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

was it right? i think it was a little harsh

2007-01-01 19:38:57 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

22 answers

I'm against the death penalty, in all situations in which prisoners can be safely incarcerated, away from the ability to harm others. Obviously, if a prisoner is bound in a straw hut, he or she can easily escape and/or influence others. But otherwise, I believe the death penalty says more about us, as citizens (regardless of national affinity) than it does about the prisoners. That we have video feeds, photographs, public executions, et al, makes me believe that the death penalty is less about justice and more about appeasing people in need of entertainment, solace, etc.

2007-01-01 19:49:47 · answer #1 · answered by rhetorica 3 · 0 3

Of course it was right.

Locking him up in Jail would have allowed him the run Iraq from behind bars. The insurgency would continue to get more vilolent. I am not saying with Saddams death it will get better.

But, what if now, with Saddam out of the way. The insurgents have less to fight for in the coming months? What if Saddam his been masterminding the insurgency from behind bars? He armed the populace at the start of the invasion. Granted he had every right to.

I think they should has gassed him personnally. Serin/mustard combo just like he did to the Kurds.!!!

2007-01-02 08:17:53 · answer #2 · answered by devilduck74 3 · 1 0

I have to admit it was appalling how he was treated in his last moments .. yes he killed many many innocent people and was a cruel man but hanging him was not the option it was an easy way out for the goverment .. I believe he should have been imprisioned for life .. taking his life was a political movement and designed to make a statement that iraq is free now he is dead but his beliefs are deep rooted within the society and many will not allow the goverment to be stable as saddam is now a marter in their eyes and they will fight till the end

2007-01-02 16:47:23 · answer #3 · answered by sammie 6 · 0 0

Saddam was tried in an Iraqi court which he mocked, accused of being false and literally, turned the trial into a circus worthy of the tabloids.

Will this stop the violence in Iraq, nope; but for once, the Iraqi people took responsibility of their own country and convicted a man that held the Iraqi people under his boot for 32 years. The timing was too soon, but it was the decision of the Iraqis, not of the US, whose only job was to make sure Saddam didn't bust out of jail.

Saddam's dead; end of story.

2007-01-02 06:44:20 · answer #4 · answered by tercelclub 4 · 2 1

Here's my 50 cents. This man is a part of the Iraq culture. That country uses hanging as their punishment. Sadam has used this punishment on many people, as a citizen of Iraq he needs to fall under their laws and their punishments. If you think about it, the Iraqi people who he persecuted are the ones who tried him and sentenced him. Is it right to say that their legal system is wrong? We had him here and we did nothing because we realized that it was not our place to punish him, it was his country's. Personally, I don't believe in hanging people. However, I think that Iraq had the full right to hang him because he is just as subject to the country punishment as anyone else.

2007-01-02 03:50:25 · answer #5 · answered by Tweety bird 2 · 4 1

More than harsh. It was absolutely stupid. Stucking Mupid. mispelt deliberately. The torture freak pig was almost 70. If given a life sentence he wouldn't have lasted more than 5 or 6 years.

Most importantly he would not have been a martyr.
The people in Iraq including foreign fighters like the Coalition soldiers, are all going to be in for a swirling crapstorm because of that one idiotic act.

There is speculation that the timing of his death was prompted by some idiot on a ranch in Texas who was worried that DG3K was going to bite the dirt before New Years and that was correct. The freak on the ranch needed some diversion to get people to not look at Dead Guy 3 thousand.
The young man was named Justin. 22 years old. from Spring, a suburb of Houston.
Not that the "honorary" Texan in Crawford gives 3/4 of a fat rat's rump, but DG2K was also a Texan.

I care because he was human. It could have easily been my niece, her husband. or my nephew. He was somebody's son.
The way things are now going, DG4K could very well be my niece. or nephew. or nephew-in-law.

The Creep in Crawford was meanwhile busy having the mother of another dead boy. Casey Sheehan. his mom Cindy... he was having her arrested for protesting this.
And he's trying to think of a really good lie to tell us about how to win the war.

2007-01-02 04:01:14 · answer #6 · answered by brotherjonah 3 · 0 4

In the terms of american politicians it was right, in a democratic society thing like this will not be stood for.

In the type of government saddam pioneered in, it was wrong to hang him. He was nothing more than doing the same as any other politician seeking power was already doing. If your going to hang him you should hang all of them.

He did the only thing he could do to gain power in iraq, complete domination and control. Iraq is not ready yet for a government where comprimise and views can be spoken and heard without violence.

By no means am I saying he was the "good guy" also I am saying he was not all the "bad guy" either.

2007-01-02 03:54:03 · answer #7 · answered by shadycaliber 3 · 0 4

Right or wrong, we can judge nothing using hind sight.
The laws of one nation should not be up to interpretation by another, unless that nation is willing to allow the same.
The only time one should worry is if it directly impacts the life of the one making the judgement.

2007-01-02 07:40:46 · answer #8 · answered by coffee b 2 · 1 0

In my opinion, the hanging of Saddam was immoral, unjust, and damn right wrong.

He was hanged for his crimes against humanity - murdering hundreds. This is a horrible thing to do, and I'm sure anyone of good mental health can relate. However, by murdering him those people who actually carried out the "crime", are just as wrong as he was - even if it was a so-called punishment, they still murdered him, remember that. They murdered another human being. There should be NO justification for murder, yet people seem to believe having different rules for different people is okay? If these people hanged Saddam for murder etc? Surely that means they should be punished, since they've murdered another human being?

People may have despised that man, he may have ruined there lives. Many have been dropped to his level by murdering him though. Couldn't they have found some other way to punish him?

Do I believe it was right? No.

2007-01-02 03:51:55 · answer #9 · answered by Callum 2 · 0 4

He was tried in Iraq, according to Iraq Law. He was sentenced according to Iraq Law. The sentence was carried out by Iraq. The issue is with Iraq law. In my country we have capital punishment for certain crimes and the punishment is death.

2007-01-02 03:51:35 · answer #10 · answered by darscoind 2 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers