Was Saddam's crime worse then some of our leaders. He died for the death of 148 people.?

Question

Being that the persevation of a leaders government is a must even if it means cutting out infected portions(killing those dangerous to their position). Does this put all leaders whose methoids are not agreed with in the same path that Saddam traveled?

Answer 1

I dont know .I dont think we can go by the bias propaganda our government gives us ..When he supposedly killed all these other people .Why didnt our government stop him then ,or were we supporting him at that time so it was ok .Its obvious we more or less murdered him with out a fair trial .He should have been tried in an international court to be legitiment . Not by the people we put in power there .Does anyone think there was any possible way that we were going to let him be found innocent and walk out free (yeah right) That was a political show and only a blind person couldnt see that .His fate was decided before the trial even started .We've killed over 20,000 civilians a year there with bombs .That are just as dead as the ones he killed The country is a ruins now and not safe for anyone who lives there .He at least had a stable society and electricity and schools .Its cost 3,000 American lives, hundreds of billions of dollars when people here are struggling to get by here and made our country less safe from terroist . Why wouldnt people there hate us after we invade their country and kill their president and force feed them our culture which is completly differant from theirs .As far as him being worse than our leaders . Why doesn't any one ever say anything about the Japaneese civilians we killed on Hiroshima and Nagasoki .Is the only reason its ok for us is because no one has the power to do anything about it .I am a patriotic American I love this country and people but I lost all respect for our corrupt government . I have to be honest even if people dont want to hear it .The truth doesn't change because you dont like it .

Answer 2

Saddam ranks pretty high up there in the latest bunch of 'em. The 148 weren't the only ones that they could prove, really, but what they could easily prove -- as many less than that would be sufficient to get the death penalty, they didn't need to waste the effort and tie up the legal system for years trying to get him on every single charge.
Though, IMO, the genocide tribunal should have tried him. This trial, through the media coverage, sounded like simple (though there really isn't such a thing) murder and not the mass killings that it was; he needed the genocide label stuck on him. I do remember hearing somewhere, however, that the reason that they didn't do that was because the UN has no death penalty and they wanted him to die. Honestly, I think they should have just locked him up. I'm against the death penalty, but not for the reason you would expect--death is too good for the people who've done such crimes that supposedly deserve it. As cheezy as it sounds, they should live in jail and think about their crimes.
And to answer your real question, yeah, I think it was. I mean, I'm not a fan of Bush at all either, but he's no Saddam.

Answer 3

If you were the soul survivor of your family, even if it was your partner & children, parents, cousins, friends that were murderd by the hand of one man, would you want to see his head in a noose?
He killed over 5000 people from northern Iraq, women & children included, with a gas, it was the saddest time for many thousands of surviving relatives.
Dont forget 9/11, & all the innocent people from all over the world killed by terrorist's,
(nearly 4000 lives lost) Saddam may have had some thing to do with that too, either way we are at least trying to get Iraq into the modern age of civilization, peacefully as possible & its cost USA over 3000 lives to sacrifice there freedom, thats care not crime.

Answer 4

NO he was tried for the death of 148 people, he killed millions. He was actually guilty of more than what they tried him on. They just tried him on what they knew they could hang him on. He used nerve gas on an entire village and killed them all. I for the life of me can not see how people in the US can even think that what we are doing in Iraq is a crime? I am beginning to think that there are those in this country that have forgotten why we are in this fight....Quit trying to put political ties to the war and think!!!! WE MUST FIGHT TERRORISM AT ALL COSTS PEOPLE!!!! Saddam was just a small part of the pie.

Answer 5

y don't u take it this way?

What would u do with rebellions in your country?
He admitted the crimes which has been done on his name, he didn't put blame on another, and he was not sorry for that till the last moment, said, "he did it for Iraq......."

innocents killed admitted, same thing happened in Afghanistan Lebanon, Iraq with the USA bombing, where will u put that figures....and who should hang on that account?

Anyhow he was POW, he should not be hanged, specially with humiliation and insult at the gallows at the last moment, according to Geneva convention.....

Any humanity is there or not? that was inhuman, if he did the inhuman act so the others to himat the last moment...he punished for all the crimes and gone innocent and martyrs i Guess, May God give peace his sole

Answer 6

He committed many massacres but the only one for which he was tried and convicted was the one which would have absolutely no connection with the support he had from his Allies in the USA and Western Europe during his reign of terror.
If he had been tried on these other charges his allies would have been embarrassed by the evidence produced in court.

Answer 7

That was the only ones he was convicted on...they didn't want to drag on the trials for the other 500,000+ that would have taken yrs.

Answer 8

Hes gone get over it

Answer 9

and thats not enough for you?