I think it was wrong to kill Saddam Hussein

[Svenskaflicka]

... I'd rather have seen him live for a looooooooooooooong time, in a sub-human rights - standard cell, kept alive by water and Swedish hard bread, alone and without sunlight.

The man killed millions of kurds. He killed all who dared to disagree with him. He was a monster.

I think death was a much too swift and easy punishment. He should have been made to suffer for a long time, instead.

 

[Pure]

i'm inclined to agree, though i don't know what the suffering is supposed to accomplish. how about exile to a remote atlantic island, with a food drop off once a month.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

I don't know that life in solitary confinement would have been all that brilliant. What they should really have done rather than hang Saddam was to hang the soldiers who arrested him, rather than dropping a granade down his spider hole. That would have saved one hell of a lot of trouble.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I just feel sad...

 

[Boxlicker101]

I've always thought they should have turned him over to Kuwait. He would have been hanged or beheaded a long time ago. Otherwise, I think the best way to kill him would have been to throw him, alive but paralyzed, into a pen full of starving hogs.

Having him still alive would have left him as a rallying point for his followers, and there are still plenty of them.

 

[Harry Leg]

I have no problem executing those who deserve to die as long as you can restore life to those that deserve to live.

 

[Nirvanadragones]

I doesn't really matter to me what they did or did not do to him. As long as he is not able to hurt anyone anymore.

 

[minsue]

I have no problem executing those who deserve to die as long as you can restore life to those that deserve to live.

Indeed.

 

[Harry Leg]

Indeed.

You and I might be alone in sharing that sentiment

 

[R. Richard]

The problem with keeping Saddam alive and/or torturing him is that is the way to really make him inot a martyr. Now that he is dead, he will cause trouble for a while but then he will quickly be forgotten. Once he is forgotten, he won't be used to raise the money that keeps the Iraqi 'insurgency' alive. Normally, Iran might supply replacement money, but not in the case of Saddam.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

It's Macchiavelli 101: The first thing you do when you displace the king is execute him and his family, to remove that potential rallying point for the old loyalists. They happened to do it in reverse order here, but that's OK.

To those who feel sad for Sadaam, save your tears for his victims. Their widows and orphans would have nothing but contempt for your tears for Sadaam.

Every human has to die sometime, and the world's a better place for this one checking out ahead of schedule. By any objective standard he was a monster, and long ago surrendered any claim or right to your concern about his "damaged inner child" or any of that stuff. Good riddance to him.

 

[scheherazade_79]

It was probably the cheapest option, though. Why waste a fortune keeping him under armed guard and feeding him for the next 10-20 years or so, when you just slip someone a tenner to put a rope around his neck?

 

[Harry Leg]

I shed no tears for Saddam, I do not reget his passing. I'm sure his victims feel a measure of satisfaction in having their revenge and maybe they deserve to have it. I am not a bleeding heart upset over the execution of an obvious tyrant.
My concern is for the collective soul of humantity that this is where we are in our spiritual evolution. The violence and fear and anger still goes unchecked as it did 2000 years ago. It's justifiable to kill. It's legalized murder. If it was wrong for him to torture and kill why is it ok for anyone else. Is the act wrong or only the intent? You may say it is vengeance, the righting of a wrong, but this is just sophistry.
To take a life is wrong. There are many that deserve to die and many that deserved to live. If you feel you are in a position to pass judgment on one, you should be able to pass judgment on the other. Who must you be to make such judgments? This is the realm of God whoever he may be. Or karma if you like. No matter how you look at it, it is not the role of man and unitl we collectively realize this simple fact, we will all suffer.
The things we do echo throughout the world in unpredictable ways.

 

[rgraham666]

Revenge is a two edged sword, it cut not only its victim but also its perpetrator.

I'd have few qualms about executing Saddam, save my usual objections to capital punishment, if the sentence had been passed by the World Court under international law.

Instead it drives another nail into the coffin of multi-lateral action that we, including most Americans, have been building for over half a century. We will shortly return to the world before WWI, with arms races and alliances to protect our nations from other nations pursuing the same goal.

And this new race will probably end the same way. Except this time the major powers involved all have nuclear weapons.

Thank you, George W. Bush.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

You and I might be alone in sharing that sentiment

No.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

...

I'd have few qualms about executing Saddam, save my usual objections to capital punishment, if the sentence had been passed by the World Court under international law.

...

The world court? What a useless piece of work that is, almost as bad as the united nations.

 

[R. Richard]

I shed no tears for Saddam, I do not reget his passing. I'm sure his victims feel a measure of satisfaction in having their revenge and maybe they deserve to have it. I am not a bleeding heart upset over the execution of an obvious tyrant.
My concern is for the collective soul of humantity that this is where we are in our spiritual evolution. The violence and fear and anger still goes unchecked as it did 2000 years ago. It's justifiable to kill. It's legalized murder. If it was wrong for him to torture and kill why is it ok for anyone else. Is the act wrong or only the intent? You may say it is vengeance, the righting of a wrong, but this is just sophistry.
To take a life is wrong. There are many that deserve to die and many that deserved to live. If you feel you are in a position to pass judgment on one, you should be able to pass judgment on the other. Who must you be to make such judgments? This is the realm of God whoever he may be. Or karma if you like. No matter how you look at it, it is not the role of man and unitl we collectively realize this simple fact, we will all suffer.
The things we do echo throughout the world in unpredictable ways.

"If it was wrong for him to torture and kill why is it ok for anyone else."
First, you might try ending a question with a question mark. Second, Saddam was not tortured, he was executed in as painless a manner as practical. Saddam was dropped from a height and the impact of the rope broke his neck and killed him 'instantly.'

Lets look at what the alternative to killing Saddam was. The Iraqis could have kept him in a cage for the rest of his life, at great expense to the Iraqi government. There would have been the continual threat of Saddam loyalists trying to free him at a possible heavy cost in human life. There would also have been the threat of Shias and/or Kurds [Sunnis], bent on revenge, trying to kill him also at a possible heavy cost in human life. Keeping a man in a cage is one definition of torture.

So long as Saddam lived, he served as a rallying point for the Baathists [Sunnis] om Iraq and he was a destablizing force in Iraq. The probable effect would have been more deaths. Yes, there will be an uptick in deaths due to Baathists/Sunnis trying to protest Saddam's death. However, the long term effect will be a net saving of life.

 

[Liar]

Saddam gets no tears. if he'd been killed by a pack of wild boars, South Park style, I'd say "Eh, karma." and moved on.

But I withold the right to be saddened on the behalf of the principle. Execution of a convicted criminal is a conscious choice and not a nessecity (like in a war, for instance). And a society that kills by choice is no more pleasant or justified than an individual who kills by choice.

 

[R. Richard]

OK, here it is, Saddam's big moment. The Butcher of Baghdad is now to face a far more merciful death than the vast majority of his victims. Now is the time for a fire breathing speech of defiance. However, Saddam went with a whimper, not a bang.

Speechless Hussein trembled, struggled
The details of Saddam's non-heroic final hour

At two minutes past 3 a.m. (GMT) today, Saddam Hussein's boast that he would die a heroic martyr ended when he saw the gallows.

He began to tremble and his eyes filled with what one observer called "his terror at impending death. For the first time he was feeling what so many others had done facing execution from his actions."

One hour before – 2 a.m. on a cold Baghdad morning – his cell door had opened. Standing there was the Iraqi commander of the execution squad. He ordered the two American guards, who had stood their last death watch, to withdraw. In their place stepped two muscular Iraqi soldiers.

The commander told Saddam he would be hanged in the hour. There then followed the ritual formalities for execution.

Saddam ate a meal of boiled chicken and rice he had ordered at midnight. With the food he drank several cups of hot water laced with honey. It was a drink which dated back to his childhood.

After the meal he was invited to use the cell toilet – to avoid the public embarrassment of wetting himself in the execution chamber.

Saddam refused the offer.

At 2:30 a.m. he performed his final religious ablutions, kneeling and washing his hands, face and feet.

He then sat on the edge of his iron-cot bed and began to read the Quran. It had been a gift from his wife, sent to him at the outset of his trial. But only after the court’s death sentence had been passed had Saddam begun to study it.

Meantime, in the execution chamber, final rehearsals were underway.

A sack filled with builder's sand was used to test the gallows trapdoor. Twice the trapdoor swung open and the bag plunged into the void. The hangman judged the rope had been fully stretched.

After each test an Iraqi technician checked the trapdoor. Each flap was secured to the gallows platform by three steel and oiled hinges. The trap opening had been made wider than usual to avoid any chance of Saddam's body catching the sides of the platform.

At 2:45 a.m. two mortuary attendants arrived with a plain wooden coffin. They placed it beside the gallows platform.

By 2:50 a.m. the handful of invited witnesses stood against one wall of the execution chamber. They included members of the Iraqi judiciary, clerics, a representative of the Iraqi government and a doctor.

Their whispered talking fell silent as the chamber door opened. Gripped by the two hooded Iraqi guards, Saddam Hussein stood there blinking in the bright lights.

These had been switched on for the Iraqi video cameraman. It was 3:01 a.m. The tripod camera was in a corner of the chamber, providing a wide-angle shot of the gallows. Each time the test sack had plunged through the trapdoor, the cameraman had filmed a test video to check his framing.

Now at 3:01 a.m. Saddam stood there for a moment longer. Gripped firmly by the elbows, his two guards then motioned him forward towards the 12 steps leading up to the gallows platform.

At the foot of the steps, an Iraqi government official stepped forward and began to read from a single sheet of paper. It was the official death sentence.

An observer recalled: "Saddam’s mouth started to work. But no words came. The terror in his eyes was there for us all to see. He started to struggle. But he had no muscular power."

The official withdrew. Gripped even tighter by the guards, Saddam was half-forced up the steps.

The executioner – another Iraqi – came forward. In his hand he held a hood. He offered the blindfold up to Saddam.

Saddam shook his head, his mouth opened and closed.

"From where I stood he seemed to look down at the trapdoor as if he wanted to avoid it," said one of the observers.

One of his guards quickly pinioned Saddam's hands behind his back. A black cloth had been placed around his neck where the noose was now positioned.

He was maneuvered onto the center of the platform.

The silence in the room was total.

Suddenly there was the sound of a lever being pushed down hard. The trapdoor swung open. Saddam's body plunged through.

Saddam's body, neck broken, hung suspended for a few minutes. Then the doctor stepped forward and listened through a stethoscope for a heartbeat. There was none.

The two morticians stepped under the platform and cut the body down. The knife they used to slice through the rope looked like the kind a butcher would use.

At 3:14 a.m. Saddam Hussein’s body was placed in the plain wooden coffin and taken to a mortuary storage vault while a final decision was taken on the manner of its disposal. His widow had already made a request for it to be handed over to her for burial.

 

[Liar]

And like the kurd running the local convenience store said: It sucks that he's not alive to own up to the other 1,9 million people he killed. Now he was executed for a mass murder of Shiites. Had he also been forced to stand trial for crimes against Kurds and Sunnis (there are lots of well documented cases of both), there would be less of a risk that his death is used as political fodder in the insurgency and Shiite/Sunni conflict.

 

[rgraham666]

Zeb, the international institutions may not be 'useful', by which you mean do exactly what the U.S. wants when it wants, but it beats the living hell out of the alternative. A return to the world where it is a war of all against all.

And anything a nation does in war is allowed.

 

[R. Richard]

Zeb, the international institutions may not be 'useful', by which you mean do exactly what the U.S. wants when it wants, but it beats the living hell out of the alternative. A return to the world where it is a war of all against all.

And anything a nation does in war is allowed.

Rob:
Nations are bound by the Geneva Convention. True, some of them do ignore the Geneva Convention and the United Nations does nothing. Non-Governmental Organizations [NGOs] routinely ignore the Geneva Convention. The United Nations not only does not punish the NGOs, they support them. [i.e Currently, Hamas has an Israeli prisoner. They have refused any and all outside contact with said Israeli prisoner, including visits by the International Red Cross. The United Nations does nothing. All the United Nations would need to do is say, "No more food aid until the Israeli prisoner is allowed IRC contact." The United Nations does nothing.]

 

[Harry Leg]

"If it was wrong for him to torture and kill why is it ok for anyone else."
First, you might try ending a question with a question mark. Second, Saddam was not tortured, he was executed in as painless a manner as practical. Saddam was dropped from a height and the impact of the rope broke his neck and killed him 'instantly.'

Lets look at what the alternative to killing Saddam was. The Iraqis could have kept him in a cage for the rest of his life, at great expense to the Iraqi government. There would have been the continual threat of Saddam loyalists trying to free him at a possible heavy cost in human life. There would also have been the threat of Shias and/or Kurds [Sunnis], bent on revenge, trying to kill him also at a possible heavy cost in human life. Keeping a man in a cage is one definition of torture.

So long as Saddam lived, he served as a rallying point for the Baathists [Sunnis] om Iraq and he was a destablizing force in Iraq. The probable effect would have been more deaths. Yes, there will be an uptick in deaths due to Baathists/Sunnis trying to protest Saddam's death. However, the long term effect will be a net saving of life.

First, let me apologize for my improper punctuation. I will endeavour not to make this mistake again as I can see this is a grievous error.

Second, I didn't mean to imply that Saddam was tortured. What I meant was that I don't see that killing anyone is ok, even tyrannical dictators. I see now that I did not state this clearly. Again, please forgive me.

Third, I do not claim to have a viable alternative solution to his execution. I understand that the argument can easily be made that it was a cost effective move and that it may indeed discourage any Saddam loyalists from rising up in violence. Whether these are reasonable arguments I have no desire nor the faculties required to debate effectively.
My sole point was simply that it is wrong to take a human life even if he desrves to die unless you have the power to restore life to those that deserve to live.
Morality is not a movable feast.

 

[Pure]

headline

former US puppet executed by present US puppet

 

[Huckleman2000]

What Harry's said.

I'd also add that I find it really hollow and distasteful when people complain about the costs of keeping prisoners alive, especially coming from people who routinely advocate harsh punishment as deterrence for crimes of any kind, and prosecution 'to the full extent of the law.' Surely, a legal and judicial system is one of the legitimate functions of government. If you're going to advocate for strong prosecution and punishment, then don't bitch about how much it costs. If you want to reduce prison costs, start by releasing the hundreds of thousands of prisoners languishing due to mandated sentences for petty drug crimes and similar victims of 'get tough' laws.