Saddam Hussein died for no reasons?

Question

Saddam Hussein's Laywer went to the village that said Saddam killed 148 Shiites , but when the laywer went in that village, they all alive. Why USA excecuted Saddam Hussein and why they lied to all nations that Saddam hussein killed 148 Shiites, because Saddam hussein had a power to come back as president in his nation, people needed him. Thats why they killed him. Now saddam hussein is dead, every nations will start the third world war 3 now. Its all Americas government fault, the massive blood killer is president bush, look how many people died in Iraq and Afghanistan, all children, he killed more than millions children, he is a monster not a human to be a president like this.

Answer 1

They were all alive??? The US executed him? Dude...That's a little out there...If you want something to ponder try this Saddam Hussein committed most of his crimes as an ally of the U.S. government. He only became the "new Hitler" when he stepped out of line--threatening control over the flow of Middle East oil....there now go base you arguements on something a lil more factual and leave the fairy tales alone.

Answer 2

Preaching to the choir unfortunately.

I'm not sure about your recount of the events, but I'm fairly sure something occured.

I would be more than happy for someone to present strong evidence of the chemical gas attack. There's been so much talk about it from Bush and Blair, and no evidence put forward that I even question now whether I have ever seen a report showing that a chemical attack occured. Not to say that it didn't. It's been such a long time I can't remember.

However, I did read one report that Iranian shells were found at the scene. Stuck in my mind cos it was odd. At a time when Iran and Iraq were at odds, seems unlikely Saddam was buying from the Iranians.

So I guess I really question who did it if and when it did occur.

Blair, flustered by reporters the other day clearly cannot condone capital punishment because it is outlawed in the UK, but he didn't do a whole lot to prevent the execution.

I guess my points are:
1. He should have been tried before the Hague (international court of law, not one appointed by invading forces). Every decision made by British and American governments is for self politcal gain.
2. I don't feel progressive societies use capital punishment to punish crimes. It does nothing for the victims, only satisfies the hunger of the Americans and Brits for revenge. Take the US. The only country in the Western world that still imposes Capital Punishment, and has the highest murder rate by a mile. Something to the order of twentyfold, for a population which is on avergae only 4 times as large as other western nations.
Why not let him rot in jail in the Green zone?

It's a sad day for justice

Answer 3

Whilst I agree that the legality of SH's trial was somewhat dubious and that political showcase trials like this can never be fair, (Nuremburg, Ceaucescu, etc) you make a number of points that simply are not valid.
A. He has been tried by an Iraqi tribunal. Whilst he should have been tried under laws prevalent and not retrospectively, it is still an Iraqi court doing it and not the US.
B. SH had no power to return to office. Whilst there was a potential, given the in-fighting the chance was very remote.
C. The coalition forces did not set out to kill innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq unlike the men involved in the hijacking and subsequent deliberate collision of airliners into New York who first began their plan by the slitting of air hostesses' throats and the murder of the pilots and flight engineers, which is after all what started the whole thing in motion.
D. The killing of 148 Shiites is in fact proven, and even if this had been a falsehood then he could be charged with the killing of several thousand marsh arabs for which he never stood trial.

This really does read like a political propaganda pamphlet. Whilst I appreciate that English may not be your first language and that you are doing fairly well with it, there really isn't an excuse for deliberate and blatant misrepresentation like this.

Answer 4

I have to agree. The news that gets reported over here is not 100% correct and is what they want us to believe. My friend is from Iraq and although he didnt think Saddam was a nice person he did say that he didnt do everything they convicted him for. The timing of his execution was also done for maxium effect and destruction. My friend said that Iraq will fall now as the government is not strong so I guess Bush will get his wish and get his dirty hands on the oil after all.

On the news you hear how many American and British die but you dont hear about the millions of innocent Iraqs that die because of what Bush started.

It is such a shame that one man ( Bush ) thinks that he can control the world and have everything his way. I am sure that there will be reprucussions from this and America will not think that it is their own fault.

If Bush and Blair think that Iraq is better off without him why are they not trying to sort out the other dictators in the world like Mugabe, he has killed millions of his own people just for not voting for him and continues to cause misery and distress for his people. Oh hang on there is nothing in Zimbabwe that the Americans and British governments want maybe thats why!!!!!

So now Bush cant rule over Iraq where will he start next?????
What does he want? Oil, Gas, Gold. You NEVER see him helping the real people in trouble like the poor people of Zimbabwe now do we.

America is not all that it dosent rule the world and it dosent have all the answers.

Answer 5

Human Rights don't follow mathematical rules, Two wrongs don't make a right. Yes, President Bush is guilty of causing the deaths of 100 of thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 has never been made.
When Saddam and his cohorts caused the death of over 5000 Kurds in Halabja in 1988, with chemical weapons put together with substances obtained from the West, the international community virtually ignored the massacre.
However, there remains the question whether it is acceptable for anyone to exercise the power of life or death over another? In Christianity AND Islam, only God has the power of life and death.
Does the trial of those who also bear responsibility for Halabja continue? It's time the Kurdish people were recognised as having the right protection from the international community. Halabja wasn't the first massacre of Kurds even in recent times. At least 2000 were killed 10 years previously and there again the Western world did not react.
On the other hand, I object to anyone who counts himself as part of the human race public saying that he is 'happy' when talking about the execution.

Answer 6

no saddam Hussein did kill a number of people and its true that he was hanged by the Iraqi government and not the US, but they still had no right to hang him. since they hanged Saddam, they might as well do the same to bush.he too has killed many people over the years. infact, he has killed more people in one month than Saddam has killed in his entire lifetime. so why is only Saddam getting punished for his crimes? and nobody should get the right to say that its Muslims who are rejoicing. why would we possibly be? you know, not all muslims are from Iraq and if you think about it, bush just got his way again. and yet, he still badmouths muslims and you can clearly see that they're not treated as equally. people say that racism has stopped in the world but thats not true. its just been put a curtain on for the time being.

Answer 7

What proof do you have that they are alive?

What proof do you have that bush killed a million children? Some other guy who posted a question said 600,000 in general not kids. I even heard 5 million.

As for it being America's fault, try reading a history book with big words and actual history, not "Crib notes guide to world history and politics *the condensed version*" You might just see the violence happening has been happening for centuries, not just in the last 4 years.

Making unprovable comments does not prove your point it just makes you look like a loon.

Hey how about this The Shiites that were killed were really complex clones designed to look act and die like their real counterparts... and Saddam was trying to stop them from taking over the world. I cant prove it but it has to be true because I heard it some where and have no evidence.

Use facts, not garbage fed to you by people with less facts than you.

Here is another fact. Evil radioactive monkeys actually rule the world from a spaceship buried under the statue of liberty and control the world bank! Try to prove me wrong with my unprovable "facts" and baseless arguments.....

Answer 8

Iraq found that the right way to end this was to kill Saddam Hussein. Since he was tried for under Iraq law, being restored and all, they sentenced him to death, stating that he would be sentenced to death soon. As that was planned, he was hung as a result of that sentence. The reason he was hung so fast after getting convicted is due to the Iraqi laws, however in America, we put the trial longer making the defendant able to appeal as he may want and plead innocent and guilty with a certain time period... After the verdict, the defendant, or known to be convict, is sentenced on death row. People are sentenced from a year to about 15 or more maybe. That doesn't apply to Iraqi laws and they are more strict.


For your info... I am an African-American who is trying to say that the plan was executed by Iraq, now wonder he was killed...DUH!
Plus, My Dad is fighting in the war and is fighting in the army so you guys don't know jack. I don't see your lazy selves helping out America and I am glad Saddam died for the massive killings or what he was also tried for......... Keep this in ya mind and think it through before you say something.

Answer 9

i agree with you. these people that have answered your question so far have obviously got there info from newspapers.
Yes saddam killed but what dictator hasnt!
he had no weapons of mass destruction! the media hasnt shown what the usa has done to that country.
even though he was executed in iraq it was not the iraqi government that decided his fate it was the U.S masters so you people that are saying get your facts straight you should get yours straight and stop reading the balls that written in newspapers. we do not know the half of whats going on in iraq i have a very close friend thats been there and has just recently left he has told me alot of things that the americans have done to innocent iraqi women, men and children. saddam should not of been sentenced to death, i agree he should of been punished for the people that was killed but most of what has been written about saddam is not true i wont go into how i know, its not from reading newspapers like most of you that has answered this question, i am a reporter! Bush has done alot of bad too but you dont hear about that. anyway enough said.

Answer 10

It seems there's always someone who wants to find guilty parties as innocent. Here we have a former leader who killed, destroyed entire families, allowed his sons and others to rape and murder, and other horrible humanities I'd rather forget, yet we have someone who sees him as dying for no reason? These people are looking through rose colored glasses.

Apparently this individual never watches the news, or reads the papers! This person apparently has been secluded from all media and life or he or she would have seen this leader's evil side and how his people died and suffered at his command!

How can you defend such evil? Are you evil??? Only evil will defend evil!

He deserved death. He was justly tried in his own country and found guilty! He has paid the ultimate price for his sins. He lived by the sword and therefore he died by the sword, so to speak!

How can anyone defend this evil man? GEEZE! Cockroaches come out of the woodworks when darkness surrounds them!!!!