying for us. Bush should take a closer look at how much of an impact his poor decision making skills has had on this country. It's bad enough that many people still haven't healed their emotional wounds from 9/11, now they have to deal with the war in Iraq. But in all of this, where's Bin Laden? He simply used 9/11 as a scape goat to go after Saddam. Saddam was a cruel leader, no doubt about that, but Bush is just as bad. Killing Saddam won't end any issues we have in the Middle East, especially since Saddam is willing and ready to go as a martyr. His legacy will live on, whether we bring democracy to Iraq or not.

To answer your question, killing Saddam isn't right, but they feel if he's out of the picture completely, he will no longer pose a threat. In this case, they would probably say killing is right because of the reasons behind it. Saddam kept alive those he liked, those that lived by his standards. He killed off those that opposed him. Heck, he killed his own son-in-laws, making his DAUGHTERS widows. No decent father sets his daughters up to think they're safe, only to kill their husbands.

Answer 3

It's not right or OK to kill Saddam. Our current President has his mind made up that Saddam is pure evil, he(Saddam) has done some horrible things in the past in his country not ours. W wants the man gone and from the looks of things it's going to happen.W will never be in the line of fire because he has convinced a lot of people that getting rid of Saddam will help wipe out terrorism. The dude is so wrong.

Answer 4

It is not wrong to kill a mass murderer of his own people.
Saddam has been killing since he was in his early teens.
It is time to stop him.

As to George W. Bush, why is he responsible for the deaths of those people who have been killed by terrorists.

Deaths by our soldiers have been minimal, and the deaths of our soldiers were done by terrorists. Some might not like me calling the Muslims with granade launchers terrorists, but I don't know what to call a person that beheads civilians and sends the tapes to a TV station to scare the rest of the world.

I feel the same about the two journalists taken by Islamic terrorists in the Gaza strip. They threatened to kill them if they did not say the Muslim prayer.

grace2u

Answer 5

Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being by another. The penalty for murder is usually either life imprisonment, or in jurisdictions with capital punishment, the death penalty. Legalised killing, such as genocide, can also constitute murder if it violates international law.
To kill means to extinguish the life and hence cause the death of a living organism.

When you read these official definitions it is a bit scary.... how can a genocide be legal if it doesn't violate internal laws!!!!!!
Who are we to intrude in any ones life and way of living and judging them with our moral ways ??

Don't forget that for many Saddam is a hero so who is right ??

Personally i cant accept what he did but then again who am i to say that.....
All i can say is that at least a great majority of people think like me and can hide behind the moral laws of democracy !!.
Hummmm........ that's no answer to your question but I'm afraid its all about life !!

Answer 6

I guess I feel that Saddam deserves to die for the horrible things he has done, however, I think the way we (the US) are involved in it is wrong. We had no right to enter Iraq in the first place or arrest Saddam. He deserves to pay for his crimes, and if payment is with his life, so be it. He never spared anyone or showed mercy. I will shed no tears for his death, but I take no pleasure in it either. My biggest concern is that his death will make him a martyr in the eyes of the terrorists, and they just may retaliate.

Answer 7

I don't think George Bush was responsible for gasing innocent villagers because he didn't want them in his country. I think Bush has acted for the greater good for the greastest number of people. I do not believe this can be said of Saddam. The worst thing good men can do is stand by and do nothing , letting evil proliferate.
Following your line of arguement would you have had Winston Churchill in the line of fire as you call it?

Answer 8

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth...Read the Bible...Bush is a complete and utter failure as President...no argument there...but he has not inhumanely killed thousands of Americans...He didn't order the planes to crash in to the WTC on 9/11/01...so lets not label him a terrorist...but yes, as Commander in Chief, he has made bad decisions...The whole war in Iraq is driven by oil...He won't find Bin Laden there...but I wouldn't call Bush a killer in the same sense as Saddam or Bin Laden...Saddam willingly committed mass murder on his own civilians...Bin Laden openly bragged about 9/11/01...

Answer 9

Who says killing is always wrong? I'm against capital punishment
in most cases but I gladly make an exception for serial killers,who
should all be put to death without delay. Saddam is one of the worst kind of serial killers,a tyrant,and there is justification for
hanging him. As for Bush,he will be judged by history. I suspect
the judgment won't be kind.

Answer 10

"War gives the right of the conquerors to impose any conditions they please upon the vanquished." - Julius Caesar.

People do not want fairness or justice - they want revenge and their pound of flesh. I am sure if people still believed in witches then 90% of the people here would go to watch old ladies being burnt to death.

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi

Personally I think Saddam should be made to work on a farm making food to feed to hungry or in a factory to make blankets for the homeless. He has no power anymore and executing him is just petty revenge.