Saddam Hussain Executed... - Page 3

maxwell silver · 30-12-2006, 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by flashytart

he should of been shot, the evil bastard

I bet you'd have loved to pull the trigger

chav1 · 30-12-2006, 16:55

he shoulda been torn to pieces with tweezers by the families of those he killed, 1 small chunk at a time

cashman · 30-12-2006, 18:12

Saddam Hussain,once educated in england, once funded and backed by theUSA,stopped toeing the line so he became a baddie,strange world.

cherokee · 30-12-2006, 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by flashytart

he should of been shot, the evil bastard

He requested to be shot but because he was never in the army they opted to hang him the way the do any civvy.

panther · 30-12-2006, 18:21

maybe they should have fed him through a mincer 'still alive' !!! he should have suffererd like his victims
they should bring the death penalty back in this country,

for all the murdering bastards ere! pardon my french!

steeljack · 30-12-2006, 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

Saddam Hussain,once educated in england, once funded and backed by theUSA,stopped toeing the line so he became a baddie,strange world.

yep , just another in a long line ,including The Shah of Iran, Marcos, Noriega, Mobutu , all put into power and supported by the Pentagon then tossed overboard when circumstances change , its a wonder why any national leader would trust Washington to be a true friend and stand shoulder to shoulder with them,
Lots of truth in the old saying "if you sup with the devil you better use a long spoon"

mani · 30-12-2006, 18:52

agree about the point that the death penalty shud b bought back here. i mean come on we're in a technological advanced society - surely the mistakes that a person shud b injected twice to kill him shudnt happen - if htey can invent all these nerve gasses etc then how hard would it be to find a chemical that would do the job first time?

one thing iraq/usa did wrong was execute him today - its the first day of Eid - and alot of countries and people have expressed alot of grievences regardin this... also in islam who ever dies on such auspicious days is generally regarded as a martyr. now u gotta question if iraqi govt *shia dominated* did this on purpose to offend the large sunni population or not...

jambutty · 30-12-2006, 18:58

Sadly bullsyebarb other victims will not get the opportunity to testify on their own behalf because you cannot try a dead person. The best that could happen would be the Iraqi equivalent of a judicial review if they have such a thing. The Saddam chapter is legally and officially closed although the Sunni fanatics will attempt to keep it open.

Hanging when done by a true professional (like Albert Pierrepoint) Cyfr is quick and humane when compared to some of the botched attempts at electrocution, gas chamber and even lethal injection. The cruellest method is what happens to a PVS patient when the court has ruled to allow them to die. The method – starvation - because the medical services stop feeding him/her and the patient is allowed to die from starvation. Now that is barbaric.

Have a look at http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/hangmen.html it makes fascinating reading.

No one was held to account for the Dresden bombings garinda because in case you have forgotten or not known, it was the Luftwaffe that started the civilian bombing of London, albeit in error. Of course by then the Germans had already bombed Polish, French, Belgium etc cities. They continued with blanket bombing of our cities and “Bomber” Harris was right to retaliate as he did.

In any case when a country goes to war it is the whole country (less any conscientious objectors who get imprisoned) and that means civilians. The only people exempt are children not of working age. I mean who makes the bombs and bullets? Who provides the food for the troops? Who provides clothing and the money to pay them? So targeting civilians during a legitimate war is, in my view, fair game. The civilians are the support ‘troops’ of the fighting men and women.

KIPAX · 30-12-2006, 19:05

is killing somone wrong or not ?

if yes then hanging him was wrong

if no then why was he hanged.

or is there an inbetween.. you can hang someone if you have a good reason.. like saddam was hanged for a good reason... but didnt he kill other people for what he decided was a good reason..

why dont we just not go around killing people... well easier said than done...

willow you amke a good point which simplified can be... a guy is pointing a gun at you and counting to 10... at ten he will shoot you dead... you ahve a gun in your hand what do you do.... well me... i would blow his brains out before he got to 2

but i wasnt really thinking about self defence.... hannging somoene isnt self defence... its payback and what right does anyone have to kill someone as retribution.... no one does..... no excuses... killing someone just because you believe you have a good reason is wrong (other than self defence)

i saw manis first line and i thought he was on the right track with his this day and age...until i saw he meant to kill them in one clean go

put me in charge... i will stop the death penalty...... but the alternative for someone like saddam would mean him wishing he was dead every hr of every day he was alive..

panther · 30-12-2006, 19:11

an eye for an eye thats what i say, let the punishment fit the crime!

mani · 30-12-2006, 19:13

*L*

kipax - master of deception i am - hence i shud b the next prime minister

garinda · 30-12-2006, 19:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by bullseyebarb

Perhaps you'd prefer that Hitler won. War is not a game, funny or otherwise. Up against such an enemy, one goes hell bent for leather. Breaking civilian will used to be a part of that......something only the Islamists seem to understand these days.

Of course not, and don't patronise me. My Grandfather was killed aged twenty two fighting the Nazis.

However, what I was pointing out is that is always the conquered who stand acused of war crimes, never the victors, no matter what atrocities were carried out to achieve that victory.

Saddam was an evil man, but do bear in mind that we, the west, still had both trade and diplomatic relations with Iraq when he gassed the Kurds. It wasn't until he invaded oil rich Kuwait that we decided he was 'evil'. Funny that.

I shall wait with bated breath for Bush and Blair to police the world, and rid us of other evil dictators. Most of whom aren't oil rich, or strategically placed amongst the world's largest oil reserves.

Mugabe, looks like you and the other despots are safe then.

jambutty · 30-12-2006, 19:28

It is wrong to kill someone for personal gain or pleasure KIPPAX.

It is right to kill someone in self defence.

It is right to kill someone in retribution for someone killing for personal gain or pleasure. It is payback or revenge if you like but it does act as a deterrent to most people. Although there will always be some who won’t give a damn and kill anyway. Well if they do they will only be able to do it until they are caught and punished. Dead men cannot kill again.

Quote:

However, what I was pointing out is that is always the conquered who stand acused of war crimes, never the victors, no matter what atrocities were carried out to achieve that victory.

No quite right garinda. Many American soldiers have been brought to trial for atrocities committed during both World Wars, as have English and other allied troops, in Korea, Vietnam, Palestine and now Iraq. None of the senior generals though! And I guess that is what you mean – the generals.

By the way the west was asked by Kuwait to remove the Iraqi forces. We didn’t go in uninvited. And we won’t tackle other despots because as you point out, there is nothing in it for us – oil and gas that is.

garinda · 30-12-2006, 19:32

Idi Amin was responsible for an estimated 300,000 deaths in Uganda.

Where did he seek sanctuary?

That hot bed of funding for Al-Quada, Saudia Arabia.

Saudia Arabia, that non democratic Monarchist state, which according to Amnesty International has one of the worst human rights records in the world.

The same Saudia Arabia we like, because they are friendly, and have oil.

Did the West try to bring Amin to trial for his atrocities?

Did they frig.

garinda · 30-12-2006, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

No quite right garinda. Many American soldiers have been brought to trial for atrocities committed during both World Wars, as have English and other allied troops, in Korea, Vietnam, Palestine and now Iraq. None of the senior generals though! And I guess that is what you mean – the generals.

Individual solidiers yes, but not for those in ultimate command.

Unless I'm mistaken Saddam didn't personally commit the crimes of which he was convicted.