Saddam Husseins Hanging. Your Opinion?

[sebbysteiny]

So we want to rid the world of murderous tyranny, not?

 

So what do we achieve by stooping to the same levels of that which we're trying to eradicate?

 

What is wrong with everybody? This moral relativism is a virus that seems to be corrupting our society to the core.

 

1) The death penalty is bad.

 

2) Brutally murdering hundreds of thousands of your own people and torchering millions including executions infront of family memebers, deliberate mutilation, and the use of chemical weapons against entire towns is far far worse.

 

There can be no comparison between these two except to conclude that we are much better in every way that Saddam was even with the death penalty.

[Tormod]

There can be no comparison between these two except to conclude that we are much better in every way that Saddam was even with the death penalty.

 

I don't understand what you're saying, Sebby.

[Racoon]

If by Iraqi law that his crime, as proven guilty, is punishable by death, then Saddam should face those consequences.

 

And In Iraq, you get hung. :doh:

 

Lets let the lawyers and prisons tax you more to save and protect with security his life when innocent people die and get killed everyday instead?

Considering what he did? Why?

 

I don't buy that then "you're just as bad as they are if you execute him" arguement. He chose to violate the sanctity of what a man in a leadership role should do for his people and country.

[Tormod]

I don't buy that then "you're just as bad as they are if you execute him" arguement.

 

I don't think that's the point. Opposing the death penalty in general has nothing to do with supporting the condemned. It is basically a position used to argue that if killing is illegal, state sanctioned murder must also be illegal.

 

Murder is illegal in the US, yet there is capital punishment. Thus in order to support the death penalty you must accept that murder is okay in certain circumstances.

 

To me, state sanctioned murder is barbarism at the lowest level, regardless of who supports it.

[Cedars]

[rant]

Long live fundamentalism. I assume then that it is okay to call for the death of the current US president as well? He is responsible for countless civilian deaths in Iraq. His father should be on trial as well - he caused the deaths of even more civilians during the first family outage to the Gulf.

 

But that does not count, does it? Because they are both on your side, so these are not crimes. And the deaths happened far from your doorsteps.

[/rant]

 

 

 

 

First, theres a whole bunch of people chanting Death to America, Death to Bush (and you can insert any number of ex-presidents name here). Nothing new there.

 

If the international community wants to put Bush on trial for war crimes, they certainly have that option as I understand it. But Bush isnt the topic of this poll.

 

 

I can see why we put vicious dogs down and dont take the chance that they could maim another. Saddam is nothing more than a vicious dog. He had his chance for 12 years to make it right and he chose not to. His parole was revoked.

[Racoon]

I don't think that's the point. Opposing the death penalty in general has nothing to do with supporting the condemned. It is basically a position used to argue that if killing is illegal, state sanctioned murder must also be illegal.

 

Murder is illegal in the US, yet there is capital punishment. Thus in order to support the death penalty you must accept that murder is okay in certain circumstances.

 

To me, state sanctioned murder is barbarism at the lowest level, regardless of who supports it.

 

 

But that brings me to my main point.

That is their Law. Its Iraqi Law. Not mine, not the USA's, not Norway's, not any other countries.

 

If the Iraqi's want to have a barbaric system of capital punishment, for a very bad man who murdered thousands, then who am I to say they can't have their Justice?

[sebbysteiny]

Murder is illegal in the US, yet there is capital punishment. Thus in order to support the death penalty you must accept that murder is okay in certain circumstances.

 

Mens rea is a legal and completely moral principal which has been accepted in all decent legal systems.

 

Yet for some reason, there seem to be so many people that completely ignore it.

 

Murder is killing with the intent to kill for the sole intention of killing (or cause GBH).

 

Killing with the intention to defend life or property is not murder. Killing with the intention to carry out the justice of the state (if looking at the actions of the executioner), or killing with the intention of enforcing the laws of the land when sanctioned by the courts of the land (if looking at the actions of the state) is fundamentally different from killing with the sole intention of killing.

 

One requires a criminal mind. One does not.

 

The death penalty is wrong, sure. But it is not state sanctioned murder for serious want of mens rea.

[infamous]

I think it is and should be the business of the sovereign Iraqi people, so it doesn't and shouldn't matter what I think. It is my opinion that Saddam does not deserve to live but that doesn't necessarily translate to someone else deserving to kill him.

I happen to agree with C1ay on this question. In the first place, we are asking the Iraqi people to stand up and take control of their nation themselves. Taking this into account, we should step back and allow them to make this critical decision and keep our nose out of it. I fail to understand why we are even arguing the point. What ever happens, we should be glad that we don't have to take responsibility for making another bad decision. Seems we've been accused of making so many such in the past few years it's time we allowed somebody else to take the heat for a while........................Infy

[Tormod]

If the international community wants to put Bush on trial for war crimes, they certainly have that option as I understand it. But Bush isnt the topic of this poll.

 

LOL - that was a cheap cop-out.

 

I can see why we put vicious dogs down and dont take the chance that they could maim another. Saddam is nothing more than a vicious dog. He had his chance for 12 years to make it right and he chose not to. His parole was revoked.

 

And so you claim the right to hang him. Fundamentalism won the day.

[Tormod]

But that brings me to my main point.

That is their Law. Its Iraqi Law. Not mine, not the USA's, not Norway's, not any other countries.

 

If the Iraqi's want to have a barbaric system of capital punishment, for a very bad man who murdered thousands, then who am I to say they can't have their Justice?

 

You are you, with a mind and freedom to speak and think.

 

But your post makes me wonder - Who are your people to send an army because you disagree with the way Iraq was run in the first place, but then refuse to discuss the decisions taken while your guns are still locked and loaded? :doh:

 

Mens rea is a legal and completely moral principal which has been accepted in all decent legal systems.

 

"Completely moral" is pure hogwash and you know it. It is my stand that killing is immoral for any reason, and I am not known for letting philosophy get in the way of my thinking.

 

But why not consider a more well-known thought: The 6th Commandment (5th if you're a Catholic or Lutheran) clearly state, "You shall not kill". Not "you shall not end someone's life against their wish (unless it is okayed by someone)".

 

I take it then that one point of view here is more valid than another?

 

Taking this into account, we should step back and allow them to make this critical decision and keep our nose out of it. I fail to understand why we are even arguing the point.

 

You WHAT? Are you implying that we are not free to have an opinion on the matter?

 

What ever happens, we should be glad that we don't have to take responsibility for making another bad decision.

 

Yes. Let others do the mopping up, eh? :evil:

[Cedars]

LOL - that was a cheap cop-out.

 

 

 

And so you claim the right to hang him. Fundamentalism won the day.

 

Its not my cop-out. Simply put, its the facts as they stand. Write your own president and demand international justice if you see fit. Let me know how far it gets. Just maybe its not my view that is extreme.

 

I didnt claim the right to hang him, the iraq courts did. I am not anti-DP and I will sleep just fine tonight, and the night they hang saddam.

 

I dont buy into the arguement the state lowers itself by inflicting the ultimate punishment on convicted (mass) murderers.

[Tormod]

Its not my cop-out.

 

Yes it is. Nobody claims Bush is on trial here - but the *fact* is that the *reason* why Hussein has been tried and sentenced is because the US has overturned his rule.

 

Simply put, its the facts as they stand. Write your own president and demand international justice if you see fit. Let me know how far it gets. Just maybe its not my view that is extreme.

 

Well, we don't have a president. But our Prime Minister has publicly objected to the sentence and suggested a life sentence instead.

 

I didnt claim the right to hang him, the iraq courts did. I am not anti-DP and I will sleep just fine tonight, and the night they hang saddam.

 

So will I. A lot of people seem to think that being opposed to the death penalty is the same as supporting the condemned.

 

I dont buy into the arguement the state lowers itself by inflicting the ultimate punishment on convicted (mass) murderers.

 

Of course you don't. If you did, you could not support the death penalty. Even I understand that. :doh:

[infamous]

You WHAT? Are you implying that we are not free to have an opinion on the matter?

No sir, all I'm saying is it should be a decision left to the Iraqi people.

Yes. Let others do the mopping up, eh?

I can understand your frustration Tormod, it's turned into a mess. Hopefully, I'll not be personally blamed for decisions made by my government. At present, I think our troops are committed to mopping up. They are dying right along with the Iraqi forces in this conflict. The question before us here is whether or not Sadam should be put to death. My answer would be to let the Iraqi people determine this, it's in their sovereign interest to be soul arbitrator regarding this question................Infy

[Tormod]

The question before us here is whether or not Sadam should be put to death. My answer would be to let the Iraqi people determine this, it's in their sovereign interest to be soul arbitrator regarding this question................Infy

 

Good. Because the thread title specifically says "Your Opinion?" and therefore asks us all for our personal opinion. So asking why it is debated is derailing the issue, my friend.

 

But I'll call it the night now. Good night folks. :doh:

[Edella]

For those arguing that it is up to the Iraqi people to determine Saddam's fate: Would you still hold this position if he (for whatever reason) was found not guilty and set free?

[infamous]

Good. Because the thread title specifically says "Your Opinion?" and therefore asks us all for our personal opinion. So asking why it is debated is derailing the issue, my friend.

Quite right my friend, I stand corrected. I really didn't mean for it to sound as though I felt the question was irrelevant, a poor choice of words on my part.............peace..................Infy

[infamous]

For those arguing that it is up to the Iraqi people to determine Saddam's fate: Would you still hold this position if he (for whatever reason) was found not guilty and set free?

If we truly seek sovereignty for the Iraqi people we should accept their decision on the matter. That is unless we want to make Iraq the 51st state of the union 'just kidding ofcourse'.................Infy