I just don't know. This is a Moral vs. Logic question. I would not want to see him in power and I am sure that he was conducting operations even in prison but, I don't know if death is always the right answer. I feel uncomfortable saying he should die. Yet, I had no problem when Timothy McVey was executed. I think the way Saddam was put to death was wrong. The US should have handled it. We would have given him an injection at least.
Is there even a right answer to this??????
2007-01-03 08:33:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Katie 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Most definitely executed. Here is the reasonale. In prison you have 3 square meals, a roof over your head, exercise, socialization and occaisionally entertainment. Now this is not to say that prison is a Cake walk because it certainly is not however, it has been proven that the the amount spent on any one inmate each year from the government is more than many poverish households and some middle class have to spend annually. That means that those whom have never committed crimes and are working hard just to survive have worse treatment.
Death Penalties are a soft subject for me but I think that he is more than an acceptable candidate. He killed thousands of innocents simply for not agreeing with his philosophy and he killed them in such inhumane ways. If I thought that it was possible to educate and better him I would say prison but the proof is in the pudding, he was arguing and screaming insults even as the noose was being placed around his neck.
2007-01-03 16:53:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by ♥Rayah♥ 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Left in prison the rest of his life, and that is only because of what the aftermath of his execution has bought and the people that may be in harm's way, like our troops, troops from other countries and innocent Iraqi people.
What he did or ordered done was very wrong so I am not saying that he should not have been punished, but I just worry about our American troops...
2007-01-03 16:56:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Brenda E 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Executed
2007-01-03 16:24:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by wondering one 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Executed, but not by hanging. I think that was too good for him. Firing squad would've been too good. Ol' Sparky would've been too good (that's the electric chair, by the way). I think they should have either drawn and quartered him (back in the day, they would tie each arm and each leg to a horse and spook all four horses making them run in different directions and rip the limbs from their sockets. Then they would cut out the innards of the body) or they should have hanged him in the middle of Times Square at midnight on New Year's having to hear everyone count down to his death.
2007-01-03 16:36:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Prison- because the way he was executed was crude and quite "medevial." He wouod have suffered much more if he was in prison and the only reason he was executed was so family members of the people he kiled would get revenge. It was an act, a show, for entertainment. It was entertainment to us and the rest of the world. It was revenge for the people directly and indirectly affected by him.
2007-01-03 16:27:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by burn_this_city 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
I think Iraqis put a value on life that we don't. If no one deserves to die then what does that mean to anyone who really deserves to live?
I don't think we are even capable of answering such questions here in the land of the politically correct, home of the welfare cases.
2007-01-03 16:37:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Curt 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Saddam was a horrible man but taking his life is no better. Since Bush has invaded Iraq he has killed more innocent people than Saddam
2007-01-03 16:30:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Selly 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
He should have been made to get up before dawn each day to dig graves to symbolize the thousands of innocent Iraqiis who died under his regime.
2007-01-03 16:35:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Prison, no doubt. The second poster got it right. Plus, I'm not for the death penalty.
2007-01-03 16:29:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by Θ Chez Θ 3
·
0⤊
1⤋