Do you think it was worth hanging Saddam Hussein, The Iraqi dictator?

Answer 1

No. The Iraqi people should have let their deposed president to rot in prison. Then prison officials should have let him escape and lead US spies to Osama before capturing them both to face another trial that will corroborate earlier testimonies. You see, Saddam died without the US extracting anything about the biological weapon development which has been the original cause of US fighting the Iraqis. It still hangs until now...but a dead man tells no tales.

Answer 2

No, not at all. Saddam was not worth over 3,000+ of our men and women dying over. I think his "trial" was a sham from the beginning. I am not agreeing with Saddam killing so many people like he did with the Kurds, but if a person actually STUDIED the country and their history, they would know that Saddam did what he HAD to do considering the circumstances. Iraq only understands control through violence and doesn't respect anything else, you can see that through what is happening over in that country right now. The Iraq war did nothing more than hand over Iraq to the terrorists, which when Iraq was under Saddam didn't have a snowballs chance at taking over the country.

As a side note, you do realize that Saddam was in US custody up until 5 minutes before they killed them? The US is just as much to blame for how Saddam as the Iraqis are!

Answer 3

Let's see...

-US$2 trillion dollars spent with no results.

- All segments of the Iraqi government were destroyed (civil service and the military disbanded), leading to anarchy and the end of the legal system. Aside from government corruption in Iraq, the legal system worked.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060901679_pf.html

- Public utilities in Iraq went from dependable to non-existent.

- More Iraqi citizens have been killed by US terrorists in four years than Saddam murdered in 25

- A civil war has begun, caused by US favouratism of one side

Comparatively, Iraq was better off under Saddam.

And that's without discussing the estimated 6000 dead US soldiers. If you say "3000", you're not counting those who died in transit; the US military does not count someone as "killed in Iraq" IF they were wounded in Iraq and died from those wounds outside the country, whether in an airplane or on the ground.

Small wonder the US has been so quick to ship wounded soldiers out of Iraq.


.

Answer 4

Main event was removal of Saddam Hussian from his post by using force. Obviously he was a danger to any government in power. He was tried by Iraqi Court and punished. He has still many admirers who think that he lived like a dignified man and died a dignified death.
We should stop talking about past. Iraq neighbors and USA has the responsibility to control the situation.

Answer 5

I won't say he should not have been killed but the trial was a sham. He was tried under laws that did not exist when he committed the crimes. While they talked all big about genocide they did not have any evidence of that, so they convicted for his role in the killings of 148 Shiite Muslims from Dujail. This is after he came under attack in that town and it took a fire fight that lasted a few hours get him out.

If they wanted to try him for war crimes they should have used an international tribunal like they did with the Nazis. Except how you deal with groups of your own citizens that try and assassinate you does not fall under war crimes so the UN would have to re-write those laws to try him.

If they wanted him tried by his own countries he should have been held to the laws at the time of the crime. To make a law then try someone for a crime they committed years before the laws where made is a sham at the best.

I would say that the entire trial show the US believes our laws our universal had we can hold anyone in any country to our ethical code regardless of what that countries ethical code or laws are. We made the new laws, set up the government and had people involved in the trial. That is not justice that is us killing him for show.

If we were going to kill him we should have done it when we found him for strategic purposes or held him before an international tribunal if he committed war crimes.

Answer 6

Saddam became convicted interior the 1st trial on the deaths of the 176. waiting for him, ought to he have by some skill been found no longer to blame, have been trials for: one million) the slaughter of tens of 1000's of Kurds utilising chemical weapons, 2) the slaughter of greater desirable than one million Iranians in the process the Iran-Iraq warfare, 3) the slaughter of yet untold greater Kuwaitis for the period of his invasion of that usa, 4) the wanton homicide of thousands and thousands of Shia in Iraq for the period of his 30-12 months reign of terror. the certainty that he became convicted on the 1st charge, sentenced to death, and hanged for his crime would not negate the different crimes. Bush has come nowhere close to the death toll of Saddam. in certainty, the death toll from the U.S. invasion became trifling in comparison to Saddam, and keeps to be a trifle in comparison to the factional strife between the Shia and the Sunnis and the Kurds -- which killed 34,000 basically this previous 12 months on my own. that's greater desirable than the U.S. invasion and occupation have killed in the two Gulf Wars blended. you're completely uninformed approximately what's easily occurring. So bypass piss up a rope.

Answer 7

Has not stemmed the violence in the nation and in fact more US soldiers were killed after he has captured. Although the US backed Iraqi government made the call as far as the where and the when, the country is no more safer.

Answer 8

Yes

Answer 9

Yes, one less tyrant to run the world!!

Iraq will gett better very soon!

Answer 10

It is what the Iraqui people chose to do. Who are we to say if their chose was right or wrong?