who are we.....as the u.s. just another country.....to hang one of their leaders......... thats like if peru came over here and hung one of ours.....not bush because too many people would support.......but a leader admired.........shouldn't war crimes be delt with by the u.n.?..........i serioulsy don't know what gives the u.s. justification to hand saddam.......can someone with just a little insight please tell me?
2007-01-01 18:27:18 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
His death sentence was late by 16years. he should have been hang in the first gulf war. I have no feelings for him. Those people he killed!!
2007-01-01 19:08:38 · answer #1 · answered by Elcie 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the same vein, you might as well ask: "who are we to forcibly remove the president of another country (UN member)?" Many countries in the world were appalled when the US invaded Iraq (without a UN mandate) to oust the leader - it has set a dangerous trend.
US jailers handed Saddam over to the Iraqi authorities to be hung; it does nor mean US hands are clean. America invaded Iraq without a UN mandate; how can the UN try Saddam in the international court when the invasion is 'illegal'???
2007-01-02 04:03:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. the Iraqi judicial system tried him in a fair trial that was open and transparent.
2. he was NOT charged with crimes against humanity, nor was he charged with war crimes.
3. he was charged with murdering 148 people in the North of Iraq, when they protested against him.
4. he was not "hung" he was HANGED...use proper english, please....
5. If this WAS a war crime charge, then it would have been handled differently, and your tax dollars would have been badly spent by idiotic lawyers from the US in needless and senseless appeals for years to come.
6. I applaud the Iraqi judicial system for dealing with a tyrant who was a convicted murder in what is rightly called "swift" justice.
With all of the publicity that has been seen over all of the Iraqi problem, how can you NOT know what has been going on..and that the american government (while it may be orchestrating a lot of this) is not in the forefront of the courts in Iraq and what Saddam was charged with?
2007-01-02 03:09:13 · answer #3 · answered by flyboss1107 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Iraqis tried, convicted and hanged him. You have to understand Saddam was not an innocent man. He was responsible for upwards of 300,000 killings, even by the use of chemical weapons. He wiped out towns and villages because they were of another faith.
War crimes and the UN? That's laughable. Where were they when Idi Amin was slaughtering thousands and even "ate" some of his victims. Yes, he was a cannibal. What about Pol Pot who killed over a million Cambodians? What about Rwanda? What about Castro? He executed thousands in Cuba when he took power? You need to narrow down your question to one area. The UN has little power to control despots and dictators of this world.
If you believe Saddam was innocent or if he didn't deserve his punishment, then you won't like this answer.
2007-01-02 03:04:56 · answer #4 · answered by gone 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If only every American thought like you. Executing a foreign Head of State is a war crime, even if you happen to be at war with them. Unfortunately the Bush administration seems to believe in the old logic that "Might make right"
BTW, most people will say that the Iraqis executed him, but the truth is Iraq is a signatory to the International Criminal Court, so therefore any national court od Iraq doesn't have the authority to charge people with war crime or crimes against humanity. That would be like a small claims court handling a murder case.
2007-01-02 02:33:06 · answer #5 · answered by Mabus 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Unless the rope was "Made in America" We didn't hang him.
UN? the UN was shielding him.... Remember the oil for Food scandal? Saddam had bought off the UN.
He was in US custody but was a prisoner of the Nation of Iraq, we had no right NOT to hand him over to answer to his crimes against his own country.
If Hitler had survived the war should he have been spared hanging?
Here is a wonderful idea, Mourn the ones Saddam killed for no reason, not the murderer who was responsible for their deaths.
2007-01-02 02:50:29 · answer #6 · answered by Stone K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We didn't hang Saddam, The Iraqi govt did. They had that right. The UN=Useless Nitwits. They are as useful as udders on a bull. Bush is our democratically elected leader. There are no grounds to punish him at all.
2007-01-02 02:34:13 · answer #7 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We have absolutely no right to do such a thing, for sure... but when the question arises on to whether his crimes leading up to the hanging where justified we get the same answer, no. But letting him free would be just as bad as hanging him... because we hung him, countless lives will be effected by the domino effect of what we have done...
To make a long answer short... No...
2007-01-02 02:33:05 · answer #8 · answered by Grant C 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
WE did not hang him, the Iraqi government did. Please look it up. We held him, He was tried by his own country's court system and executed by his own country for crimes done by him in his regime. This was not a UN court such as in Nuremberg after the war. That would be like us having the UN look over impeachment proceedings. The fact is they held the trial, they looked at teh appeal, they sentenced him and carried out the sentence efficiently and by THIER laws , not ours. We were just policemen.
2007-01-02 02:50:26 · answer #9 · answered by fancyname 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We didn't hang him. He was tried by his own people and found guilty. We just helped them detain him and take away his power so that he could be tried for his many crimes. If we had convicted him he would be sitting on death row in our prison system and supported by our tax dollars for 20 or 30 years until his appeals ran out.
2007-01-02 02:30:57 · answer #10 · answered by Pamela 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋