Saddam Hussein Sentenced To Death By Hanging

Young Spartan · 11-05-2006

Quote:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Saddam Hussein, the iron-fisted dictator who ruled Iraq for nearly a quarter of a century, was found guilty of crimes against humanity Sunday and sentenced to death by hanging.

Source: FOXNews.com - Saddam Hussein Sentenced to Die for Crimes Against Humanity

Good to see that the very people he wronged stepped up and gave him what he deserved.

*unleash* · 11-05-2006

Yep, i agree with that...
Did you heard his words when he was "escorted" out of the courthouse, something like...,allah above or something alike. Well i just hope those rebels won't do anything during the hanging.....which they will

ecntrc · 11-05-2006

yay.. good dat guy. he deserves it..

ovidiua2003 · 11-06-2006

don't judge because u shall be judged in the same manner. but he did a lot of evil...so i guess it's ok

*notjustgraphics* · 11-06-2006

I hate getting political, but I do have a comment on this subject...

Please PLEASE don't think I'm trying to say Saddam should go free or anything... BUT There is no way in hell he got a fair trial... something that Democratic societies should hold in the highest regard...

I mean, the U.S. invaded the country Saddam ran (justly or not) and put their own leader in place... then they arrest Saddam and try him in the same country that is now run by the new regime... as a judge in a country as unstable as Saddams, would you fell free to assert judical rule fairly and justly?

During his trial, 4 of his lawyers were assasinated/killed and the judge repeatedly made prejudicial comments throughout the course of the trial.

Now, if the guy is the evildoer we all think he is, why would the world not want him tried fairly and justly - so that his conviction would stand the test of time? Now, they are rushing his sentencing, he has a 10 day appeal which we all know how it will turn out, and then they will hang the man....

Does somebody think that he would win in a fair trial? If he would win in a fair trial, what does that mean?

Mike.

*unleash* · 11-06-2006

I agree with you on that part, he didn't got a fair trial but still....I think if he would be judged(or how ever you call that) in like the netherlands or in the like france...i think he had got the same punishement there...As our premier said it, he deserves this punishment, but the dead sentence isn't right

*notjustgraphics* · 11-06-2006

I don't agree with the Death Penalty in principle... because until the system is flawless (which I doubt will ever happen) you just never really know... too many people are set free after 10/15/20 years because of new evidence, or dirty cops, etc... Death Penalties are permanent...

I do believe it is a just punishment for certain crimes, but can never be applied justly...

I can just see that 60 years from now, long after the players in the matter are all dead, and the history books have conflicting accounts of what happend under Saddams rule, questions about his guilt or innocence will arise... It's better that he be fairly tried and executed or preferabbly jailed for life then to have the suspicion that foul play was at hand in 60 years...

Mike.

P.S.

I just came across this article which i think puts things in perspective
Saddam: a tribute

markynolan · 12-30-2006

yeah...in my personal opinion. i mean, cmon, even biorust cant stop me from sayin dis. its a so called democratic thingy in da US rite. so plz sit down n relax. heheh.
in my personal opinion. fine, saddam did a lot of bad things. even da moslems there know wut he has done. som of his doings are even against da syariah (in simple, islamic teachings), so by rite, in the islamic law also, he shud be punished, in which how severe it shud be, is none of anyones, (non iraqis, n i wud say nonmuslims) business. i somhow agree wit mike. think for urselves, whether it really was a 'justly' trial.
me myself, in my own personal opinion, question da credibility of mr bush. i mean...hey, wut da hell is da US troops doin in iraq, its a VERY foolish n questionable order by mr bush. y da hell r they there. y dun mr bush juz let them b. im a bit cynical, but i must say dat, if bush was behind saddams capture, i question y. n after he did all those i wud say in general, bad tings in iraq, dun u tink he shud be on a 'justly trial' too?
u see...im juz sayin dis cause i tink dat its not fair. cmon...both of them are murderers i wud say. so both deserve da same thing. i do hate mr bush. im sorry. but im not denyin dat saddam is not guilty. he DID bad things.
trust me. those of u who have shallow n empty head n blindly US pro, u wudnt even consider my thread, but if you are not, then i urge u. to juz think, n make sure dat da world treats evryone fairly.
n 1 mo thing. UN=useless nations....wuts da point of havin united nations if da decisions only come from a few, veto generated power countries. heheh. think. god...y r the ppl in dis world r so blind. do somtin man. hehehe...
world peace n racial harmony n most importantly, zero religious prejudice is wut i want. may those bad leaders be punished.

ecntrc · 12-31-2006

ah you know what dat guy wen deserve em. thats what i think. i no like argue but thats what i think..

**tamlin** · 12-31-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by markynolan

world peace n racial harmony n most importantly, zero religious prejudice is wut i want.

Those are very commendable aims, although I don't believe the first two (world peace and racial harmony) will ever happen precisely because the third (zero religious prejudice) can never be achieved. Speaking as a lifelong humanist, it seems to me that prejudice is an integral part of all religions: every religion believes that it is the "true" one, so, by inference, every other must be "false". Even within religions there have been (and still are) schisms that have resulted in the oppression, torture and death of literally billions of people through the ages - how can that ever be justified, I wonder?

*unleash* · 12-31-2006

To Mike,
I do think that normally the death punishment shouldn't be used. Even if it was a killer or a terrorist(with deaths on his/ her name).
But in this case i think it was the right decisioun because the country of Irak needed this. If saddam is death they can feel free, but if he is in prison they will always have the feeling that he could come back.
And the rebels would have more things to fight for. So in this case I do think that the hanging was the only right route for saddam.

And I toughtit was very "strange" those rebels didn't even try to get him out of that military precinct. I had thought they would in every case couse chaos among the people in that area, But no nothing.........very strange.......

And to markynolan,
I agree with you on the part of the questionable order, the one about the troops in Iraq. I find it very strange that mister bush sended his troops there.
The reasons he gave us(through TV) where I think not the reall ones. At one hand i think such dictators should be punished and their country's should get the right to choose for themselves. But i don't think that is what bush is seeking there. I think he is there for the water, the oil and the "position" to get a new militairy base.....

xmarskix · 01-01-2007

Its funny how they went about hangin Saddam..in my personal opinion..the way they went about it was wrong! I don't think they should have publicised his death..they should have done it in privacy..i know he did alot of wrong in his time..but doing it infrnt of everyone his people..his belivers..his followers..his enimies..his family..that should have never happened..i feel this way because now that were close t getting our soliders back home..who's to say that his followers and belivers wont make it worse? I belive that they will i believe that they will try and get revenge on the U.S or any other country that played part in his death. And then putting his body out infront of everyone..so they could make fun or whatever you want to call it that was unrightious as well..think about how his family felt..i know your probely thinking who cares about his family and what not..but im sure not everyone is his family is as bad as him like his daughters and sons..i bet they felt terrble watching everyone hate on there father's dead body..its terrible!

stiney51 · 01-01-2007

No matter how or why the US ended up with troops in Iraq, it would be detrimental to everyone for the inevital withdrawl. I personally think (as a US citizen) that our President should not have decided to invade Iraq. I do think Sadam was guilty and deserves the punishment (especially since we can't really do worse than it). But regardless what is left in Iraq is a very unstable government and even more unstable populous.

Inherently you have a bunch of people who believe what they are doing is right, and believe if they die doing it, that their god will reward them. That is a recipe for an un-winable conflict.

The only way for this conflict to end less badly, is if somehow the US could withdraw its troops and for them to be temporarily replaced with troops from many other nations. Iraq needs a period of stability for their government to have a chance to succede. (which was not put in place by the US given that a large percentage of the government is against US policy). The region hates the US (possibly rightfully so) and will continue to battle any government while the US is involved.

markynolan · 01-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamlin

Those are very commendable aims, although I don't believe the first two (world peace and racial harmony) will ever happen precisely because the third (zero religious prejudice) can never be achieved. Speaking as a lifelong humanist, it seems to me that prejudice is an integral part of all religions: every religion believes that it is the "true" one, so, by inference, every other must be "false". Even within religions there have been (and still are) schisms that have resulted in the oppression, torture and death of literally billions of people through the ages - how can that ever be justified, I wonder?

true...i somhow agree...but wut makes me sick, is when it seems as if da world is not even trying. i agree wit u tamlin. but u see, my range of friends consists of different races n religions. so if I, a normal human bein, who holds stongly to my religion, can n love to live in peace among interracial communities, y cant others. history has proven dat at certain times and for a certain period, people from different religions COULD live togetha in harmony, n were allowed to practice their beliefs freely. da problem actually arises when a person or a group of people, juz cant accept da fact dat things are goin smoothly. these are da ppl who makes everythin impossible. n to make it worse n sh*tty, they ruin da bonds tied among ppl, only for self purposed reasons. and i truly hate these kinda ppl. esp if its a so called leader, n ppl actually chose him to be one. it shows how stupid n blind da people hav become.
it actually starts wit us. if we try our best. we can change things. juz do our part. n if we lack in faith, OF COURSE nothin will be achieved. fine, its quite difficult, but cmon, only extremists or mad men kill ppl for religious reasons. though som were 'made' to do it, resultin from things such as insensitive remarks and statements done by their 'victims'. so it is our duty to respect others. and be patient. for example if A says somtin stupid about B, n B acts beyond humanity, and juz blow A's head off, things will not be solved too.
a person can believe dat his or her own religion is true, n others are false, but dat doesnt give that particular person a solid reason to juz go n do stupid things. if i take it to a certain point, i wud say dat bein antisocial, meaning if a person is stupid enough to not mix around wit other races n religion is even BETTER, than to create tension, or more extreme doings.

dEUS · 01-02-2007

Well, now the extremists have something to take revenge for...

It's an eternal struggle...