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

Did he have fair trial? Did he deserve to die? If so, was it right to hang him on the day of the Muslims big religious festival day? Is he a criminal? Was it the Iraqis wish to sentence him to death, or was it the American Government's? Please be fair and honest with you answers.

2006-12-31 01:20:34 · 8 answers · asked by munira_alghamdi 1 in Politics & Government Politics

8 answers

I am going to attempt to answer this as simply as possible and from a non-partisan point of view.

Saddam Hussein should have never been removed from the Iraqi power by the hands of the US government and nor should he have been executed by the Iraqi people thru aide of the US.

If the Iraqi people REALLY wanted Saddam out of power, then they should have uprised and revolted on their own terms. Yes it was true that prior to 1991 , Iraq once held the 4th largest Army in the world, but in the post-Desert Storm their numbers were so weak that the people could have EASILY plotted an overthrow.

The US went after Saddam because we failed in our primary mission in not finding Osama Bin Ladin within Afgahanistan, so to quell the rising questions of the US people, the government launched Iraqi Freedom, which if you remember was initially a primary mission to find the famous non-existing "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". Once again , we failed in the primary mission and redirected it as now a government removal mission. It was a cheap way to keep funding an unpopular war.

But what you need to look back and remember is this: During the 1980's the US loved Iraq, they were our pawn in an oil war alongside the UK. It all goes a little something like this:

Prior to 1979, the UK funded and backed the Shah of Iran and his line before him for almost 50 years. In exchange for military, financial and government support, Iran gave the UK rights to its Persian Oil Fields for almost nothing in taxes. However, in 1979 the Shah was overthrown by Muslim extremists and Ayotolla Rulloah Khomehni was brought back out of a decade of exile to establish the Iranian government it is now. In a move to retake the government, the US and UK found a friend within Iraq due to Saddam having different religious views ( he is a sunni and they are shiite) and the growing fear of Iranian expansion towards Iraq.

The US and UK had previously worked with Saddam in the 1940s during a CIA organized attempt to assassinate a potentially dangerous leader Qassim who was in control of Iraq, Saddam was shot in the leg during his escape and led out of the country by CIA officials to begin an exile in Egypt. (It's also interesting to note that in 1980 by the way, the city of Detroit gave him a key to the city to his generous contributions to several churches.)

So alongside the UK and now France, the US supplied millions of dollars to Iraq along with chemical weapon technology, especially a mixture of Mustard Gas and Nerve Agents. This was to be used to fight of the Iranians at any cost and soon it was revealed that Iran had sided with a branch of Iraqis known as the Kurds who wanted to establish their own country in north Iraq called Kurdistan. The Kurds were financially backed and trained by the Iranians and soon intelligence revealed this fact to Saddam and in a desperate move to avoid a full on invasion from both the East and North, he launched a massive chemical attack killing thousands. Initially the US and Iraq proclaimed it was the work of Iran, but after Desert Storm the US was caught lying and admitted it was Iraq.

After an 8 year war, Iraq had decimated Iran but ran up enormous war debts, especially towards Kuwait, once considered the 12th Province of Iraq. Kuwait , however, had long been connected with the extremists of Iran and Iraq claimed they had saved Kuwait from Iranian invasion, so wished that their massive war debt be cleared. Kuwait declined and in an act of defiance, began slant-oil drilling along a disputed border beside Iraq, which technically crossed Iraqi border, making it their rightful oil.

Saddam then ordered troops to the border and then began the invasion of Kuwait. The UN saw this as war acts, but the UK and US viewed it as a threat to the oil industry because Iraq already contained a 9th of the world's oil and now stood to gain more. Fearing a gas increase, the US called for a coalition force to the UN and was approved, leading to Desert Storm. Within 100 hours of a ground war, the mission was labeled a success and Iraq's forces were crushed into nothingness.

So the question is with all this real information that any one of you are free to research is : Did he really deserve what he was given? I don't think so. If we allowed his execution, then the US, UK and France should face war crimes as well for their long involvement for over 50 years with the man they labeled a "tyrant". Another thing you have to considered is this : Was it right that the Iraqi people have a thrown together tribunal and give him a quick trial? No, if he truly committed war attrocities, then by law that person is to face a tribunal before the Geneva Covention in Geneva, Switzerland before non-partisan countries. That was essentially a witch-hunt like in Salem.

Now that he has been executed though, it's not going to change a single thing in that region, it all always be the same, and then we're all going to realize what a mistake it was to execute one man, when it's really an entire region. Because tyrant or not, the fear of Saddam formed an almost police-like control over the middle east and made some crazed form of stability. Now that he is gone, Iran is up to their old ways of threatening the world, and all the other surrounding countries are becoming increasingly violent.

2006-12-31 02:03:51 · answer #1 · answered by clockwork_mike 2 · 0 0

Yes the one trial was well over a year long and it was fair and by Iraqi law. Yes, even though the one trial was only about 150 slaughtered people, they had evidence to tie him to about a million mass murders. The reason they hung him at the beginning of the festival was because most people would be staying home anyway and it was better for security and crowd control. Yes he was a horrific criminal. The Iraqi's had total control of the trial, the sentencing and the carrying out of that sentence. the Americans only provided the security for Saddam.

2006-12-31 01:25:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The trial, conviction, and execution of Saddam... including the date, was done by the Iraqi justice System (which they enjoy finally actually having one). If the American government could control the Iraqi government as well as you intimate, this war would be in a different phase right now, and Iraq would look much different (partitioned)!

2006-12-31 01:23:53 · answer #3 · answered by Don Quixote 2 · 2 1

I have mixed emotions about his death and trial. On one hand, he was a terrible human and killed more people than we could ever imagine. On the other hand - we had no right to go into his country and start a war. There are so many dictators in the world that are equally cruel. We have to ask if it was worth it to sacrifice almost 3,000 of our young to destroy one. Did he deserve to die - yes, for all the crimes he committed. Should it have been done on the day Muslims have a big religious festival - that would depend on whether you were a supporter of his or not. I believe both governments wanted him dead. Ours because he wanted to kill Bush's daddy, his because of his crimes against humanity.

2006-12-31 01:28:49 · answer #4 · answered by CxeLady 3 · 0 2

Fair & honest.// He deservered to die. He killed 1,000s of inocent people who disagreed with him. Yes he was under US control but it was his own people who convicted him & senticed him to death. It had to be carried out when it was because his birthday is in April. He would be 70 & under Iraq law you can not give the death penality to any one over 70. Yes was a very evil man. His father got the country in a coup& his uncle with his help over throw his father. Then Saddem Killed his uncle to take the country. He even had his son in laws killed because they took his daughters out of the country. So yes I truly believe he got what he deservered.

2006-12-31 01:38:17 · answer #5 · answered by BUTCH 5 · 0 1

i tink he deserves it for all the violent acts he had done both directly and indirectly. i would say its the iraqis govt cos it was stated in the news. america dun hav death sentence rite- nt sure abt tat tho- anyways the evil have to be punished... tats wad i tink. no offence to anyone, just my thoughts

2006-12-31 01:24:40 · answer #6 · answered by pink-cookies 2 · 2 1

Justice was served. Hallelujah!

2006-12-31 01:28:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

it is the American Government's wish , because us occupied iraq

2006-12-31 01:23:43 · answer #8 · answered by Zaki M 2 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers