Saddam Hussein Executed

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 01:55

AcidHell2 said:
So in this case it shouldnt be down to iraq, he was the legal ruler of Iraq and so should not of been on trial. He should have been on trial in an international court. He's sentence would have been the same or life imprisonment, but at least we would have been on the good side. However as it turned out,, we are only slightly better than him. Sentence people to death with no chance of defence. Weather that be a mincer feet first or the gallows.

Family should NEVER EVER EVER have any say in the sentence, there are after all are emotionally evolved(the whole point of a fair legal system)

On your last part I didn't say that they should. I was stating that families get no justice if he commits suicide. Example, if one of your loved ones were murdered obviously you would have to acknolodge legally that you cannot have a say on the person who murdered them's sentence. However say he commited suicide would you not feel that thats an injustice to you? would you not feel that hes got off easy? would you not feel that you would like to see him locked away for ever or put to death. That is what I mean.

Back to your first point. Either way the Hague could have been a good way but put it this way, was Saddam a good or bad leader of Iraq? He was bad, Like I said I don't know all of the history on him but I do know of some of the things he did, such as putting people through meat grinders, burning people to death and other brutal and barbaric ways. Maybe Iraq wanted him dead so fast so they can resume, they may think with him dead thats a step forward in their progress to becoming a civilised society, obviously they have a long way to go but what im getting at is that maybe its a step forward for them to get him out of the way and start setting things straight. I mean look at the state of ethiopia with Robert Mugabe, I mean half of the money that gets through from charities goes into his pocket.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 01:57

AcidHell2 said:
But again, that's not supporting the death sentence, that's merely stating are system is wrong. I've already stated that it is. Half of the electronics tags aren't even monitored due to man power. That's of several police not the newspaper.

If you ask me, do I support the death sentence? yes I do, people like pedophiles and what not should be put to death.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 01:59

Macabre said:
On your last part I didn't say that they should. I was stating that families get no justice if he commits suicide. Example, if one of your loved ones were murdered obviously you would have to acknolodge legally that you cannot have a say on the person who murdered them's sentence. However say he commited suicide would you not feel that thats an injustice to you? would you not feel that hes got off easy? would you not feel that you would like to see him locked away for ever or put to death. That is what I mean.
.

No he's dead, he can't commit another crime, so justice is done, same as locking them up for life. I'm sure I would feel different if it was one of my family, but I would hope I would keep enough of a level head to release, we shouldn't punish them for the sake of punishment. Obviously I can't say I wouldn't feel like that. But If i did it would be classed as my worst treat(sp can't spell it

).

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:00

Macabre said:
Back to your first point. Either way the Hague could have been a good way but put it this way, was Saddam a good or bad leader of Iraq? He was bad, Like I said I don't know all of the history on him but I do know of some of the things he did, such as putting people through meat grinders, burning people to death and other brutal and barbaric ways. Maybe Iraq wanted him dead so fast so they can resume, they may think with him dead thats a step forward in their progress to becoming a civilised society, obviously they have a long way to go but what im getting at is that maybe its a step forward for them to get him out of the way and start setting things straight. I mean look at the state of ethiopia with Robert Mugabe, I mean half of the money that gets through from charities goes into his pocket.

Just because he's 100% guilty doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a fair trial. I don't care if he is more evil than Satan, he deserves a fair trial, If he's guilty he'll be found guilty.

How, surely the first step in becoming a civilised society, is by him being charged fairly. After all, crime and punishment is the means to DETERMEN a fair society.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:01

AcidHell2 said:
No he's dead, he can't commit another crime, so justice is done, same as locking them up for life. I'm sure I would feel different if it was one of my family, but I would hope I would keep enough of a level head to release, we shouldn't punish them for the sake of punishment. Obviously I can't say I wouldn't feel like that. But If i did it would be classed as my worst treat(sp can't spell it ).

No because if they commit suicide their not being trialed for their crimes at all just taking an easy way out.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:02

AcidHell2 said:
Just because he's 100% guilty doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a fair trial. I don't care if he is more evil than Satan, he deserves a fair trial, If he's guilty he'll be found guilty.

Didn't say he didn't. I don't know for a fact if he was given a fair trial or not, but his trial lasted long enough. Yes people deserve a fair trial.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:03

Macabre said:
No because if they commit suicide their not being trialed for their crimes at all just taking an easy way out.

So there dead, what does it matter, they've been found guilty and taken there own life, Therefore they can't harm anyone else ever. At this point punishment becomes irelavent as the means of harming anyone has been taken away from them.

Macabre said:
Didn't say he didn't. I don't know for a fact if he was given a fair trial or not, but his trial lasted long enough. Yes people deserve a fair trial.

he was tried in an iraq court on which he should have been the ruler, taht alone says he wasn't tried fairly. Also take into account the UN and other organisations said it was unjust. He committed crimes against humanity, therefore only one true court exists HAGUE. No other court has the power to convict.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:06

And again you must take into consideration that Iraq's legal system is not fully developed or in the state of a democracy. Then going back to your hague suggestion, yes thats a safe way to do it but then again going back to how Iraq need their independence to be able to perform trials theirself. You could have an arguement constantly.

Yes going by his execution it is not done in a professional manner but then again refering back to how their legal system is still in development. I would post a link to the full video but then again Yewen or some other mod would probly ban me

.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:07

Macabre said:
And again you must take into consideration that Iraq's legal system is not fully developed or in the state of a democracy. Then going back to your hague suggestion, yes thats a safe way to do it but then again going back to how Iraq need their independence to be able to perform trials theirself. You could have an arguement constantly.
.

he's the LEGAL ruler of Iraq, new legal system of not HE CAN NOT BE TRIED under iraq law.

That's one reason why the international court of law was set up. so even rulers can be convicted.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:08

AcidHell2 said:
So there dead, what does it matter, they've been found guilty and taken there own life, Therefore they can't harm anyone else ever. At this point punishment becomes irelavent as the means of harming anyone has been taken away from them.

he was tried in an iraq court on which he should have been the ruler, taht alone says he wasn't tried fairly. Also take into account the UN and other organisations said it was unjust. He committed crimes against humanity, therefore only one true court exists HAGUE. No other court has the power to convict.

Part 1: Again thats a personal view not really one that can be debatted over and over.

Part 2: True, true. However going back to Iraq's independence. Its equally argueable.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:10

AcidHell2 said:
he's the LEGAL ruler of Iraq, new legal system of not HE CAN NOT BE TRIED under iraq law.

Look, Iraq Legal system is a mess, Saddam was a dictator not a president or prime minister. You can say he was the legal ruler etc etc. But either way he was no proper legal ruler. They took it into their own hands, thats up to them. Fair trial or not. He didn't go to trial at the Hague they sorted it out theirself's and thats it.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:12

Macabre said:
Look, Iraq Legal system is a mess, Saddam was a dictator not a president or prime minister. You can say he was the legal ruler etc etc. But either way he was no proper legal ruler. They took it into their own hands, thats up to them. Fair trial or not. He didn't go to trial at the Hague they sorted it out theirself's and thats it.

No they didn't sort it out themselves, if that was the case he would still be the ruler, the Americans came in, then decide (who, where and when) he would be tried.

Don't get me wrong I have absolutely no sympathy for saddam, but in any case it was not a fair trial. without a fair trial we are only slightly better than him.

What ever the media says he was well liked and appreciated by many iraq's as long as you wherent shia or some other hated faction, who knows what a fair voting system would have bought, but what ever he was the ruler. Do you think are kings and queens where voted in?

titaniumx3 · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:13

I have to say, he looked awfully calm before he got hanged; he may be evil but at least he has some balls.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:20

AcidHell2 said:
No they didn't sort it out themselves, if that was the case he would still be the ruler, the Americans came in, then decide (who, where and when) he would be tried.

Don't get me wrong I have absolutely no sympathy for saddam, but in any case it was not a fair trial. without a fair trial we are only slightly better than him.

What ever the media says he was well liked and appreciated by many iraq's as long as you wherent shia or some other hated faction, who knows what a fair voting system would have bought, but what ever he was the ruler. Do you think are kings and queens where voted in?

Look, im not saying it was a fair trial. You could argue all day, but the point is that yes the Americans and BRITISH, helped a lot, but at the end of the day for Iraq to progress they need to get rid of the bad things maintain a president thats not barbaric thats civilized and upholds a constitution, and one that will maintain a democracy, for this to happen they need to obviously sort their country out first. Yes he should have been given a fair trial but at the end of the day its over now and just maybe in years to come Iraq will have their issues sorted out such as their legal, financial, state of affairs etc to become civilized and maintain a democracy. Saddam was a dictator he may have ruled Iraq but he was no help at the end of the day he just caused pain, death and anguish and never benefitted.

No the Monarchy, royal family is in general wanted by the British population, personally I think people like Prince Charles and Camilla are a waste of time and money but then again they could get rid of the Monarchy if the population wanted it, Spain had rid of theirs.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:22

Macabre said:
Look, im not saying it was a fair trial. You could argue all day, but the point is that yes the Americans and BRITISH, helped a lot, but at the end of the day for Iraq to progress they need to get rid of the bad things maintain a president thats not barbaric thats civilized and upholds a constitution, and one that will maintain a democracy, for this to happen they need to obviously sort their country out first. Yes he should have been given a fair trial but at the end of the day its over now and just maybe in years to come Iraq will have their issues sorted out such as their legal, financial, state of affairs etc to become civilized and maintain a democracy. Saddam was a dictator he may have ruled Iraq but he was no help at the end of the day he just caused pain, death and anguish and never benefitted.

I agree, but it's no ware near a good start, if they wanted a good start it would have been done fairly, after all thats what democracy is about.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:22

titaniumx3 said:
I have to say, he looked awfully calm before he got hanged; he may be evil but at least he has some balls.

No, Saddam was an extremist, he was willing to martyr himself for his cause. He didn't care one way or another if he died.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:23

AcidHell2 said:
I agree, but it's no ware near a good start, if they wanted a good start it would have been done fairly, after all thats what democracy is about.

True, but again they don't really know any better currently, look at their ways cutting hands off for stealing etc. I mean they are not familier with a democracy they have been used to using barbaric proceedings etc.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:24

Macabre said:
No, Saddam was an extremist, he was willing to martyr himself for his cause. He didn't care one way or another if he died.

Why do you make him out as some sort of a terrorist, he was nothing of the sort, he didn't believe in 72(or whatever) virgins when he dies or anything else. The terrorist support thing is nothing but propaganda.

Macabre said:
True, but again they don't really know any better currently, look at their ways cutting hands off for stealing etc. I mean they are not familier with a democracy they have been used to using barbaric proceedings etc.

So the USA and us gave them "democracy" part of that should be leading by example not making fast of a trial.

Macabre · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:28

AcidHell2 said:
Why do you make him out as some sort of a terrorist, he was nothing of the sort, he didn't believe in 72(or whatever) virgins when he dies or anything else. The terrorist support thing is nothing but propaganda.

So the USA and us gave them "democracy" part of that should be leading by example not making fast of a trial.

No, I did not make him out to be a terrorist, but he openly admitted he would be a martyr for his cause. He butchered his people too. Well Extremist maybe is too far a word in his case but certainly a mad man.

No the USA and UK are trying hard to rid Iraq of the terrorist monkeys. Iraq's legal system is not even developed so again.

Glaucus · 1 Jan 2007 at 02:29

I'll post again tomoz, I'm of to bed...