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

Did Saddam's killing resolve anything? Does it compensate for not finding Osama Bin Laden? Will Saddam's killing start more trouble than it was intended to resolve? What right has any man to take the life of another man? Is capital punishment democracy or disguised dictatorship?

2006-12-30 06:36:23 · 15 answers · asked by icyhott4urmind 1 in News & Events Current Events

15 answers

Nothing was achieved. I think America went after Saddam because they let Bin Laden escape through their fingers, and Bush didn't want to appear foolish, so he went after another dictator. Not to say Saddam was innocent--he was a nasty, nasty man. But it was rather obvious--the timing of his capture was right after it was declared they had no idea where Bin Laden was.
And to answer your question, no it does not compensate for not getting Bin Laden. As bad as Saddam was, it was never proven that he had anything to do with 9/11--that was all Bin Laden. It's as I said--Bush said "I can't get you the guy responsible, so we'll go after another bad guy, and make ourselves look good."

2006-12-30 06:41:40 · answer #1 · answered by bellegurl17 4 · 5 1

1. Those people no longer have to live in the fear that Saddam will come back into power and start murdering them again.
2. No it does not compensate for not finding Osama, but it is one step towards making this country a free democracy.
3. I don't think so. Due to the fact that most of the people of Iraq a Shiite Muslims, which are the people that Saddam most persacuted.
4. I think we have a right to take someones life when their living endangers others, or when they have commited murder. In this case both are true.
5. I think that capital punishment is democracy, I mean trail by a jury means that there was a vote. It's not dictatorship.

2006-12-30 07:18:51 · answer #2 · answered by girly_gurl2215 2 · 0 0

Quoting Mark Green:

"Let's do a cost-benefit analysis of the capture and execution of Saddam. Let's see: the BENEFIT: -- he's gone; the COST -- up to 600,000 dead Iraqis according to a careful Johns Hopkins study; 3000 dead Americans; 20,000+ maimed and wounded Americans; an out-of-pocket cost of $400 biliion, toward a likely total cost of ( counting debt service, disability care etc.) of $2 trillion over time; and a war lasting longer than WWII..."

And another quote by Charles Bouley:

"I will not lose sleep over Saddam's death, but it saddens me that my country condoned, sanctioned, practically arranged his death and most here don't even know why. They take the Bush talking points as fact, don't do any historical research and come the new year will have forgotten Saddam even existed....Saddam is dead. Big deal. The war isn't over, and we, the greatest fighting force on the planet have proven we can kill one man. Just not the right one, he's still in a cave at the end of a very long extension cord in Afghanistan."

2006-12-30 07:14:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Look at the time line. JAN 79...Shah of Iran over thrown, JUL 79....Saddam takes power in Iraq. Nov 79....Hostages taken in Iran. Dec 79..USSR invades Afghanistan. Summer 1980 Iraq attacks Iran. The USA helped Iraq as a means of getting back at Iran. But we really did not want Iraq to win either so we secretly helped Iran. (Believe it or not, Israel helped Iran also.) By supporting both sides, the war dragged on for 8 years and neither had the ability to cause problems elsewhere.. Once the war ended, they started meddling in other nations. What we should have done is give each one a nuke and the ability to deliver it to the capital city of the other. Think how many problems that would have solved.

2016-05-22 21:31:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

1. Resolved nothing.
2. No, and Osama should have been the first found and executed.
3. Yes, this is only the start of more trouble than we ever imagined.
4. We as people feel that we have that right but truly only God has that right, but if any people should have had the right to kill Saddam it should have been the victims and families of victims that he hurt, in whatever way they saw fit.
5. Capital punishment has nothing to do with either, it exists in both because people in charge said it should.
*Both sides have now created a continuance of future and harsher violence instead of bringing about the creation of peace, as far as I'm concerned.

2006-12-30 06:48:27 · answer #5 · answered by NBinGP 2 · 2 2

So many questions, here are all the answers:

1) We made it certain Saddam will not return to power.
2) No, it did not compensate for not finding bin laden.
3) We aren't starting trouble, we're protecting ourselves.
4) We have the right because we can.
5) Capital punishment has no relationship to democracy or dictatorship. It can exist in either a democracy or a dictatorship, and democracies and dictatorships can both exist with or without capital punishment.

2006-12-30 06:41:36 · answer #6 · answered by kimmyisahotbabe 5 · 1 4

Iraq tried and convicted Saddam, then then Iraq put him to death. Did bush complain...NO of course not. But America did not try or put him to death.

What was gained by his death? The Iraq people saw closure to crimes he did against their family members and other Iraq people. They had every right to put him to death for what he did. They have every right to celebrate the death of this monster just as people would have celebrated the death of Hitler if they had been allowed to try and hang that monster as well.

I am an American who is anti-Bush, anti-war and I feel nothing really about Saddam's death, but I do feel it was justified and that his people deserved to see him die. Just as I feel the people of Darfu (spelling?) should be able to enjoy knowing that the people responsible for the mass genocide in that country pay the ultimate price.However I feel that true justice for Saddam and these other monsters would be life imprisonment in a horrible prison with no protection for their welfare.

Death was too good for Saddam if you are sympathetic for him I I feel you should seek mental health.

2006-12-30 06:59:25 · answer #7 · answered by Kdude 4 · 0 0

He was executed by the Iraqi's for killing Iraqi's after being tried by an Iraqi court. I have no idea about the rest of your questions. I'm sorry you are so upset. I don't think killing is right, but some cultures think it OK, and certainly he had no problem with it.

2006-12-30 06:42:14 · answer #8 · answered by LINDA G 4 · 0 1

"Now, he is in the garbage of history," said Jawad Abdul-Aziz, who lost his father, three brothers and 22 cousins in the reprisal killings that followed a botched 1982 assassination attempt against Saddam in the Shiite town of Dujail.
why don't you ask the person who said this quote, this was NONE OF ANYBODY'S BUSINESS except people like the man who said the above quote

2006-12-30 06:40:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

two things:

#1 Ratings! for the "kingpins" of NBC, MSNBC, FOX News and CNN.

#2 Joy and satisfaction for the "kingpins" that live in the U.S. and control this country like a puppet.

2006-12-30 07:36:05 · answer #10 · answered by lelekid4ever 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers