Should Saddam be executed?

[king mob]

Now the Iraquis have him & the trial will be underway soon (though god knows when it'll finish) it looks likely that Saddam will face the death penalty.

Its down to his people to judge him & personally i agree with him being executed but is it as easy as that & what sort of defense can he hope to make?

Story

[zozman]

Shall we have a trial first, before we decide what his punishment might be?

[Regular John]

Too easy, he and his cohorts should suffer as much as possible before they are allowed to die.

[Partridge's Love Child]

Shall we have a trial first, before we decide what his punishment might be?

Well, quite.

personally i agree with him being executed

Why?  You give no justification for the death penalty there, just say that's what you think should happen.

I've voted for "no", not for any particular political reason, just that I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances.  I think he should be made to do Celebrity Big Brother 3.

[king mob]

Shall we have a trial first, before we decide what his punishment might be?

Well the trial is going to happen but his punishment is an issue now, execution is the main option currently open.
The trial will probably be to decide whether he dies or not, certainly for what he's done to his people death would be the right option for him.

Normally i would be set against the death penalty but in Saddams case a exception should be made.

[Partridge's Love Child]

I'm sorry for going on - but why?  Why is death the right option?  Why should you make an exception?

[zozman]

A trial, by its definition, is to decide guilt or innocence - it's not to decide the type or level of punishment.  I don't think anyone (apart from him probably) thinks he's innocent but you've got to go through the due process or you're as bad as him.

[Margaret Thatcher]

I think he should be made to do Celebrity Big Brother 3.

I doubt he would be interested, well maybe if there was gassing and beating involved.  Maybe Saddam should have been the new housemate in the current Big Brother series?  Although that would have probably not have worked out, as I'd guess that none of them would actually recognise him.

The Big Brother house has a secret rape room maybe.....and torture chambers.  Shame Emma got kicked out now isnt it.

[zozman]

A trial, by its definition, is to decide guilt or innocence - it's not to decide the type or level of punishment.  I don't think anyone (apart from him probably) thinks he's innocent but you've got to go through the due process or you're as bad as him.

Well not as bad as him obviously, but killing him without a trial is still not justice.

[king mob]

Shall we have a trial first, before we decide what his punishment might be?

Well, quite.

personally i agree with him being executed

Why?  You give no justification for the death penalty there, just say that's what you think should happen.

I cant find any justification for him to live, not after the years of pain he gave his people, torture & mutilation to keep power is just plain evil & placing him in prison for the rest of his life is'nt enough.
Its a bigger issue when you draw into how much he was supported by western countries such as ourselves & the Americans but thats not the question at hand, its what shoul the people who suffered under him do with him?
I know what my gut reaction is & i'm sure the majority of Iraquis want him dead as well, yes its revenge but every now & then the planet does throw people up who deserve to die for what they've done to a race of people, Saddam is one.

[hencole]

Even if I supported the death penalty, I think death would be an easy way out for him.

Exceptions are dangerous. A life is a life, there can't be any bluring of that as it is open to individual interpretation. You can't really be opposed to the death penalty King Mob. Why does he deserve it and others don't? It seems you would use the death penalty as revenge for those he killed rather than a deterant, and revenge is one of the main reason there is conflict in the world. An eye for an eye (and his death certainly wouldn't be, you'd have to kill him thousands of times over to get that balance) creates a never ending cycle. Forgive, but don't forget is my philosophy. What you achieve by killing him is convincing people that the only way to eradicate the wrongs of this world is to destroy them. Have two opposing sides thinking that and you have chaos.

[Pinball]

It is notable that, unlike Milosevic and other recent ex-dictators, Saddam is not being tried in an international war crimes court or, at the very least, a local court with international involvement. It's obvious why the US have dictated a short sham trial leading to swift execution - they don't want Saddam blabbing about his time with the CIA, Rumsfeld and Reagan selling him WMD etc. etc.   I most certainly would like to hear that, and consequently am against this Iraqi sham trial, run by Saddam's enemies. Would Arafat have a fair trial in an Israeli court? Hmmm.

As for execution, personally I'm against this and consider it barbaric, but in Saddam's case it's hardly a great loss to the human gene pool. An additional consideration, however, is what Saddam knows. That is so valuable as to mean he should absolutely not be executed or "allowed" to be assassinated. He should be held in UN custody in the Hague or equivalent, away from American torturers and rapists, and Iraqi enemies. Although Saddam is clearly a monster, I would truly love to hear the embarrassing things he could say about the Americans, if he were allowed to do so. He won't be, however.

Truth, justice, and the American way? Yeah right. My view - fuck the American way.

[Vermschneid Mehearties]

You can't punish him using the same punishments he's being punished for. All these people who say "he should have his nads torn to shreds by antler beetles and his guts infested with tapeworms" seem to forget that.

I'd be in favour of locking in a cell for the rest of his life. Having to spend the remainder of his consciousness (sp?) locked up and unable to do all the things he took for granted when he had power should be punishment enough. And then he'll die naturally, like all humans should have the right to.

I just think killing him serves no purpose. He carries no present threat, and killing him denies the families of all the people he has killed a real sense of closure. Knowing that he is locked up to think about what he has done for the rest of his life however, now that would be something a bit more appropriate I think.

What will killing him achieve? It's just a mindless, kneejerk response that isn't a good enough punishment for him. My opinion, anyway.

Edit- I also think king mob's comment about him being 'evil' implys that he is somehow 'spiritually' evil, and is a messenger from hell, or somesuch. Seen as I don't believe in spirituality or hell, I hardly think it's a sensible description of someone who is merely a man.

[Partridge's Love Child]

I concur with Mr Coleman here.  I think it's understandable that you feel that shoving him in prison for the rest of his life is not enough, but then what punishment is?  I think that sometimes you have to step back and appreciate that crimes are crimes, and in many cases a punishment is never going to be sufficient - that's why they're crimes.  The wrongs made by people like Saddam or Hitler are simply off the scale, and we cannot hope to come close to finding a way to repay them in kind.  When we get over our frustration at that, we should be thankful for it, because it suggests that the human race as a civilised whole is not majoritivly capable of the ills of some of its individuals.

Edit:  And yes to this point too, which wasn't there when I started posting that ^:

It is notable that, unlike Milosevic and other recent ex-dictators, Saddam is not being tried in an international war crimes court or, at the very least, a local court with international involvement. It's obvious why the US have dictated a short sham trial leading to swift execution - they don't want Saddam blabbing about his time with the CIA, Rumsfeld and Reagan selling him WMD etc. etc.

[MojoJojo]

I say he should die, not because I agree with the death penalty, but because it's the most practical solution, as Machiavelli would tell you. You can't just lock him up, he would be a target for insurgents to break out for the rest of his life.

I don't agree with the death penalty for non-leaders, but I think leaders of state should be held to a different set of laws.
Justification:
1) They do anyway.
2) It is generally very difficult to arrest any leader of a country on trial (for internationally recognised laws, such as human rights), without harming a huge number of civilians in the process. Their crimes also tend to far exceed what any "non-leader" could do.

[hencole]

My view - fuck the American way.

When this sudden change of heart?

[gazzyk1ns]

I'm really not too sure what to think, as long as he's never allowed any power again I don't care too much. I do think it's right that the Iraqis have him and are to be allowed to punish him as they wish, though (obviously I mean via conventional methods, not torture, etc).

[Vermschneid Mehearties]

Re-gazzykins

Would you care if, after the execution, his body was ripped to pieces by a baying mob, and the crowd spat, pissed and turded on his bloody entrails?
I know a newspaper or two who would bloody love it.

[king mob]

Even if I supported the death penalty, I think death would be an easy way out for him.

Exceptions are dangerous. A life is a life, there can't be any bluring of that as it is open to individual interpretation. You can't really be opposed to the death penalty King Mob. Why does he deserve it and others don't? It seems you would use the death penalty as revenge for those he killed rather than a deterant, and revenge is one of the main reason there is conflict in the world. An eye for an eye (and his death certainly wouldn't be, you'd have to kill him thousands of times over to get that balance) creates a never ending cycle. Forgive, but don't forget is my philosophy. What you achieve by killing him is convincing people that the only way to eradicate the wrongs of this world is to destroy them. Have two opposing sides thinking that and you have chaos.

Exceptions have been made, the Nazis after WW2 being a good example of it.Killing him is not a deterrant in any way but its the only sensible solution to deal with him as prison would be a pointless punishment.
Locking him up would be a reminder to the thousands who suffered under him that he's not suffered as much as they or their families did so yes its revenge but its something i feel the Iraquis should have as a option to close this part of their history.

[Purple Tentacle]

I am against the death penalty in principle for a variety of reasons, although admittedly I don't think wrongful arrest is a problem here.  Sadly I'm going to have to take the David Sullivan approach and say that no human being has the "right" to take another human being's life.

However I DO think it is an outrage that he is not being tried at The Hague, and I genuinely believe it is because of a) the length of time involved (how long has the Milosovic trial lasted? How many series of Big Brother have been on in that time?) and b) because, as Pinball rightly pointed out, it would be excessively embarrassing for the Americans.

There is a set procedure that stretches from the shoplifter to the serial murderer, and to break that procedure at any level makes the whole system a mockery.

Would you sanction returning Peter Sutcliffe to "the people of Yorkshire" to face "justice", or would you rather that due process made sure that his open and shut case went smoothly?

[hencole]

Locking him up would be a reminder to the thousands who suffered under him that he's not suffered as much as they or their families did so yes its revenge but its something i feel the Iraquis should have as a option to close this part of their history.

Executing him would not solve that problem unless you had him raped 1000's of times and kept ressucitating him every time he died. Why try and emulate someones actions that you've just conndemmed? makes no sense to me. 'You killed these people and that  is wrong, so now we will kill you and that is right'

[king mob]

Edit- I also think king mob's comment about him being 'evil' implys that he is somehow 'spiritually' evil, and is a messenger from hell, or somesuch. Seen as I don't believe in spirituality or hell, I hardly think it's a sensible description of someone who is merely a man.

He's evil in the sense of his actions were far removed from being good, anyone who ran a country the way he ran Iraq the way did was evil.
You may see the spiritual angle but i'm calling him evil as in a "evil bastard", dont try to say i'm implying anything other than that as its not there.

[king mob]

Locking him up would be a reminder to the thousands who suffered under him that he's not suffered as much as they or their families did so yes its revenge but its something i feel the Iraquis should have as a option to close this part of their history.

Executing him would not solve that problem unless you had him raped 1000's of times and kept ressucitating him every time he died. Why try and emulate someones actions that you've just conndemmed? makes no sense to me. 'You killed these people and that  is wrong, so now we will kill you and that is right'

it wouldnt solve it at all but at the same time perhaps allowing him to live would be as bad for his victims?
Killing him would not be the best thing to do but what else is there?
Imprisonment would be a easy option & exile just shunts the problem elsewhere.
As i've said, theres moments in history where we have to face up to these people, i agree that this should be done with a international court but i also feel its needed by the Iraqui people to help them close that part of their history.

[hencole]

Edit- I also think king mob's comment about him being 'evil' implys that he is somehow 'spiritually' evil, and is a messenger from hell, or somesuch. Seen as I don't believe in spirituality or hell, I hardly think it's a sensible description of someone who is merely a man.

He's evil in the sense of his actions were far removed from being good, anyone who ran a country the way he ran Iraq the way did was evil.
You may see the spiritual angle but i'm calling him evil as in a "evil bastard", dont try to say i'm implying anything other than that as its not there.

By that sense Cheny et al would be classed as aiding and an 'evil' man which in trun would make there actions crimes. Should they be sentanced to death? Should Bush? If you do, millions of Americans wouldn't. They believe in the death penalty, but as I said earlier what warrants death is entirely subjective to an individuals moral and ethical code and hence it should never be impossed.

What right do you now have to say that the execution of juveniles and the metally ill in America is wrong? Try telling that to the parents of those they murdered and I think they would disagree.

[king mob]

Edit- I also think king mob's comment about him being 'evil' implys that he is somehow 'spiritually' evil, and is a messenger from hell, or somesuch. Seen as I don't believe in spirituality or hell, I hardly think it's a sensible description of someone who is merely a man.

He's evil in the sense of his actions were far removed from being good, anyone who ran a country the way he ran Iraq the way did was evil.
You may see the spiritual angle but i'm calling him evil as in a "evil bastard", dont try to say i'm implying anything other than that as its not there.

By that sense Cheny et al would be classed as aiding and an 'evil' man which in trun would make there actions crimes. Should they be sentanced to death? Should Bush? If you do, millions of Americans wouldn't. They believe in the death penalty, but as I said earlier what warrants death is entirely subjective to an individuals moral and ethical code and hence it should never be impossed.

What right do you now have to say that the execution of juveniles and the metally ill in America is wrong? Try telling that to the parents of those they murdered and I think they would disagree.

I disagree strongly with the death penalty but as i've said theres extreme circumstances where theres no other option, as for Cheney, etc i hope Saddam drops them all in it so the world at large can see how wrong this American government is.

Its a gut reaction but it shows how gray ones opinions can be when thought about,do you think imprisonment or exile is enough for someone like Saddam?

[Partridge's Love Child]

I refer the honourable gentleman to the response I made some moments ago.

[Shaddock]

The only person undoubtefdly worthy of execution over the illegal invasion last year of Iraq  is Donald f**king Rumsfeld, for trying to link Iraq to 9/11 so he could grab their oil even if it meant murdering thousands of their civilians in the process.

Or maybe execution is too good for Rumsfeld.  Prison for a couple of years (with 24-hour webcam) followed by a frontal lobotomy to rectify his warped brain, followed by the implant of an ethics chip.  

Dummy-head Bush was Rumsfled's puppet, and coward Blair was Bush's accomplice.  They should all be in jail.

[zozman]

seconded - although I'd have to say Cheney is the puppetmaster, not Rumsfeld.

[CelebritySexist]

I personally hope that the trial turns into a vaguely farcical, 'Man In The Glass Booth' style posturing session.  Anyone ever see that, with Maximilian Schell?

Also:  Hello, I am new to the board, and I hope that I will not be persecuted for the brevity and naivety of my first contribution.

[hencole]

Its a gut reaction but it shows how gray ones opinions can be when thought about,do you think imprisonment or exile is enough for someone like Saddam?

Yes. Had he murdered my family no.