KC Hill
taye
beauty, blog, reviews
Riff Raff
Paladin
Craig Hill
Oracle of DelphiShould Saddam have been Executed?
December 30th 2006 17:28
Brutal death for Brutal dictator
Aren't we sinking to his level if we kill him like he killed so many?
Why not let the bastard fester in a claustrophobic cell and die alone in jail?
My nation, Canada, does not engage in capital punishment; a murder conviction will get you twenty-five years in prison. Our American friends will probably cringe at such a 'light' sentence for killing a human being, but studies show ultra-long sentences and capital punishment do not deter people from committing crimes.
If I was in charge of such things what would I do?
Could I condemn Saddam Hussein to death? Would I have the guts to pull the trigger?
That's a lot of questions.
Maybe there are more questions than answers in all this.
What a kettle of fish. 'It Stinks"
There was no shortage of volunteers lining up to pull the lever that would hang good ole Saddam.
What are your thoughts?
| 229 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Go to Craig Hill's home page by clicking here
Comment by The Voices in my Head
The Voices in my Head
I understand the question you pose and the dilemma of it.
I often think, in a slightly different way, that the death penalty is wrong...but only because it is far easier to die than to live in prison. Especially for someone like Suddam, who ruled everyone...to suddenly be ruled over would be torture for him. Death seems far too easy in my mind.
Alternatively, being civilized is fine, if we are speaking about non-criminals. Obviously, criminals aren't. So, what good does it do to treat them civilized manner?
Honestly?
I think the only way to take back our countries from the hands of criminals is to go to an eye for an eye punishment system. Archaic? Yes. So is violence against innocent people. Speak to the perpetrators in their own language, on their own terms. We would see far less violence.
Great post!
Voices~
Comment by ThomasM
Fuel Saving Advice
Heidi's Blog
Blogtommy
Comment by Anonymous
I say he should have lived in a villa in Switzerland until he died of old age, kinda like Idi Amin!
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Too true that Saddam would have hated to be ruled over for the rest of his life.
Some would say keeping him alive would allow him to relay messages to his followers (and he still had many) from behind bars to cause more death and mayhem.
Others would say killing him will make him a martyr to his followers causing more death and mayhem.
damned if you do, damned if you don't.
An eye for an eye...
not sure its good in the long run. I know Bosnian refugees who told me the former Yugoslavia practices an 'eye for an eye' a 'life for a life' and have been for centuries. These refugees feel the senseless killings will NEVER end. You killed my father when I was little. When I grow up, I kill you. Your kid grows up and kills my brother his kids grow up and kill your nephews and so on and so on.
Oh, Voices, its all so heart-breaking, all the horrible things human beings do to each other. Will we ever overcome, rise above our brutality?
Perhaps that will be our next step in human evolution? Unfortunately, evolution takes eons.
Thanks, and I'm glad you're staying.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Indeed this was a revenge killing. Most executions are even if we sugar coat that part over by saying the electric chair is a deterant or strictly a punishment.
Did Saddam deserve to be killed for all the brutality he exercised over his own people. Yes. Should we exercise brutality over everyone who 'deserved' it? No, I don't think so. Could become a very slippery slope.
Like you said, time must be allowed for the appeal process. We've all heard of cases where someone on death row has been exonerated by new DNA techniques that weren't invented at the time of the person's trial. If the convicted murderer had been swiftly executed, the new evidence would have been horribly too late.
Though, of course, I don't think evidence would have been uncovered exonerating Saddam, but everyone deserves sufficient time for appeals. I'd say at least 5 years after conviction.
Cheers, Thomas!
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
But it was Americans who toppled his gov't and later captured him. Should they have a say in things? Not sure of the answer but just thought I'd pose it for arguments sake.
hum, a villa in Switzerland? Way too good for the SOB, if you ask me. Let the effer rot in a dark cell til the end of his days.
Thanks Anon.
Comment by The Voices in my Head
The Voices in my Head
I wasn't clear before, I'm sorry. Just want to clarify, I am not talking about vigilante eye for an eye...I am talking about government punishment. Also, please understand, not referring to cutting off a hand for those that steal.
I am talking about heinous crimes. Do you really think anyone would cut someone up in a slow and torturous way if they knew that when caught, the same would happen to them? Would child molesters, who I think all should die, bar none, regardless of childhood trauma, be as likely to act if they knew that the parents of the victim were allowed to select their punishment? Nope. Everyone has been treated entirely too leniently.
I realize this stand brings a whole host of questions, too. No answers. This opinion is just one of those fantasy responses. It's how I would do things, if in the position to decide these matters.
Good thing I'm just another writer wanna-be! lol
Voices~
PS Thanks for that! I'm glad to be staying, too.
Comment by Damo
I was trying to formulate the a post about it myself but you beat me to the gun.
I have always had reservations about the effectiveness of killing a person because the symbolize an issue. I have greater reservations if that execution comes at the end of a show trial or kangeroo court.
We either believe in justice or we don't. There is no such thing as being being half just. It ends up as being injustice. It is fine saying that Saddam was a monster and deserves no justice but if you set up court that is warped to find him guilty on a lesser questionable charge what are we saying.
THe charges that Saddam hanged for were to do with retaliation to an uprising against him. A brutal response was certanly without question the act of a ruthless and frightened ruler. Yet it does put the charge on the same level as anyone who has taken actions like pre-emptive strikes or bombing of civilian areas in times of war. In an international court it is doubtful this would not be quashed in an appeal. The judge was force to resign for daring to say that "Saddam was only allow to be a Dictator because people let him." Laws were passed by the new Iraqi to prevent their own President from offering Saddam clemency from execution. The whole this smells of revenge over justice.
The irony is that the true crimes of humanity where he killed thousands will never be heard and he will never be held accountable. In essence because he was charged with these the law has to presume innocence until proven otherwise. Hanged for a hundred plus deaths but innocent of thousands.
I don't think that these ironies will be ignored by futute historians. They may see it as little more than a show trial and political execution. Revenge is only sweet for a while.
Comment by Joe Blogg
Joe Blogg's Blog
manchesterunited
collingwoodfootballclub
Saddam, forfeited any rights to be treated as a human being a loooooooong time ago.
That said he wooda made an interesting guest on Oprah.
Comment by Anonymous
I thought about a lot of the points that have been raised as I saw the news come on yesterday about his hanging - wow they certainly don`t mess around hey? You wonder if all criminals are treated as such or if his case was so cut and dried that they had no reason to keep him around.
I think it is rather hypocritical of us as a society to condone the killing of another human being....for killing another human being! Chuck them in the dirtiest, worst, most brutal prison they can find and throw away the key. Let some of his victims family members be his guards. Allow no priviledges no matter how 'good a prisoner' he be.
Ash
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
I agree that this was a 'show trial'.
Probably, the Iraqi's just wanted to get things over with and had already made the judgment of Hussein's guilt BEFORE the start of the 'trial'.
They had 'proof' of his murderous antics for decades as he tortured and killed his own people so why drag out the trial? While he was officially only tried for hundreds of murders, no one doubts his guilt on thousands (hundreds of thousands) of slayings.
Thanks so much for your comments and insights.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Do you think Oprah would have him as a guest?
Babwa Walters would for sure. Maybe Saddam could have been the new co-host on 'The View' (do you have that show in Australia?).
Cheers, Joe!
Hi Ash,
Nice to see you.
Quick carrying out of sentence, indeed!
They probably didn't want him to somehow get out of it and were just so full of hatred for the man, that they hanged him in record time.
yup, throw him in the dirtiest, foulest prison and throw away the key. The other prisoners are sure to ensure he has a 'pleasant' stay! Sweet, prolonged justice.
thanks, Ash
Comment by Damo
I am not trying to be intentionally difficult but I am unclear as to what people say should have happened.
Should Saddam have been given a fair trial or is there only justice for some?
Does the magnitude of the accusation forego the right to a fair trail?
Did everyone want justice or just revenge?
If revenge is right then he should have been shot publically without any trail. Quick easy and less hypocracy.
However if we decide that revenge is morally repugnant then a show trail has no place.
The quetion of punishment comes after this, not before.
Comment by Oblivion
My thoughts on this... are very conflicting.
There is not a doubt that this is a dilemma, it dosen't matter if it is this particular situation or not.
I don't really quite know if I can answer the questions you and everyone else here posed with any accuracy...
After reading this, I came across an interesting quote. No doubt it has been used and debated upon along with this issue... but I'll just throw it out here for kicks:
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends." -- J.R.R Tolkien
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
You're not being difficult at all. It is the subject matter that is difficult. We (or at least I) am a bit unclear as to what should have been done because I'm not sure what should have been done.
Maybe for the Iraqis revenge was close enough to justice as they could get? I dunno.
Would this trial have been very different if it was in America or England? It would have been a longer trial lasting months or even years followed by a guilty verdict followed with a long appeal process and, in the end, with the same results as Iraqi's trial.
Maybe the human race is incapable of providing anything other than a show trial for the likes of Husseins, Milosevics, or Hitlers (now that would have been one hell of a trial!!). Who would be objective in Hussein's trial? if Hitler had one?
I'm sorry, Damo, I am not trying to be difficult with you, please believe me. I'm only trying to present as many sides and approaches as i can think of. It's not that i disagree with you, I'm playing Devil's Advocate.
Pegasus
Comment by Lilla
From The Home Front
Enviro Warrior
Dream Herald
Esoteric Bookshop
He had to die, no doubts... but I feel sorry for the part he played.. both voluntarily and arrogantly, and innocently and stupidly... someone should have told him that you can't play with the big boys and not get 'shot...' but he had his run and 'affluent democracy' needed him for the time they let him play ...
... but on the other side of the coin, he had to go... if one didctator can be allowed to get away with it .. well, no point going down that road... we all want democracy... like it or not!
My consolation is that he may well have been fairly brain dead by the time they put the noose around his neck anyway. I remember reading about the injections used to extract information (and conceal it too, perhaps)... and remember seeing him in court... yep... all that blinking (?) ... poor bugger... all but brain dead...amen.
... and the band played on...
Lilla...
ps Peg on a brighter note; Happy New Year to you my friend... see you later...
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
And, what a great quote too:
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends." -- J.R.R Tolkien
The Vatican & EU have expressed disapproval for the execution:
*Vatican City: "An execution is always tragic news, reason for sadness, even in the case of a person who is guilty of grave crimes." - Holy See spokesperson Federico Lombardi.[60]
"[The execution punishes] a crime with another crime...The death penalty is not a natural death. And no one can give death, not even the state." - Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
* European Union: European Commissioner for Development Aid Louis Michel stated that the execution of Saddam Hussein is against the fundamental principles of the European Union. The EU is against the death penalty, whatever are the crimes committed. "It is not a big day for democracy", Michel stated to the RTBF. "The EU is in fierce opposition to the death penalty and there is no exception to that fundamental principle. Cruelty is not to be answered with cruelty. I believe that there were other possible means to revenge the cruelties committed by Saddam. The death penalty is not the right answer." He fears that the execution of Saddam has a negative impact and that the former dictator will emerge as a martyr. "You don't fight barbarism with acts that I deem as barbaric. The death penalty is not compatible with democracy." he told Reuters.
(from Wikpedia)
Cheers,
Pegasus
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
How are you?
Brain dead at trial...or just playing up for sympathy?
I'll admit I felt a bit sorry for the old guy since his capture (from a spider hole! ha ha) looking all befuddled and helpless, until I remind myself of what atrocities he's committed.
HAPPY NEW YEAR to you, my dear one.
take care,
Peg
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
That guy was a tyrant, he oppressed a nation for twentyfive years, so are you to say that once he's caught and all it suddenly becomes 'oh were civilized, we'll give him a prison sentence'.
Criminals like saddam are not complicated, they are simple, they are cold blooded killers and they have no place in civilized society. It would be anything but civil to elt him live.
I don't know where this crap comes into peoples heads, maybe if you spent a week living in Iraq under saddam you'd be more willing to give up your civil self to have him executed.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
You are entitled to your opinion. Here's mine:
What is the relationship between civilized society and executions?
Everything
oh we're civilized, we'll give him a prison sentence
Yes
It would be anything but civil to let him live.
it would be the civil thing to let him live.
I don't know where this crap comes into peoples heads
It comes into our minds through our hearts.
maybe if you spent a week living in Iraq under saddam you'd be more willing to give up your civil self to have him executed.
I have never lived in Iraq, that's true. Perhaps I would feel differently if i had. Since I haven't, I'll have to go on my actual experiences which have taught me to have an open mind and open heart. Its better to have too much compassion than not enough.
Thanks for your input,
Pegasus
Comment by LaurenD
In some ways it makes him a martyr, in other ways, it nullifies the moral argument that his murdering is wrong.
So killing him, logically, doesn't make sense.
Why couldn't they just have given him a job at the post office?
LaurenD
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
You're misguided, if you relaly do have compassion for a mass murdering dictator then that makes you no better than said dictator.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head when you wrote "I have never lived in Iraq, that's true. Perhaps I would feel differently if i had", you never did, so your opinon is quite redundant and ill informed. You do realise he's responsible for all these massaccres, you do, don't you? I'm finding it hard to believe you do if you believe it is civil to leave such a man in alive.
Comment by Lily
Ars Poetica
I just saw 'the hanging', felt sick, sad, read all of this with hmmmm's and yeah rights and stuff
....and then laughed my head off at what Lauren finished with .. hahahaha...
errr look mummy, it's a rollercoaster...
~Lily
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Job at the post office LOL! More 'shooting-from-the-hip', I see!
Ahmed,
What more can I say? We don't see eye to eye on this issue & probably never will.
Lily,
Hello, nice to have you in the mix.
Rollercoaster is a good summary, girl!
Thanks Lily
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Comment by Damo
I don't believe that the quality of mercy is ever strained. Nor do I believe that killing anyone even a captured dictator makes us better people. These are my intellectual choices and make them with full knowledge of the ramifications.
And no I have not been Iraq, however I do have person experience of the terror of a tyrant. My wife comes from Sri Lanka and I have heard first hand accounts of things that no one should hear. I have seen fear in the eyes of people that no one can imagine. I can think of no Sri Lankan friend mine or relation who does not know the meaning of tyrany and pointless murders. I do not say this to be condecending but illustrate that not everyone who has suffered under a tyrant believes in vengence. There are some people who do believe that justice is something greater than their person feelings and gratifications. there are those that believe that injustice is the beginning of tyranny
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
That man should die, if for anything to pay back for what he's done to those people.
Justice is about the crime fitting the punishment, the punishment should ATLEAST be equal to the crime commited, however you can't equal the crimes saddam has commited in punishment, the most you can go is with execution.
It would be anything but civil and justful and even compassionate to let the man live.
Just because justice and vengence can go together doesn't mean justice shoud not be carried out as a result.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
We never were meant to.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Of course I don't think Hussein was a saint, he was a monster, a horrible, horrible blood-thirsty monster.
But even monsters deserve the question to be asked,
"Should we spare his life?"
Maybe the answer will be no, but the question must be asked first anyway and thought long and hard over it. Each and everyone of us should have that right, no matter how vile the crime we are accused of is.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
The only thing I'm pissed off about in his court trial is the fact it didn't go on for longer, there are other people just as guilty as he is for those massaccres which extends beyond the borders of Iraq and goes all the way to the shores of North America.
However for the crime he was convicted of it was more than enough to sentence him to death. When dealing with him he got what was coming to him, and yes he was given the privildge to defend himself in court.
Comment by Damo
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
There was no word on America's involvement with Iraq over the past 25 years, all they did was convict him for one isolated massacre.
Sure it would have been enough to sentence him to death based on this one charge but there was other truths that wasn't brought to the forefront involving other things that have been going on in Iraq over the past 25 years and more...
Comment by Damo
So you can see how some people would see this case not in terms of just Saddam but the impartiality of the Legal system. Perhaps they are asking "If Saddam gets a show trail, what about those in Gito Bay? What about us if falsely accused? Could we every trust the courts to be fair and deliver justice?
These are just questions, but they do strike a nerve with some people.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
No surprise they executed him so quickly, they don't want that man alive because, well, he knows things about certain people that could be more than a little incriminating in an open and impartial court. So the court was oopen and impartial but he was only tried one one massacre which he was soley responsibel for.
Comment by Stanley
No, I don’t mourn the demise of a brutal dictator who was capricious and cruel.
What I do mourn is the loss of the rule of law.
Brilliant legal scholar AV Dicey formulated the rule of law having three main characteristics, but it is the first two that is most pertinent in this case:
1) ‘the absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power.’ Basically, this prevents governments and individuals from exercising arbitrary power.
2) Equality before the law. All classes of people are equally subject to the law and no one is exempt.
(Source: AV Dicey, “Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution.”)
Yes, many people will argue that Saddam did not extend this type of courtesy to his victims, but as so called flag bearers of democracy we should exhibit why the Western legal system although not perfect, is admired.
It has been obvious from the very beginning that the verdict and the punishment were preordained.
His guilt is without question – there is plenty of evidence in the public record of his brutality to opponents in Iraq and neighbouring nations.
A fair and thorough trial from the very outset could have set an example of the validity and importance of the rule of law in a nation that has suffered from decades of tyrannical and arbitrary abuses of power.
Instead what we got was a flawed and politicised trial that is no closer to unifying a scarred nation. What transpired instead was a kangaroo court were legal “niceties” such as evidence and rebuttal were dispensed with.
I think someone mentioned in an earlier comment that the sentence had been rejected by not only the UN, but also by major human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
There is probably also no closure for the Shites or the Kurds that were victims to his brutality.
Perhaps the most disheartening aspect is that the execution of the Hitler of the Tigris has not changed a single thing in present day Iraq.
Comment by Joe Blogg
Joe Blogg's Blog
manchesterunited
collingwoodfootballclub
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
The US has a habit of thinking 'if you're not kissing my ass then you're saddams lover' and fail to realise that Muslims (not shiites) are more cynical of the US and know that saddam was put into power by the US and that the US would just probably put another guy like him.
Comment by Damo
You summed it up well
Comment by David my David
They should have punished him properly ...
They should have given him a blog on Orble ...
He got off lightly by being executed ... ***
David ...
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
Very well-said, well-thought-out points.
The two rules of law you mentioned are an ideal that many societies strive for but often fall short of. If 'flag-bearing democracies' cannot follow these rules (or selectively choose when to follow or not follow) then how can a wounded, precarious one be expected to at such a charged time?
OK, it was a show trial but its a done deal now. In time, I hope Iraq will become a well-rounded, just and democratic nation that stringently follows such rules of law.
Thanks for your viewpoint Stan
Hey Joe,
You are hilarious. Oprah's couch is getting tired of losers jumping up and down on it, I'll bet.
Cheers
Davey,
text
sub
Saddam's execution? All about you, man.
Pegasus
Comment by Anonymous
George Bush wanted to get the man that tried to kill his daddy. He helped Saddam's biggest critics and enemies (the Shia) to gain power. It was an American (heavily advised) prosecution and court that tried Saddam. And it was through terror and murder of Saddam's defense team that this (so called ) fair trial was conducted.
This was one of those 'show trials' that the Soviet used to present to the world (the verdict and sentence was decided before the invasion). What I would have done was (if It must be a show trial) I would have sent him to the Haig for trial and if convicted I would have locked him up in an established prison administered by the World court. Life with no parole and limited exposure to the rest of society.
He would have spent his last days studying the Koran and contemplating his transgressions.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
hear, hear.
Comment by Luke
Old Movies
Cane Toad Warrior
Comment by ThomasM
Fuel Saving Advice
Heidi's Blog
Blogtommy
Comment by AnthonyB
HAPPY NEW YEAR, PENNY !!
Comment by JessOw
The Tack Room
Comment by Brenton
Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum
And Ahmed, when have you been in jail? You think that's something you'd enjoy? Desire? Death is not the only thing one can be punished by.
I can't say the death sentance concerns me with Saddam so much as in other cases, but I see it as Empirically flawed, regardless.
Comment by KylieW
Celebrity Obsession
Some would say that in Saddam's case that was a good thing. And yes the evidence in his case is overwhelming. Also, his crimes were heinous. But what about others? I already fear that the way the US and Australia go about investigating those accused of terrorism related offenses is more like a witch hunt than an investigation. What would the trials be like? For example, can David Hicks ever really be given a fair trial? If the Saddam trial is any indication, then the answer is no.
In saying all this, I'm undecided about whether Saddam should have been executed. I can see how his living, even behind bars would make the Iraqi people nervous....this is a man whose power used to know no bounds. But philosophically, I don't believe in the death penalty. I don't think it deters crime at all. Will the next dictator in waiting think twice about committing atrocities to get himself into power because Saddam was executed??? Hell no.
It's a complex question and no clear answer.
Great post Pegasus!
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
If he's kept alive in an old prison then justice hasn't been done, not to him even because the countries laws entitles him to the death penalty.
Comment by Robert V
For starters, killing and murder are two different things. You can kill and be civilized. You cannot murder and be civilized. Therefore, we're still more civilized than the murderers we execute, because the murderers have it coming and their victims didn't.
You're right that the deterrent factor is pretty unclear in studies, though one by John Lott found that increasing the execution rate -- making the death penalty more visible where it already exists -- decreases crime. I'd say that justice and a sense of closure for victims' families are also important, however, and 25 years doesn't accomplish either of those goals.
Finally, I disagree with the notion that life in prison is worse than death. We could get into a huge philosophical discussion about it, but I like to keep it simple: People on death row try hard to get their sentences commuted to life in prison, and people with life sentences only occasionally kill themselves or try to get put down. Therefore, by and large inmates fear death enough that they'd rather live in prison.
My ideal death penalty law: A new, higher burden of proof. Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, using only (A) physical evidence and (B) eyewitness testimony from people who knew the defendant before the incident. (B) is the key, because so much false identification takes place when a victim/witness never saw an attacker before, then picks the wrong suspect out of a lineup. This is especially likely across racial lines.
If the prosecutor has to use witness testimony from people who never saw the assailant before the attack, no death penalty.
Comment by Brian
To some it may be a source of vindication, some a mistrial. Add to this the fact this question:
"Has Saddam Hussein's Death become a form of Relief or concern to have more uprisings thus enhancing the security of all countries in the world today?"
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
Great post, Peg!
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
I find capital punishment immensely disturbing, as I don't think anyone deserves to be killed. Not even Saddam, or Osama Bin Laden. A life in prison would allow Saddam the opportunity find new patterns, adopt new paradigms and even somehow redeem himself, but the Iraqi court has taken away his ability to change by handing down this cruel form of punishment.
It is very worrying that Iraq, an emerging democracy in which every present action will inform the kind of future it can weave for itself, has selected to endorse the practice of hanging its citizens; and yet America, one of the world's most successful democracies, is setting a very bad example by operating under the same laws. Bush has termed the trial's verdict as a 'milestone' in Iraqi democracy, which makes me shudder.
You'd think the violence on Iraq's streets was enough- one more death is unnecessary, stultifying and obscene. The continuation of violence based on legal grounds encourages violence as a solution for a country that needs stark examples of mercy, peace, harmony and restraint to take note of. The newly elected government needs extensive revision so as to eradicate this brutal form of law enforcement.
CP estranges very needy citizens from access to resources that might help them recover a better way of living, the first being their life. It offers no second chances or forgiveness, focussing on the person's undeniable wrong-doing with single-mindedness something akin to religious fervour.
Like abortion and same-sex marriage, CP is hotly debated all around the world. Only some states in the US endorse the penalty, mostly the 'red' (or Republican) and tensions within the country over legal policy abound as a result. Australia, Canada and most of Europe don't allow the practice to be carried out, opting for much more civilised methods of dealing with their criminals.
What do you think? Is there anybody who deserves the death penalty? Does Osama Bin Laden? I firmly believe that to take away the life of another human being is immoral, and everyone should be given a second chance to re-integrate into society, even if it's only a prison society. A crime against humanity might be a heinous offense but no human being deserves to be killed.
Comment by Jane Doe
The sick thing is this happened in this day and age, 60 years after the end of world war two when we all thought this could never happen again.
There is no doubt as to his guilt, he was responsible for countless deaths, and gave the orders for horrific torture to be carried out.
There was no avenue but death for Saddam, he would not of festered alone in a claustrophobic cell, he would of received visits from supporters, gifts, and we would of heard how it would be an abuse of his basic human rights not to have a television or some shit like that, there is no redemption for monsters, he thrived off his notoriety.
People are quick to shun Capital Punishment, but if it was one of their loved ones horifically abused and murdered would they still have the same opinion? 25 years in prison is nothing, its like Australia, and the full term is hardly ever served lots of people are released after serving only half that..for taking someone elses life? and free to do it all over again.
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
I know I would. I don't think vengeance is ever justified.
Comment by pegasus
Poker Addict
How about the example the Amish recently gave us when several Amish school girls were shot to death?
The Amish's first thought was to comfort the killer's family and to forgive the killer for taking their daughters.
What strength, what love (love of their lost children, love of the killer, love of God) the exhibited, what a powerful example of tolerance and compassion.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
That man should die, if for anything to pay back for what he's done to those people.
Justice is about the crime fitting the punishment, the punishment should ATLEAST be equal to the crime commited, however you can't equal the crimes saddam has commited in punishment, the most you can go is with execution.
It would be anything but civil and justful and even compassionate to let the man live.
Just because justice and vengence can go together doesn't mean justice shoud not be carried out as a result.