A web article (at http://gemsoftheweb.blogspot.com) by the same title made me think of bringing the topic to the Yahoo Answers community.
2006-12-31 22:55:50 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
no ,that would have been cruel and unusual punishment.
2007-01-01 13:52:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The outcome would've still been the same. Hanging, Beheading all end the same in a painful death! Saddam is in HELL dancing with the devil and all of his followers.. This is where this evil man belongs!
2007-01-01 07:05:38 · answer #2 · answered by aunt_beeaa 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The guillotine is too barbaric and is mostly not used, hanging will eventually follow suit.
2007-01-01 07:02:54 · answer #3 · answered by sunshine25 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Because I pitty the poor person who would have to pick up his head and decide what to do with it. he paid for his crimes, I still think God would have taken Suddamm's life in another way, perhaps with more pain?
2007-01-01 07:05:04 · answer #4 · answered by ANASTASIA_NIKOLAIEVNA_ROMANOVA 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush shud have been hanged or guillotined or whatever...I hate that dictator (winning an election by illegal means is worser than a dictator)
2007-01-01 07:05:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No person has been given the right to take the life of another living being. Please do not encourage such sadistic thoughts in your mind.
2007-01-01 07:07:32 · answer #6 · answered by Brahmanyan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for him to be dead on a neck is what the American want? i think it does not matter
2007-01-01 07:04:32 · answer #7 · answered by Bun-Galla 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes
2007-01-01 10:35:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was hanged by the neck until he was dead !!
2007-01-01 06:58:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
doesnt matter how, they just wanted him dead
2007-01-01 06:59:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋