Saddam Hussein executed

[QueenBee]

Offtop:

I agree with the english part, but what does the last sentence mean? :$

I think "nothing new under the sun", or under something else...

He wouldn't care in the slightest. He didn't show one bit of remorse for his crime while on trial.

I agree... I don't think it would help at all. No point in trying to "heal" him or anything, to heal the damage.. I think there's no chance for that :/

[mir]

as off talking bout justice and history, the nurnbergtrials were allready mentioned....
there are many lessons to be learned indeed.
as of my self i am agains deathpenalty .

But as in 1946 there are more things to take in perspective, sadly....
In those cases it was not meant as punnishment nor as (as some ppl regard it) quick relief for the convicted...
The problem that these people can bring to burden as long as they live, no matter how far away we put em is of far greater impact that the short outbreak of violence that might and most likely will happen concurring the death of this man.
verry sad but true...

In fact it would have been far better if he got killed in a figt during his capture, sounds harsh doesnt it ?
Let me explain: ever since he got to trial several people of the court got killed not to mention what his speeches on stand will have inflicted, the extend of that can only be speculated about but im sure they didnt decrease the killing in iraq

so inshort deatpenalty, its a most impopular measure but sometimes one has to choose between 2 evils.. and which one will be the better one of them we will never know for a choice had to be made and it has been made, we hung him and what ever consequence it will have we will have to do with it.

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by freddie

He wouldn't care in the slightest. He didn't show one bit of remorse for his crime while on trial. He's sure he did the things he did for security. Thousands of victims left behind? Just a price of doing business...

Saddam was not a common criminal to feel remorse. He was a nation's leader. Have you ever heard of a nation's leader showing remorse? He was defiant until the end and that's the way it should be.

Originally Posted by Rachel

I think we are gonna see a lot of violence in the coming few weeks. More innocent people will die. I see no justice in that.

Apart from his own tribe, there isn't a single person in Iraq who would commit violence in the name of Saddam Hussein. But I agree that we're gonna see more voilence. ( not because of Saddam's execution though ).

[freddie]

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

Saddam was not a common criminal to feel remorse. He was a nation's leader. Have you ever heard of a nation's leader showing remorse? He was defiant until the end and that's the way it should be.

There's a difference between leaders and people who abuse power to commit crimes against humanity. I think somewhere deep inside he had to realize there's a distinction between the two. Otherwise people were just pawns on his chessboard of life. In that case he had psychological problems.

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

Apart from his own tribe, there isn't a single person in Iraq who would commit violence in the name of Saddam Hussein. But I agree that we're gonna see more voilence. ( not because of Saddam's execution though ).

Suni Arabs might. They're a minority in Iraq, yet they had huge privileges under Saddam's reign. Then again... sectarian violence would continue no matter what. This is just one of convenient excuses.

[Talyubittu]

Originally Posted by Rachel

But that's just the point, what trouble could he have ever caused in jail? Surely by sentencing him to death it causes more trouble? I think we are gonna see a lot of violence in the coming few weeks. More innocent people will die. I see no justice in that.

Death penalty is a complete disgrace and I'm disgusted with the way Tony Blair has been over this.

He was disgusting. Being in jail or being alive at all for that matter means that he had every change in the world to rise to power again. It's best that he's gone. He can't do anymore harm. You sound so offended at his death. Why don't we just revive Hitler and invite them both to rule the world.

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

Saddam was not a common criminal to feel remorse. He was a nation's leader. Have you ever heard of a nation's leader showing remorse? He was defiant until the end and that's the way it should be..

He was not a nations leader. He wasn't even rightfully in power. He was a dictator. That is not how a nation works. Remorse and murder are two different things as well. Are you telling me that if George Bush or whomever governs whatevery country you live in, were to walk in and murder your family and then tie you up and beat you. You would be happily welcoming this because he is a nations leader? I think not. I'm sure his defiance was ever so frightening while he had a nouse around his neck.

[Rachel]

Originally Posted by Talyubittu

He was disgusting. Being in jail or being alive at all for that matter means that he had every change in the world to rise to power again. It's best that he's gone. He can't do anymore harm. You sound so offended at his death.

He killed a lot of people, yes. But why is it right to kill him?

It doesn't make any sense. You can only be against murdering or you're for it.

[Argos]

Originally Posted by Rachel

It doesn't make any sense. You can only be against murdering or you're for it.

There are not so many people whose opinions in such a case are consistent. Most people I know are
pro abortion and contra death penalty
or
against abortion but pro death penalty.
Doesn't make sense for me: kill or not kill?

If a state kills his own people, for penalty or for whatever reason, it shows the value of human life in this state. At the same time it is a model for the citizens: if the state disregards the right to live, why should the citizens respect other people's lives? The consequences are obvious.

The feelings of victims are somewhat different. There is a subconscious hope, that - if the cause of my suffering is dead, then my soul comes to rest. It doesn't really happen, but for some time the illusion of relief helps these people, but that's certainly not enough reason to kick human rights with feet.

[pestis]

Originally Posted by freddie

He was an extremelly vicious man

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

A vicious, ruthless dictator

Originally Posted by Talyubittu

He was disgusting

Posts like these really make my day...
As a side note, it seems to me that some of you didn't have the raw bliss of living/surviving under dictatorship. 'Cause if you did you'd be aware of certain concepts like 'collective guilt'.

Saddam is gone. So what ?
Ex nihilo nihil.

One more thing that makes this thread really enjoyable : people talkin' 'bout human rights...
First of all, the human being does not have innate rights. It's rights are either invented, either stolen.
Second at all, the human being does not qualify to be rational at all. As such, the shear idea of humans deciding their own rights is rather frightening.

[Argos]

Originally Posted by pestis

Saddam is gone. So what ?
Ex nihilo nihil.

So what? Doesn't really say much to me. I use my latin usually, when I run out of arguments, makes me seem more educated than I really am. If you don't mind, what exactly do you mean?

Originally Posted by pestis

First of all, the human being does not have innate rights. It's rights are either invented, either stolen.

Right, and this for a good reason! They have been 'invented' numerous times during history. This makes civilization different from the "right of the powerful", "the big eats the small". Mankind can only prosper, if there is some balance between the powerful and the weak and poor.

Originally Posted by pestis

Second at all, the human being does not qualify to be rational at all. As such, the shear idea of humans deciding their own rights is rather frightening.

Who else, than we ourselves should give us our rights, elephants, whales, redwood trees or sargassum?

[QueenBee]

Being in jail or being alive at all for that matter means that he had every change in the world to rise to power again.

I agree, because I think there might still have been a chance for him to somehow continue... I mean, not necessarily escaping from jail but I think it wouldn't be the end of him killing innocent people or causing chaos (possibly).

I think it's easy to say that he should live because it's not right to kill a human being... but I also think it's easy to say that if you haven't been affected by what he did. I just feel sorry for all those people who died or who lost someone, if I was them I'd be pretty happy to hear that he's dead...

[pestis]

Originally Posted by pestis

you'd be aware of certain concepts like 'collective guilt'

Originally Posted by Argos

So what?

Well, some backgrounds have this tendency to squeeze arguments outta you...
And if you are lucky enough to outlive them, you may end up contemplating nothing else but your own emptiness.

Originally Posted by Argos

I use my latin usually, when I run out of arguments, makes me seem more educated than I really am

Right...
i. Yes, I ran out of arguments. Happy now ?
ii. No, I'm not a latin-freak.
iii. I'm not educated at all. Nor do I wanna be. Waste of time.
And when the time will come, I don't think that the worms will find an educated man more tasty than others.

Originally Posted by Argos

Mankind can only prosper, if there is some balance between the powerful and the weak and poor

This balance that you speak of is already f*cked up. And it has been so for quite a while...

Originally Posted by Argos

Who else, than we ourselves should give us our rights, elephants, whales, redwood trees or sargassum?

Exactly my point. We are not alone.
Matters like 'human rights' aren't to be decided one way or the other only by our will.

PS. on topic : blame not a man, blame the man.

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by Rachel

He killed a lot of people, yes. But why is it right to kill him?

I'm not aware that he killed anybody. He instructed the killings of thousands but did he actually kill a person with his own hands? That's the difference between a leader/dictator and a common murderer. He might have, he might have not.

What tells us that Bush hasn't instructed the deaths of hundreds of people too ( in the name of his country's security, the common good or whatever )
When they're bombing houses in Iraq and Afghanistan because they have information they hardour Al Qaeda aides, and hey guess what, they get the Al Qaeda aides sometimes what if they also kill dozens of innocent people, women and children - that is considered collateral damage and they don't blink an eye before they go on and do it.

If Hussein was tried and killed for war crimes ( which were premeditated and vicious ) then Bush should at least be tried for war crimes too. Killing innocent people knowing you'll get some bad guys is premeditated too.
Hitler was a butcher and a war criminal, wasn't the bombings of Berlin and Dresden war crimes too and in retaliation? Who was tried for those?
There's no sense of justice when there's war. One does what one has to do. If you are in the side of the victor you're not a war criminal but a war hero.

Originally Posted by pestis

One more thing that makes this thread really enjoyable : people talkin' 'bout human rights...
First of all, the human being does not have innate rights. It's rights are either invented, either stolen.
Second at all, the human being does not qualify to be rational at all. As such, the shear idea of humans deciding their own rights is rather frightening.

As frightening as it is that another human being is deciding my rights ( and my destiny )
I'd rather be the maker of my own destiny, thanks.

[Rachel]

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

I'm not aware that he killed anybody. He instructed the killings of thousands but did he actually kill a person with his own hands? That's the difference between a leader/dictator and a common murderer. He might have, he might have not.

What tells us that Bush hasn't instructed the deaths of hundreds of people too ( in the name of his country's security, the common good or whatever )
When they're bombing houses in Iraq and Afghanistan because they have information they hardour Al Qaeda aides, and hey guess what, they get the Al Qaeda aides sometimes what if they also kill dozens of innocent people, women and children - that is considered collateral damage and they don't blink an eye before they go on and do it.

If Hussein was tried and killed for war crimes ( which were premeditated and vicious ) then Bush should at least be tried for war crimes too. Killing innocent people knowing you'll get some bad guys is premeditated too.
Hitler was a butcher and a war criminal, wasn't the bombings of Berlin and Dresden war crimes too and in retaliation? Who was tried for those?
There's no sense of justice when there's war. One does what one has to do. If you are in the side of the victor you're not a war criminal but a war hero.

Oh I totally agree. One person's cold blooded killer is another person's hero. I'd put Bush in the same bag as Saddam. Actually, I think Bush is worse as he is a lot more dangerous as he has the "moral" upperhand. Aka he is using the power of his country to dictate what is right and what is wrong. There's only one thing he's gonna be remembered for, and that thing is a terrible thing.

[pestis]

Originally Posted by Dr Dark

There's no sense of justice when there's war. One does what one has to do. If you are in the side of the victor you're not a war criminal but a war hero.

Well put, my friend.

[haku]

The Iraqi regime has showed a video of the hanging of two of Hussein's aides, one of the prisoners was even decapitated in the process, which is a nice touch.
Like with the previous execution video, there is no sound, probably to hide the insults and taunting from the spectators that can be heard in the unofficial video. It also seems that both prisoners were hooded against their will, probably for added humiliation.

[freddie]

Witnesses said Barzan and al-Bandar were shaking with fear as they approached the gallows.

Funny thing, this. I always wondered why these manically religious people shake as they're about to face death. If they're really that convinced in realigious dogma it should be a real blessing for them to get rid of this flesh-based existence. Unless they were bullshiting people all along and they really didn't believe shit.

In general I have to reiterate again that I don't condone the death penalty for anyone. I just can't see how people can get personal satisfaction from the fact someone was murdered. Not even the families of slain Kurd victims.