English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

25 answers

it is nothing but travesty of justice. the USA invaded Iraq on the pretext of WMDs but could not find out them in Iraq. when Saddam was in power there were no Islamic terrorists . after the invasion of the USA, it had become hot bed for terrorists and sectarian violence.as of now after invasion of Iraq, nearly 6,00,000 Iraqis died and thousands of American and its allies's soldiers died. IT WAS THE USA WHICH GAVE ARMS AND AM MUNITIONS AND MORAL SUPPORT, TO SADDAM WHEN HE WAGED WAR ON IRAN. THE TRIAL IS RIGGED AND THE USA AUTHORED THE JUDGMENT. THE DEFENSE LAWYERS WERE KILLED UNDER MYSTERIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE JUDGES WERE REMOVED ON THE PRETEXT THAT THEY OPINED THAT SADDAM WAS NOT A DICTATOR. ALL THE PEACE LOVING PEOPLE IN THE WORLD SHOULD DENOUNCE THE EXECUTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN. if the policy of the USA and its stooges is to punish dictators, WHY DID THEY ALLOW THE RUTHLESS DICTATOR OF CHILE PINOCHET? WHY DID NOT THEY SEND TROOPS TO NEPAL, MAYAN MAR?WHERE THERE WAS NO DEMOCRACY.

2006-12-30 00:55:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 15 0

I am saddened by Sadam's execution, not because he may or not deserved it, but because what justice was really served in this action? Now his followers are promising to hurt the US. But mostly I think instead of killing Sadam they should of forced him to do good, monitored him, but made him make some of his wrongs right. That probably would have been more of a punishment for him than to kill him.

2006-12-29 19:12:02 · answer #2 · answered by Cat 3 · 0 0

I think capital punishment is only acceptable in certain situations, such as when a person cannot be safely incarcerated (e.g. they are a danger to other inmates/guards, or they are a risk for escape like Ted Bundy). I think in general it is better to have the person remain in prison, so they have the opportunity to repent and try to do something good with their lives. I think Saddam Hussein probably could have been safely incarcerated, so I think his execution was unnecessary.

2006-12-30 04:04:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous61245 3 · 0 0

My aunt and cousins are from Baghdad and they are Shi'a. My other cousins are Sunni and they both have different opionions. The Shi'a cousins are happy that he is killed because Saddam hated Shi'a. However my Sunni cousins say that he shouldve been executed after more trials on other killings. I dont know what to think because I feel a LITTLE bit sorry that he had to go this way but then I remember he killed lots of Muslims (Shi'as AND Sunnis) so then I dont feel sorry for him. This is God's will. SubhanAllah!

2006-12-29 19:10:57 · answer #4 · answered by Al-Imaratiyya 2 · 0 0

I think it is a good thing, since he is responsible for so many people's killings in Iraq. The only thing I think was not a good idea, was to have it 2 days before New Year's, which would make New Year's celebrations huge targets in the U.S. or Europe. Other than that, it's fine.

2006-12-29 19:09:43 · answer #5 · answered by ny2la_usamex 3 · 0 0

I think hanging is a little primitive; For some reason it really disturbs me but at the same time he deserves it... Good riddance... But shouldn't there be one specific death penalty applicable through the entire world???
Hanging and death by rock throwing seem to me as being just plain primitive... I don't know... I'm very disturbed by the whole thing.... I think it's only going tomake thing worse; meening that Irak is probably going to retaliate even more to avenge his death..

2006-12-29 19:13:18 · answer #6 · answered by stefanyt_charron 2 · 0 0

Wasn't surprised but as much as he probably deserved it I am against capital punishment unless God does it himself. People can have and do change and we as people have limited insight into whether they will or not. We should leave the life taking to the Lord. If I thought that it would help the victims families but I know it will not as, though I haven't killed someone I have been vengeful and it didn't help. Later when I forgave it did help me.

2006-12-29 19:11:24 · answer #7 · answered by bess 4 · 0 0

I think they should have just locked him in a little cell under ground, and let him die slowly. Now all those idiot sunnis will call him a martyr, and the last thing they need is another reason to riot.

2006-12-29 19:07:53 · answer #8 · answered by judy r 2 · 0 0

Fair

2006-12-29 19:07:05 · answer #9 · answered by Zifikos 5 · 0 0

well i dont agree with the execution, he was oppressing 1 percent of his population in Iraq, now Iraq is even worse... pointless to kill him. hes a bad man but should we just start killing EVERYONE who's a dictator, maybe start with someone more of a threat, king Jon yill (no idea how to spell that). so yeah i think his execution is okay, your killing a bad person, but it wasn't necessary to kill him, even more suffered just to catch someone who isn't even that big of a threat to most of the mass populace.

2006-12-29 19:12:01 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No human execution can serve any good purpose....it has become a form of civilised revenge.

2006-12-29 19:07:32 · answer #11 · answered by saumitra s 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers