Jump to content

Home

Saddaam Hussein given death sentence

StaffSaberist

By StaffSaberist
in Senate Chambers

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Totenkopf Newbie

Totenkopf

Posted
Posted

Seems to me that the position that the death penalty is barbaric is a bit passe and naive. The idea of a final punishment for certain proscribed actions is not cruel in and of itself. I would agree that there are more humane ways of executing someone than hanging them, but don't buy into the argument that the dp is itself somehow evil. If you wish, on the other hand, to address how it is applied (circumstances leading to), then that is a different story altogether and fit for another thread.

 

As to Saddam, it would be foolish to think that keeping him alive would be any safer than swiftly executing him. From prison he could still try to exert influence or possibly even be broken out of prison. Also, putting SH in charge of Iraq to clean it up would be insane. We'd most likely have to go back in again in 10-12 years (or even sooner). However, the left would certainly shut up about all the torture he'd commit after we left b/c there'd be no political mileage in it for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samuel Dravis Newbie

Samuel Dravis

Posted
Posted

I disagree with the concept that "justice" is somehow equal to retribution, and I wonder how anyone can possibly have the idea that revenge can ever be a good thing. In addition to not being a particularly good punishment - after all, dying does not exactly last a long time - doing the same thing, in effect, that he has done does not exemplify the type of society I would like to be part of. I ask you people who say 'good riddance' - would you kill him yourself? Feel justified enough to do it? Who are you to cast the first proverbial stone?

 

Quite frankly, that sort of thinking that leads to this sentence is alien to me, and I'm glad it is so. What has happened is in the past, and there is no amount of "justified" revenge* that will change that fact.

 

 

 

 

* :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Totenkopf Newbie

Totenkopf

Posted
Posted

Frankly, yeah, I'd have no problem pulling the switch, saying "fire" or whatever was necessary to eliminate the likes of a SH or OBL or etc...Actually, you're incorrect when you compare executing someone guilty of SH's crimes/acts with what he's done. It's a real case of apples and oranges with the only remote similarity being death as part of the equation. Honestly, I don't think that anyone believes that the killing of one person somehow magically undoes whatever crime that person's guilty of in the first place. However, the dp is a deterrent in one very real way, that person will no longer be capable of killing again.

 

However, Sam, what prescription do you have for the problem? Should he be sent to a prison in the US? Maybe share a cell w/Noriega? How do you solve the problem of Saddam? And at what cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Totenkopf Newbie

Totenkopf

Posted
Posted

Actually I got the joke, it was just pretty lame. Point is, there are people who believe that that would be a viable solution. It's usually delivered tongue in cheek with the understanding that SH would merely wipe all all the opposition mercilessly and would so end the insurgerncy. Assuming for the sake of the joke that SH would actually try to clean up such a mess, it would be an unending herculean task. It would also assume that SH had enough of a conscience to care. B/c the premise lacks the last part, it kinda falls flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samuel Dravis Newbie

Samuel Dravis

Posted
Posted
Frankly, yeah, I'd have no problem pulling the switch, saying "fire" or whatever was necessary to eliminate the likes of a SH or OBL or etc...
Then you and I are very different people, and I am very glad I'm not you.

 

Actually, you're incorrect when you compare executing someone guilty of SH's crimes/acts with what he's done. It's a real case of apples and oranges with the only remote similarity being death as part of the equation.
I consider the 'death' part to be a little more significant than a 'remote part of the equation.' I don't see how you can justify killing someone you have in custody when there is nothing they can do to harm anyone else.

 

Honestly, I don't think that anyone believes that the killing of one person somehow magically undoes whatever crime that person's guilty of in the first place. However, the dp is a deterrent in one very real way, that person will no longer be capable of killing again.
So will life in prison. What's your point? Killing's better? Why? Remember that this execution will no doubt absolutely inflame a lot of people. This will not be a deterrence to anyone else either, not that the death penalty ever was. Kim Jong-il is not going to think, "Oh my, they got him, maybe I should mend my dastardly ways!"

 

However, Sam, what prescription do you have for the problem? Should he be sent to a prison in the US? Maybe share a cell w/Noriega? How do you solve the problem of Saddam?
Put him in a hole and keep him there, just like everyone else that is a danger to society. He's not special.

 

And at what cost?
At what cost, you say. Am I somehow to believe that we have suddenly decided to become concerned about how much money it will cost to keep one man alive for maybe twenty years? The Iraq war has cost around $340,055,700,000. Keeping Saddam alive would cost us about one bomb a year (30k). I think we might be able to spare it. I hear the DoD has some cash.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Totenkopf Newbie

Totenkopf

Posted
Posted

Yes, Sam, we are very different and the feeling is mutual.

 

Why should it bother you that someone who would kill, or be responsible for ordering so many deaths, might be executed? Some actions warrant more severe punishments than others. We're not talking lifting a few candybars or boosting a car. Should I take from this that you believe all the Nazis who were hanged after Nuremberg should have instead been left to rot in Spandau prison?

 

I want to say "Duh!" w/regard to your point about inflamed passions b/c we're talking about the middle east. Regardless of SH's final sentence, there will be problems. The problems won't end b/c SH is spared. If he is, it will be to a prison in Iraq, not the US, and that will likely become a lightening rod for increased attacks by sunnis looking to break him out of the klink. If he's spared, it's just as likely that the shia and kurds will be verrry POed and would stir up trouble. SH's fate is a Catch-22. So, as far as I'm concerned, there's no reason not to execute him.

 

As I wasn't addressing the question of deterence w/regard to others, your point is irrelevant. Life in prison is no guarantee he won't get out (ie escape) or that he couldn't cause problems from within jail.

 

As to the whole money thing, it's not a question of whether we've got enough money, but rather if he's worth the expenditure of funds that couldn't be put to better use elsewhere. The DoD might have the cash, but it'd be better spent on ammo and spare parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dagobahn Eagle Newbie

Dagobahn Eagle

Posted
Posted

He has to be executed.

 

Think of it this way: Certain states in the USA executes people for killing one person. Is the US of A capable, from an ethical point of view, to go "kill one person and it's death row. Kill thousands, and it's jail for life"?

 

I would find that even more disgusting.

 

Why should it bother you that someone who would kill, or be responsible for ordering so many deaths, might be executed?
It should bother him for the same reason it bothers me that the Guantánamo Bay detainees, a lot of which may be cold-blooded murderers, are being tortured.

 

They're human beings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ET Warrior Newbie

ET Warrior

Posted
Posted

Perhaps there are some of us who think the fact that the United States utilizes capital punishment is horrific and immoral.

 

there's no reason not to execute him.
Assuming you have no moral qualms against murder.

Should I take from this that you believe all the Nazis who were hanged after Nuremberg should have instead been left to rot in Spandau Prison?
Yes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
StaffSaberist Newbie

StaffSaberist

Posted
  • Author
Posted

:lol: @ the above.

 

Capital punishment is indeed distasteful, but we're not exactly in charge, here. We Americans made a big stink over the "using the Iraqis to put Saddam on trial" as a publicity stunt. we have to accept the full ramifications of that. They're free to arse-rape him if they sentence him that way (though we certianly would throw a fit if they did).

 

All things considered, if he has to die, then I'd rather we do it. Hanging, I hear, if not done correctly, is extremely painful. At least the needle has no pain to it. Or, again, as I've been told. I'm not one to want to experience that to find out, because I'd be dead and all, but I've no reason not to believe there's no pain to the needle. After all, it's the 21st century, and we've got to have learned how to do something in that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mace MacLeod Newbie

Mace MacLeod

Posted
Posted

If people have problems with the Death Penalty morally, just remember that in Iraq and many other places around the world, it's considered perfectly reasonable and justifiable traditional punishment, especially for someone convicted of the crimes Saddam just got nailed for. Especially in Muslim countires. Despite the fact that America's long friendship with Saddam and the fact they armed him with the same sort of chemical weapons they supposedly invaded the place to go looking for were neatly swept under the rug, he was tried, found guilty and sentenced in Iraq by Iraqis. Amoral, cruel, barbaric or not, they've made their choice and it's nobody's business but the Iraqis what to do with him. Besides, isn't this what the invasion was about? Oh, wait, no, it was WMDs looming ominously over the US and its allies. Oh, wait, no, it was 9/11. Oh, wait, no...well, whatever it was for, Saddam still was a very naughty man and there are a lot more people more deserving of our sympathies.

 

As for the reaction from Iraqis themselves, it's been pretty much exactly what the US was expecting (unlike just about everything else over there). The Shiites are happy, and the Sunnis are pissed off. Spare Saddam, and you'd get the reverse. There's no solution to the situation that isn't going to make someone unhappy, but at least with SH dead, his influence can finally end and the country can get on with the rest of its life. Besides, Death by Hanging is pretty much both painless and instantaneous when done properly. Body weight X dropped from height Y with rope properly placed = neck snapped at 2nd or 3rd cervical vertebrae = dead before the nerve impulses can ever reach the brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Totenkopf Newbie

Totenkopf

Posted
Posted

Perhaps some of you would like to more clearly define what constitutes murder. Is it merely killing someone? If so, then such things as self defence and abortion can be construed, fairly, as murder also. One of the definitions of murder is that it is an unlawful killing. If the laws of the land permit killing one for committing heinous acts, then such execution is hardly murder. If, on the other hand, the state were to just randomly round up people and hang them for their color or gender, that could be fairly deemed murderous. Even in the US, where capital punishment is permissible, the act is neither swift nor irreversible. The states's governor always has the final say about whether to follow through or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...