and the human rights activists are kicking off again saying he should never have been executed, did this murdering scumbag think about the rights of his victims, certainly not. These people get right up my nose with their constant moaning. Murderers should pay the ultimate prize, either death or prison with no release. Saddam Hussein was hanged like many of his innocent victims and didn't go through horrific torture first like many did. Saddam lost his human rights a long time ago. Good riddance.
2006-12-31 01:57:41 · 20 answers · asked by button mushroom 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Yawn Yawn!!
2006-12-31 02:06:09 · answer #1 · answered by S 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
What Saddam did in his own country pales into insignificance compared to the absolute carnage brought about what was an illegal US/UK war in Iraq. And why stop or even start with Iraq when North Korea and to a lesser extent Iran pose greater potential threats than Saddam. Could it be because Saddam was a 'soft' target. The ''walkover' based on a tissue of lies [WMD ]is proving to be a nightmare and I believe will lead to a much serious war encompassing most of the Middle East, disrupting oils supplies and western economies. But hey why moan when our great leader Bush has thrilled some of its citizens by a 'result'.
2006-12-31 02:21:39 · answer #2 · answered by James Mack 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yeah, he had it coming. Apparently, for them, deserving has really got nothing to do with it.....But rhetorically, I have to ask, "Where were they when he was executing his citizens, opponents, neighboring countries and their citizens, etc.?" Too bad, these same folks didn't get up in arms and and vocal to stop the executions of his millions of his victims.
Ironic still that these very same liberals can not even exist outside the safe boundaries of this great nation which they seemingly hate so much. Specifically, they would have been among Saddam's victims if born an Iraqi.
2006-12-31 02:16:46 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. US of A, Baby! 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Whether he deserved to die or not, it was for the Iraqi people to decide. I have heard that many say it was better under Saddam than it is now; they felt safer!
Who made America the International Police force and if it is, when will it target Israeli leaders who are merciless in their treatment of the Palestinians who have lived in Palestine for generations? (If you are thinking that it was 'Israel' a 3,000 years ago and just reverted, what if American Indians suddenly became wealthy and powerful and wanted their country back??)
As far as Iraq goes, no one can force democracy onto a nation. It is government 'by the people' so 'the people' have to choose it. Yes, there will be blood shed when the western troops pull out of Iraq but why not offer those who want to leave a home in America and let the rest sort it out for themselves?
2006-12-31 02:18:34 · answer #4 · answered by cate 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hoorah!
Well said. For too long the loony liberals have apparently had the upper hand, this is a small back-bite at the "Oh you must give them help and support" brigade. Did Saddams victims get counselling before they were slaughtered? Did they shiite!
And what is our government thinking in quickly 'pointing out' that "we do not support the death penalty"? How out of touch are successive governments going to be?
2006-12-31 02:14:06 · answer #5 · answered by Phlodgeybodge 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I understand what you are saying, but think of the consequences for Iraq. His death is only going to worsen the situation for Iraqi civilians. In the eyes of his supporters, Saddam has died a hero's death. The courts have made a bloody martyr out of him! If they given him life imprisonment, sentenced him to hard labour everyday for the rest of his life, he would have been disgraced-reduced to nothing. But instead, he got the privilege of a noble send-off. He got off lightly, I think.
2006-12-31 02:45:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I watched Sarah Green from Amnesty International `go on` about Saddam Hussein's` `unfair` trial yesterday; normally I support them, but in this particular case all normal rules were not applicable. He was a wicked man. I don`t think that he will now be at peace; because IF it is him in the coffin that was buried to-day, I don`t think he will stay in it. For sure someone will exhume it and mutilate the body. I think the coffin is empty and he is buried else where.
2006-12-31 02:12:49 · answer #7 · answered by Social Science Lady 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i dont agree with the death penalty. if the death penalty was brought back to Britain do you really think it would act as any sort of a deterrent and stop these crimes happening. it didn't work as a deterrent when it was in Britain and it doesn't stop terrible crimes happening in America or anywhere else. Saddam should have been punished for what he did, just in more of an effective way than just killing him.
2006-12-31 02:25:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, now things will get better - dealing finally with Saddam has closed a chapter and the speed that he was executed means that the government means business about moving on.
2006-12-31 02:03:20 · answer #9 · answered by sunshine25 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Life emprisonment would have been appropriate. But killing him just makes us as cruel and barbaric as he was.
But he is dead and there will be no trial over the killing of 170,000 Kurds with chemical weapons provided by America for him to use on Iran; that is THE fundamental issue.
See photo below:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
2006-12-31 04:03:46 · answer #10 · answered by s0190331 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This execution was important because it proves that the USA can effectively target and eliminate a dictator.
It is a lesson for Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea.
2006-12-31 02:05:04 · answer #11 · answered by StéphanDeGlasgow 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋