2006-12-29 22:32:20 · 12 answers · asked by apyhat 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yes, and given the culture he's from and how he treated the people, he's lucky he wasn't stoned, dragged behind a camel, trampled by soldiers, covered in gasoline and tourched.
he died almost instantly, and unless you've talked to a victim of his abuse ((lost limbs, family members murdered, raped by his inhumane sons, etc)) who can judge? he was evil.
2006-12-29 22:37:07 · answer #1 · answered by bb 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Executing anyone, including Saddam, can never be humane. Destroying life is against humanity. A tooth for a tooth may be biblical and just. And we find a lot of justification to stop somebody like Saddam. But killing another human person, eventhough just, cannot be humane.
2006-12-30 07:23:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not humane.
Chills and shudders are what I feel that we would live in a world where we claim to be humane yet would publically humiliate a person (criminal) by hanging them while video taped. Really, what does this say about our society that we allowed it to happen.
What is this planet coming to? Disgusting display of humanity at its worst. I really do shake my head watching how this new century has begun; and wonder what other evils are out their lurking...it seems that evil really has no bounds this century. Shameful; when there was so much excitement about a new century...and humanity has sunken so low so fast. No religion or polititian is going to save this planet. It will be "the people" who decide when this world will become a kinder, gentler place.
2006-12-30 06:51:59 · answer #3 · answered by rachel_waves 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam Hussain is guitly of killing so we are going to kill him for killing.
Capital punishment - the ultimate hypocrisy
Funny how the death sentence is imposed for this, but it was okay in the 1980s for Saddam to use chemical weapons supplied by the United States, and arranged by Donald Rumsfeld, to slaughter untold numbers of Iranians.
And what must the sentence be for causing the deaths of 650,000 Iraqis since 2003?
Tony Blair and George Bush would like to know ...
2006-12-30 06:41:48 · answer #4 · answered by jesus 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I consider execution to be a barbaric practice: and so by definition it cannot be humane.
There are some irregularities concerning the trial which mean that, strictly speaking, it cannot be called just. The way in which the execution was hurried along also calls the justice of the procedure into question.
2006-12-30 06:51:43 · answer #5 · answered by Spell Check! 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No execution is just as long as people thing killing is wrong in the first place. If he is being killed for killing then why aren't the ones that killed him going to be executed? Simply put either NO ONE kills or EVERYONE does. Not just a few that are aboove the law.
2006-12-30 06:42:40 · answer #6 · answered by kveldulf_gondlir 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. The trial was cooked by USA. It was a masked procedure. It was a **** of of a process in the name of legal correctness.
The legal body which convicted him is puppet to USA. It is ruled and afraid of US Army.
2006-12-30 06:42:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sure why not. The only thing is that it ain't our call as to what is just and humane. He was turned over to the Iraqi people and that is their law. Hell i wish we still hung people over here.
2006-12-30 06:37:44 · answer #8 · answered by masterhowie069 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think they should put him in witness protection program.Because he have to testify that Bush Senior provided him bio chemical weapons and wmd's.American also ordered him to attack Iran.
2006-12-30 06:38:43 · answer #9 · answered by mentaq 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hell yeah!! Compared to the way he killed his victims!!
2006-12-30 08:08:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋