2007-03-09 18:08:04 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think it wasn't fair in many ways, First it's very illegal punishment to do it in the first day of eid!!! and secondly, IF HE DIDN"T DO WHAT HE DID.........
2007-03-09 18:16:34 · answer #1 · answered by A New Life 3 · 3⤊ 8⤋
Hussein's crimes were disgusting. Under an eye-for-an-eye philosophy, Saddam deserved to be tortured until death, and to experience the pain that he forced onto others through chemical warfare and government oppression. Then they could have dragged his body into the streets, like the Italians did to Mussolini.
But there's a part of me that opposes the state-sanctioned murder of any human being, regardless of the crime. If members of a compassionate society argue their moral superiority to the criminals they judge, and can determine the fate of any human being, then murder for retribution feels petty, cruel, and hypocritical. Execution may violate any claim the state has in the application of justice.
That being said, the way the Iraqi government carried out Saddam's murder was hideous. The noose sliced into his neck, even though he wore a scarf to stop it. His executioners shouted sectarian slurs in the moments before he died. This is not the way to kill any person in a civilized society, even if you can justify the murder as a form of justice.
Even if you support capital punishment, it could have been done with more dignity, for the sake of those who claim to represent justice.
Saddam may have deserved to die. But that does not necessarily mean that government had a right to kill him, as opposed to life imprisonment.
I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue. It gets to me everytime I think about it.
2007-03-09 18:40:46 · answer #2 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Yes it was...He gave orders to have over 100,000 innocent Men, Woman and Children murdered and the numbers are probably bigger than we will ever know.
Though the bleeding heart types will disagree with me, Saddam deserved what he got. It's too bad he wasn't tortured before he was hanged!
The people who say it was Not fair...would have probably pardoned Adolf Hitler too.
2007-03-09 19:25:23 · answer #3 · answered by MSJP 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He was prosecuted and executed for murdering the people that tried to assassinate him. One hundred forty-four people were killed. Nothing to do with the gassing of the Kurds or Iranians. Nothing to do with the slaughter of the Kurds either.
That's like trying to prosecute Adolf Hitler (if he was captured alive) on murdering the German generals that tried to assassinate him with a bomb in a briefcase, while ignoring the Holocaust and the fact he started World War II.
Of all the horrible things he did, why execute him on the crime he did the least damage on? There were many other crimes worth executing him over. This wasn't one of them, as he did far worse. He was hanged for the wrong reason.
2007-03-09 18:14:39 · answer #4 · answered by Scott F 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No. He was made an example of because he was the leader of a poor country with a lot of oil. I think ____ deserves to be hung much more. I won't say who for fear of being labelled an enemy combatent for exercising my first ammendment rights. Now-a-days, anything you say can and will be used against you BEFORE you are read any rights. Hell I couldn't even get a f*@#& trial in this country if that happened.
2007-03-09 18:47:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well...let's see. Despotic leader whose people starved while he lived in luxury, guilty of running a dictatorship responsible for uncounted rapes, tortures, murders.... Guilty of chemical weapons attacks on his own countrymen resulting in the deaths of thousands. I would say he got off light considering what he or his henchmen perpetrated on his people. It takes a particularly biased, blind fool to not see that.
Edit:
As for that idiot who posted all the stuff about Bush above,
" Look sonny, stay on subject. I know it's hard when you obviously have ADHD as badly as you do, but the question was about Saddam Hussein, not the President."
What a moron...
2007-03-09 18:15:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
No, He should have gotten much worse and It should have been public.
To the guy above me, look into those deaths that Saddam caused just a little more. And leave Bush out of it!
Bush has not killed a single person. Don't be silly
2007-03-09 18:14:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
What is fair? I tell my 10 year old, and have for 5 years, that life is not fair. Fair is an unrealistic expectation from imperfect humans.
That said, however, I considered his execution Iraqi justice, not US justice. Here, it would not have been "fair." He would have been entitled to years of appeals, and hanging would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
But over and over, we must be reminded that Iraq belongs to Iraq. Else we could have imposed our will and solutions on them long ago.
2007-03-09 18:15:17 · answer #8 · answered by Shrink 5 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Fair is a child's version of justice.
It was just. He documented the evidence himself quite successfully, even bragged to his allies about it.
Why would you think otherwise?
Is a murderer's execution "unfair" after they are warned repeatedly that they are going to be caught and executed for murder if they keep murdering; they keep murdering and are finally caught and killed?
Seems silly to wonder why they were killed. Same here.
2007-03-09 18:27:45 · answer #9 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
NOT if you asked Saddam...hahahahaha~~actually the only way it would be fair is if you could have killed him couple hundred thousand times for all the deaths that he caused~
2007-03-09 18:15:16 · answer #10 · answered by cindy 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
You would have to ask the Iraquis that did it. Good Luck. They might give you a chance to question them.
2007-03-09 18:18:35 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋