Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:08 pm

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 32):

So you don't think he was guilty?

I never ever said that.

Quoting Gunships (Reply 33):
I guess this didn't apply to the men, women, and children who were tortured and/or gassed to death over the span of a quarter century.

Apply to every single person on earth.
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
Springbok747
Posts: 3993
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:19 pm

Quoting MIAMIx707 (Reply 49):
Then you are really missing the point. Good thing you are not president, with that dictator mindset.

Well..the whole trial was a farce. Do you really think they would have found Saddam not guilty? So..what was the point of this trail? Half the world doesn't believe it was fair anyway.

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thre...t=0&&&edition=2&ttl=20061231041712
אני תומך בישראל
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:26 pm

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 51):
Well..the whole trial was a farce. Do you really think they would have found Saddam not guilty? So..what was the point of this trail? Half the world doesn't believe it was fair anyway.

So they shouldn't have had the trial?
What's fair is fair.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:29 pm

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 50):
I never ever said that

Well if you think he is guilty why does it surprise you that he was convicted? Isn't that the logical result? Isn't that what civilization deserves?

I'm really puzzled by your statement.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:30 pm

Quoting Gunships (Reply 33):
I guess this didn't apply to the men, women, and children who were tortured and/or gassed to death over the span of a quarter century.

Jean Kirkpatrick once said: " * U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Jeane Kirkpatrick criticised the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as being the opposite of human rights, arguing that certain economic rights cannot be human rights, for they must be provided by others through forceful extraction, i.e. taxation, and they negate other peoples' inalienable rights.Kirkpatrick called the Declaration "a letter to Santa Claus", saying "Neither nature, experience, nor probability informs these lists of 'entitlements', which are subject to no constraints except those of the mind and appetite of their authors."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Of course I don't agree with that.
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:34 pm

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 53):
Isn't that the logical result?

The death penalty ? NO. Life in prison, YES.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 53):
Well if you think he is guilty why does it surprise you that he was convicted?

I'm not suprise that he was convicted. Once again: I never ever said that. I'm just against the death penalty. Got it?
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:38 pm

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 54):
Kirkpatrick called the Declaration "a letter to Santa Claus", saying "Neither nature, experience, nor probability informs these lists of 'entitlements', which are subject to no constraints except those of the mind and appetite of their authors."

That's probably true. The appetite is infinite, but the means to satiate them are not.

I think that classical economists in the Malthusian tradition would agree.

Resources are finite, and you can't get something from nothing. Only the Creator can create, ex nihilo.

However....

The world does offer an amendment to the worst of "the dismal science", and that, I believe, is as follows:

1. As energy efficiency and distributive rationality increase, so may opportunity. 2. Poverty exists in a inverse relationship to opportunity that is exercised. 3. The exercise of opportunity exists only where there is freedom. Therefore, 4. As energy efficiency, distributive rationality, and freedom increase, poverty tends to decrease.

(Mind you, there is a limit; infinite needs will never be met by finite resources, no matter how effectively they are processed.)

How does this relate to the Universal Declaration?

I think it tends to illustrate that the Declaration is still aspirational more than anything else. Energy efficiency, distributive rationality, opportunity, and freedom are still at a premium in most places in the world -- even in the most developed of the industrialized world.

The Declaration, thus, is nothing more or less the "Heaven" in the classic Shakespearean phrase: "Our reach should exceed our grasp, or else what is Heaven for?"

But, I think we can all agree, none of us live in Heaven.

[Edited 2006-12-31 05:45:58]
What's fair is fair.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:54 pm

Quoting MIAMIx707 (Reply 20):

However I would have thought a lethal injection would have been a better example.

Angel Nieves Díaz lasted 34 minutes to be dead... But, who cares ?

http://www.diariodeavisos.com/content/149038/template/19/

[link in Spanish]
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:49 pm

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 57):
Angel Nieves Díaz lasted 34 minutes to be dead...

Diseased brains take longer to die than normal ones. Same thing applies to drugged up and burned out brains.

Mark
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:55 pm

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 51):
Well..the whole trial was a farce. Do you really think they would have found Saddam not guilty? So..what was the point of this trail? Half the world doesn't believe it was fair anyway.

To show Saddam and the people of Iraq that people CAN have a chance at a fair trial...unlike what Saddam gave many people who died under his wrath.
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
AirWillie6475
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:57 pm

Quoting EZEIZA (Thread starter):
So Saddam is dead. Good or bad, he is now gone for good. But was there really a need to execute him? What was the point? Was it not better to at least wait and have an international tribunal make a decision and most of all keep him locked up for life? The risks of this guy becoming a martyr are too big. Am I the only one thinking this? I just have a bad feeling about this ....

Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla.... Just another case of someone against the death penalty. They're even willing to protect animals like Sadam.
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:01 pm

Here, this is the kind of stuff Saddam would pull

Watch this move everyone!!! (found in link below)
http://www.aei.org/events/eventID.844,filter.all/event_detail.asp

For the last 30 years, Iraqis inside Iraq had little knowledge of the full extent of Saddam Hussein's oppressive tactics. Many Iraqis who have documented his regime's history argue that Coalition authorities have not done enough to make this history known to the Iraqi people, and proponents of more stringent de-Baathification argue that until this education is completed, Saddam-era officials cannot be trusted with the rule of the new state.

Much of the recent controversy surrounding Abu Ghraib has made only vague reference to the prison's nightmarish past. Under Saddam Hussein, some thirty thousand people were executed there, and countless more were tortured and mutilated, returning to Iraqi society as visible evidence of the brutality of Baathist rule instead of being lost to the anonymity of mass graves.

Seven of these victims were Baghdadi merchants whose right hands were amputated and presented to Saddam as proof of their punishment. They have recently received medical attention in the United States, and now have the use of modern prosthetic hands. Four of these victims will speak of their experiences before returning to Iraq. In addition to their presentations, an unedited video documenting acts of torture during Saddam's reign will be shown, and our Iraqi guests will identify persons conducting the torture who hold office in Iraq today.


10:15 a.m.
Registration

10:30
Panelists:
Five Saddam-era torture victims


Commentator:
Richard Perle, AEI


Moderator:
Michael A. Ledeen, AEI

12:30 p.m.
Adjournment
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
Halcyon
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:47 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:51 pm

He murdered tons of people and was belligerent until the very end. Sick people like this are simply full of hate, and no amount of love or going soft on them will make them love. Death is the only true solution, IMHO.

Perhaps if he had not killed so many he would have received a "better" trial.

Take care,
Lucas
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:01 pm

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 40):
Again, he would have suffered more being in prison.

Wait a minute, those of you opposed to the 'barbarity' of the death penalty advocate that the prisioner is better off suffering for a long time in prison...now that is barbaric.

At least Saddam didn't suffer that long.

I call the whole thing about death or life in prison pretty even.
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:45 pm

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 41):
And yet, as I've noted, most people on death row would gladly "suffer" life imprisonment than be executed. Why is this?



Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 43):
If not, then isn't your opposition to the death penalty -- in reality -- based on the idea that it is allegedly "cruel and unusual", rather than "too good" for the prisoner?

I'm not necessarily against the death penalty. I just pointed out the dangers of this particular case. In fact, I think life in prison is very cruel, and that is what I think people like Saddam deserve. I could care less about him or his feelings, I was just saying that killing him could make things worse.

Quoting MIAMIx707 (Reply 47):
Some people just have to say something to criticize. I don't know if he would still feel so bad for Saddam if he had friend or family tortured/gassed by Saddam Hussein.

please read above

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 60):
Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla.... Just another case of someone against the death penalty. They're even willing to protect animals like Sadam.

same goes for you, read above. Besides, at what point has anyone said that Saddam deserves any protection? And btw, your post is pretty distrubing because you are ironically implying that whoever has a different view than your own is just full of "bla bla bla". Thank you for enlightining us with such a great post.
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
 
AirWillie6475
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:32 pm

Then please put on the original thread that you aren't against the death penalty because some might get the wrong impression. I don't believe in cruelty by life in prison, the idea that somehow one might suffer much more than being killed just doesn't make any sense. Why do you think murderes plead with the courts to keep them alive in death penalty cases? The idea that you will be killed is much more horrendous than getting a life sentence, this was very obvious in Saddams face yestereday. In fact if it was up to me they wouldn't put a set date on an executioun, just a time table so they wouldn't know when they'll lose their lives. Talk about mental torture.
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:12 pm

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 64):
I'm not necessarily against the death penalty. I just pointed out the dangers of this particular case. In fact, I think life in prison is very cruel, and that is what I think people like Saddam deserve. I could care less about him or his feelings, I was just saying that killing him could make things worse.

Thank you for the clarification, EZEIZA. Certainly the question of capital punishment is a very emotional one in any case, and it is all too easy to believe that people must unreservedly fall into one camp or another. My questions were intended to elicit some degree of clarity on the reasoning process behind your and others' statements and should not be taken to require that anyone acknowledge either categorical support or opposition to it.

My own personal feeling is that capital punishment should be used only on the rarest of occasions limited, in part, only to the most horrific of crimes similar to those to which its use is limited in most jurisdictions here in the United States, and, further, only to the clearest cases of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I would even entertain the raising of the standard of proof higher than "reasonable doubt", although the formula for this has not been determined in my mind. Perhaps the standard of proof necessary for the imposition of the death penalty should be, "clearly, convincingly, and unconditionally without any reasonable doubt and without any possible reservation", or something similar, rather than merely "beyond a reasonable doubt". Perhaps, further, the only crimes, within the category mentioned above, which should be capital penalty-eligible should be those that "in their quantity, savagery, atrocity and severity, so greatly offend the human sensibility as to warrant the imposition of death".

My concern with the death penalty also includes, in part, that, once it is carried out, it is truly and fundamentally irreversible, in any case of subsequently determined error, in a manner unlike any other penalty. One cannot bring back the dead even after they are proved, through new evidence or proceedings, to be innocent.

For example, considering the hypothetical in which there is a horrific, but unwitnessed, murder that was committed as to which, at trial, there is sufficient evidence admitted at trial held in the regular course that shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then the maximum penalty for that might be life in prison without the possibility of parole. However, if there is also sufficient admissible videotape and DNA evidence, the authenticity, genuineness and reliability of which is unquestioned, that points directly at the suspect, and presuming that the jury agrees on these characteristics of the evidence, then one might be well advised to permit the consideration of the imposition of the death penalty in that case. The mechanics of a dual-tier (life in prison versus capital punishment) determination is suggested in the existence of the two-stage jury consideration of guilt and penalty that already exists in current capital cases.

[Edited 2006-12-31 12:37:18]
What's fair is fair.
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:30 pm

Finally, I am concerned regarding the possible existence of those cases in the United States that appear to hold that capital cases might not be able to be reversed on appeal even if there is a reasonable showing that the appellant-defendant is not actually guilty of the crime for which the penalty was imposed. This appears to be possible where, for example, a statutory deadline is blown and the defendant is unable for that reason to any longer contest his guilt. For reasons of due process, it seems to me highly troubling, where there is acknowledgedly a reasonable chance shown by post-trial evidence or proceedings that the defendant is not actually guilty, to impose any technical procedural bar on the lifting of that penalty.

I have not read any of these cases and have heard of them only second-hand. If they exist, then they seem to warrant serious legislative consideration of their merits with a view toward possibly nullifying their effect.

[Edited 2006-12-31 12:34:38]
What's fair is fair.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13899
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:55 pm

From a German point of view:

I compare the Sadam trial to the first Nuremberg trial back in 1945-46, which ended in capital punishment for ten of the defendants.

Same as the Nazi leaders, Saddam Hussein was no ordinary criminal. He was the leader of a once powerfull, armed, political movement. He still has followers, who would have liked to see him back in power. His opposition in Irag was still afraid that eventuslly his movement would come back to power and take revenge (possibly after a withdrawal of the British and Americans).
Neo-Nazis in Germany also have been manufacturing list of people to be executed after a take-over. This is also why the execution had to be published, so that everybody could see that Saddam is definitely not coming back. The same was done after the Nuremberg trials. The bodies of the executed criminals were photographed, with the ropes still around their necks, and the pictures published in newspapers.

In both cases it was hard, if not impossible, to find totally impartial judges (due to widespread publications of evidence of the crimes before the trials and due to the necessity that the criminal political movementhad first to be defeated by military means and therefore the judges were directly connected to the winning forces). Therefore one can argue about the legetimacy of the court.

Even though since 1945 the Nazi movement in Germany is strictly a very small, though still dangerous, minority, e.g. Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy until he flew to England in 1941, sentenced to life, became a martyr for neo-Nazis, until he died in 1987 (probably committed suicide), who tried to get him out of the Allied military prison, where he was kept. If he had been in a German prison, he would probably have been pardoned at some time, but since the prison was under the joint jurisdiction of the American, British, French and Soviet forces, he had to serve his sentence in full

I assume that, if Saddam Hussein would have staid alive in an Iraqi prison, he would have been a rallying point for the remaining radical Baathists.

Same as the executed Nazi war criminals, his remains will be buried in a secret location, so that the place can not become a shrine (the executedd Nazi leaders were cremated right after the execution and the ashed dumped into a Bavarian river at a still secret location. Hitler's, Eva Braun's and the Goebeels family's remains were at first kept in KGB storage, but in the 1960s cremated (the improvised cremation by German soldiers following their suicides in 1945 (and the murder of the Goebbels children by their parents) was not fully successfull) again and again the ashes dumped in some East German river.

An option would have been to exile Saddam Hussein to some remote spot outside the Middle East, but it should have been under hard conditions, e.g. a prison island ijn the middle of nowhere, so that the population would not get the idea that Saddam would just be following the paths of other exiled dictators, like Idi Amin, Mobutu or Bokassa, who spent the rest of their lives in luxury living of the money they had stolen from their people.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:05 pm

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 66):
Perhaps, further, the only crimes, within the category mentioned above, which should be capital penalty-eligible should be those that "in their quantity, savagery, atrocity and severity, so greatly offend the human sensibility as to warrant the imposition of death".

A few further comments, and particularly on the proposed language, above:

Upon reflection, there is the possibility that the phrase, "in their quantity, savagery, atrocity, and severity" might be interpreted so as rule out the imposition of the death penalty in cases where -- for example -- only one person was killed by the suspect. For substantive reasons, I do not believe that this interpretation should be allowed. Therefore, any such formulation would have to be accompanied by language that states, for example, that the absence of the above factors, whether alone or in combination, shall not be presumed to conclusively bar the imposition of the penalty, that the presence of any factor in any individual case may compensate by degree for the absence of any others, and that all such factors must be considered in aggregate.

_____________________________

To MDEngineer11: I thank you for your thoughtful comments. I completely agree with your view that certain issues relating to the trial of Saddam Hussein and the imposition of the death penalty against him are in many ways analogous to those that surrounded the trials of Nazi suspects. I think that it will be most worthwhile to read what future historians with the unique benefit of hindsight will have to say in this regard.

[Edited 2006-12-31 13:07:23]
What's fair is fair.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13899
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:15 pm

Another similarity to the Nuremberg trials:

Saddam made the same mistake as the Nazis: He left documented proof of his crimes. Much of the evidence, same as in 1945, were orders signed by him and even a video tape after the attempt was made to kill him in the Shiite village, where he is personally shown to give orders to arrest all men present and to interrogate them. An interrogation of prisoners back usually lead to their death by torture.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
User avatar
Braybuddy
Posts: 6928
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:14 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:49 pm

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13):
So the suggestion that my buddies and I are responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis is insulting, and completely ignorant of reality.

I don't read that into Alaskaqantas's post, UH60. While Saddam was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis, he didn't kill them himself, although he was ruthless and known to have personally killed people.

I think Alaskaqantas was pointing out the analogy between Saddam and the current US administration.

US soldiers have a thankless job in Iraq, and President Bush is responsible for that.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:04 pm

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 58):
Diseased brains take longer to die than normal ones. Same thing applies to drugged up and burned out brains.

Are you talking about the idiot who wrongly applied the first lethal injection?
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 71):
I don't read that into Alaskaqantas's post, UH60. While Saddam was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis, he didn't kill them himself, although he was ruthless and known to have personally killed people.

I think Alaskaqantas was pointing out the analogy between Saddam and the current US administration.

I haven't taken the trouble to read your particular exchange in this thread, but I want to make something quite clear: Any comparison between President Bush, who acted with no malice toward anyone, and who acted, by contrast, in the service of our nation, and Saddam Hussein, who is said to have intentionally and ruthlessly murdered, and tortured, and destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of those who merely opposed him, seems to me to ignore the most basic of moral tenets.

Whether Saddam Hussein personally executed hundreds of thousands is irrelevant. Men are judged not merely by what they do with their hands, but also by what they have forced others to do under threat of death or other grievous harm, or through similar evil means or for gravely pernicious and indefensible motives.

Both Churchill and Hitler sent men to their deaths, and yet their roles in life are not, by any means, comparable.

Let us not be blind to the moral reality surrounding those who have lead their respective nations or, in the case of Saddam Hussein, who have imposed their will on a terrified and oppressed people. The language of moral equivalence runs cold where it meets with the judgment of history.

[Edited 2006-12-31 15:18:41]
What's fair is fair.
 
User avatar
Braybuddy
Posts: 6928
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:14 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:29 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 73):
Any comparison between President Bush, who acted with no malice toward anyone, and who acted, by contrast, in the service of our nation, and Saddam Hussein, who is said to have intentionally and ruthlessly murdered, and tortured, and destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of those who merely opposed him, seems to me to ignore the most basic of moral tenets.

What was the service to the American nation by invading Iraq?
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:16 am

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 55):
I'm just against the death penalty. Got it?

Okay, no need to shout. I was just trying to get you to explain what you meant by this statement:

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 30):
Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 28):
The whole Saddam trial was a joke.

Agreed. A total charade.

And you have still not explained it. Just because YOU do not approve of the death penalty does not mean that the entire trial was "a total charade" does it? Do your personal beliefs somehow influence the validity of court procedure halfway around the world from you? Does your opposition to the death penalty make liars of the witnesses against Saddam?

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 55):
The death penalty ? NO. Life in prison, YES.

Sorry this choice wasn't even under discussion. I asked only about conviction and not the sentence.

But since you have further explained that you want him to spend the rest of his life in prison let me ask you a few questions.

Oh wait, I already asked them in another thread and NOBODY has bothered to address them. As usual.

Here they are:
I am not lusting for his blood to be spilled, nor would I deign to piss on him if he were on fire, but how about a little discussion of the consequences of NOT killing him.


• Does he have supporters?

• Would they try to get him out of prison by force?

• Would they try to get him out of prison by extortion.

• In what country could he be imprisoned? Don't just say "the USA" because while we did depose him, we did not single-handedly create him.

• At whose expense should he be housed? Do we put the financial burden on the poor people of Iraq?


• How do we protect innocent people who might be kidnaped as ransom for him?

• If there would be any movement to free him, who will die and are their lives worth less than his?

• If some Iraqis will resort to violence in response to his death, would these same Iraqis swear off all violence if he lives?

• If these same Iraqis are going to murder people anyway, can't we just take "reprisals" off the list of reasons NOT to kill him? After all, they are going to be murderers anyway so it really has nothing to do with him.


I think these are serious questions and those in favor of continuing to pollute the Earth with his shadow could well be expected to answer them.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
peterk
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 1:17 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:24 am

So, what does "justice" mean -- nowadays?

Well, according to the anti death penalty-speakers a criminal like Saddam Hussein gets only deprived from one of his human rights: Personal freedom. So it's nothing more than isolation from society and living at a lower -- not low! -- standard in prison (lower than an average employed western world citizen, but a much higher standard than in e.g. Iraq etc, etc...)!

(A personal note: I more and more tend to perceive isolation from society as a mercy - and not a punishment!)

So "justice" isn't even hardly a gentle slap on the butt of such a criminal (well, and not even that -- in theory)!

So what is the sense of this kind of justice, if we treat all criminals the same, who exaggerated their criminal record beyond the boundary of killing and torturing more than "just" one man, by simply giving life sentence to all of them?

[Edited 2006-12-31 18:27:12]
Something perfect can only get worse
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:26 am

I just realized that you are the one who posted this:

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 16):
Universal Declaration of Human Rights

And this:

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 50):
Apply to every single person on earth.

Well allow me to introduce myself. I'm the guy who said this:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 35):
Except Darfur.

Except Darfur.
Except Darfur.
Except Darfur.

Do you have any idea how repugnant a self-professed "concern for human rights" and "objection to killing" becomes when it places a man like Saddam Hussein above the four hundred thousand or so of Darfur?

And there is no point in trying to claim otherwise. Your protestations of the killing of Saddam Hussein outweighing any professed indignation over Darfur are a matter of record in the archives of this site.

Is your objection to killing reserved only for murderers or do you care about the innocent?

That was a serious question, not a taunt.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:05 am

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 65):
The idea that you will be killed is much more horrendous than getting a life sentence, this was very obvious in Saddams face yestereday

I agree this on the "normal" criminals, but I'm not so sure with Saddam's case. This is a person that for many years has been surrounded by all the wealth and impunity in the world. Suddenly having someone like him face the idea of being for the rest of his life in a 2x2 cell, being treated like crap and having to take a shit in front of other people, I think that he would suffer this more than the average murderer.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 66):
For example, considering the hypothetical in which there is a horrific, but unwitnessed, murder that was committed as to which, at trial, there is sufficient evidence admitted at trial held in the regular course that shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then the maximum penalty for that might be life in prison without the possibility of parole. However, if there is also sufficient admissible videotape and DNA evidence, the authenticity, genuineness and reliability of which is unquestioned, that points directly at the suspect, and presuming that the jury agrees on these characteristics of the evidence, then one might be well advised to permit the consideration of the imposition of the death penalty in that case.

I agree, but even here there are some punishments that I think will be more effective than the death penalty, depending of the case. Especially for sexual offenders. Call me primitive, but a rapist should niot be senteced to death, but should be castrated and kept in jail for the rest of his life. I think these sort of animals will suffer more without their "weapons" than dead. I know, this is probably very cruel, but rape (even worse if it is with minors) is a crime that makes me sick. I can't even imagine what I would do to one of them If I caught them.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 73):
but I want to make something quite clear: Any comparison between President Bush, who acted with no malice toward anyone, and who acted, by contrast, in the service of our nation

Bush and Saddam can't be compared, that's for sure, but I don't believe Bush acts in the interest of the USA, but rather in the interest of himself and his circle of business. But honestly, this should be part of another thread  Smile

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 75):
And you have still not explained it. Just because YOU do not approve of the death penalty does not mean that the entire trial was "a total charade" does it?

The trial was a charade, regardless of being for or against the death penalty. I'm not saying he was not guilty, but as I mentioned earlier, a trial in an international tribunal would have been more transparent, and the result would have been the same.
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:14 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 78):
being treated like crap and having to take a shit in front of other people

Come on now! You know damn well that his treatment would inflame Arab/Muslim anger against the west no matter who imprisons him or how luxurious his suite of cells.

People have already bitched about his being publicly de-loused.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:27 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 78):
I'm not saying he was not guilty, but as I mentioned earlier, a trial in an international tribunal would have been more transparent, and the result would have been the same.

When you say the trial was a "charade" you are not comparing it with another - presumably better - option. You are declaring that the procedure itself, the laws under which it was conducted, the persons presiding over it, the rules of evidence and that sort of thing are WITHOUT MERIT on their own. Not that they are not as good as some other standard, but that they were not capable of producing a fair result.

So far not one person here has proved such a statement.

I too might have some doubts as to the procedure he faced but calling it a "charade" and other similar words is disrespectful to the very brave people who are trying to create a new nation out of the chaos of war and religious unrest bordering on civil war.

I have seen many instances of good and honorable judges making a ruling with which they disapproved but which was the only one possible under the law. I have come to believe that for the most part judges are honorable men and women who can rise above their own personal prejudices and make rulings according the the laws that have been handed down to them. Personally I don't think this honor resides only in the judges in MY OWN country. I have faith in others.

For this reason it offends me to see people make blanket accusations toward the Iraqi court without backing it up. In another thread someone from Europe went so far as to state categorically that the fact that Saddam's judge was a Kurd meant he could not rise above his personal feelings and be impartial. I'd like to give them more credit than that. If I'm wrong there is not much hope for civilization.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:25 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 80):
For this reason it offends me to see people make blanket accusations toward the Iraqi court without backing it up. In another thread someone from Europe went so far as to state categorically that the fact that Saddam's judge was a Kurd meant he could not rise above his personal feelings and be impartial. I'd like to give them more credit than that. If I'm wrong there is not much hope for civilization.

It's not a matter of hope for civilization, but a matter of logic. The people that judged Saddam can in no way be 100% partial towards the figure that until 3 years ago ruled them. There will obviously be sentiments towards Saddam, in favour or against, but as long as there are sentiments, then it is hard to believe that the tiral was completely unbiased. It's only human I guess. I believe myself to be a good, fair guy, but if I would have suffered under Saddam, or would have liked living under Saddam, then I would not be in a position of fairly judging him. Not so soon at least.
Again, an international tribunal would be less influenced by sentiments, and since we all know Saddam was a brutal dictator, the result would have been the same, but with less suspicion upon the judges.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 79):
Come on now! You know damn well that his treatment would inflame Arab/Muslim anger against the west no matter who imprisons him or how luxurious his suite of cells.

Not if he's imprisoned in a cell in Iraq. He would be another prisoner treated like other prisoners. Why should this inflame Arab anger?
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:53 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 77):

Except Darfur.
Except Darfur.
Except Darfur.

No need to shout !

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 75):

And you have still not explained it.

Do I have to explain every single of my arguments? No Sir, I don't have to explain anything. But if the answer is YES, you also have to do the same. EZEIZA said "The trial was a charade, regardless of being for or against the death penalty. I'm not saying he was not guilty, but as I mentioned earlier, a trial in an international tribunal would have been more transparent, and the result would have been the same." I agree with him.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 77):

Is your objection to killing reserved only for murderers or do you care about the innocent?

I do care about LIFE no matter who he/she is. I consider as bad as Hussein, the people who kill innocent civilians in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, etc. as other tyrants did it [and still do it].
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:03 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 81):
Not if he's imprisoned in a cell in Iraq.

You know damn well that no prison in Iraq could hold him without substantial military backup. Throw him in Abu Ghraib, US troops come home, he'd be back on his throne in three weeks and really pissed off. If he is alive there will be assaults on the prison and kidnapings for extortion in attempts to free him. Now if the argument against killing him is "thou shalt not kill" then why are you so eager to condemn to death some of the good and decent people who wil be tasked with guarding him.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 81):
He would be another prisoner treated like other prisoners.

Fat frapping chance!

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 81):
Why should this inflame Arab anger?

You DO get the world news where you live don't you? We already have half the world's Muslims and all of Europe's liberals accusing Iraq's new government of being nothing more than a division of Halliburton or the US Defense Department. You should not have even had to ask such a question.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:20 am

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 82):
No need to shout !

touché  Smile

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 82):
Do I have to explain every single of my arguments?

Have to? No. If you wish ever to be taken seriously, you certainly should be able to.

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 82):
I do care about LIFE no matter who he/she is.

No you don't. Not really. Those are just pretty words but not the slightest bit sincere. Let me show you why.

I state, flat-out that you, TACAA320 care more about the execution of Saddam Hussein than you do the 400,000 dead in Darfur. It is evident in your indignation over his execution and your silence and even sidestepping questions about the dead and, more importantly, the soon-to-be-dead of Darfur. You have posted more posts, typed more words about Saddam than about Darfur. 1 is more important than 400,000

You even post a piece of idealistic tripe from the UN about "universal human rights" in defense of the life of Saddam Hussein - one of the worst violators of those rights in recent memory. But you refuse to engage on my point that the UN is pointless and should be abolished unless they do something this very week about Darfur. Darfur! I mean what the hell do we need a UN for if they will not GO TO WAR if needed to protect these people. Like your arguments, their declaration rings false in the face of lack of any meaningful action.

We all have a limited amount of horsepower, of assets and resources to throw toward our principles. I find it appalling that you would squander yours on Saddam Hussein. You would be willing to kill other innocent people in the future in the service of protecting him in a prison.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:25 am

S C H E D U L E S





Schedule 1

THE ARTICLES
PART I
THE CONVENTION

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
ARTICLE 2
RIGHT TO LIFE
1. Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.

2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:



(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;



(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;



(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

ARTICLE 3
PROHIBITION OF TORTURE
No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
ARTICLE 4
PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY AND FORCED LABOUR
1. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.

3. For the purpose of this Article the term "forced or compulsory labour" shall not include:



(a) any work required to be done in the ordinary course of detention imposed according to the provisions of Article 5 of this Convention or during conditional release from such detention;



(b) any service of a military character or, in case of conscientious objectors in countries where they are recognised, service exacted instead of compulsory military service;



(c) any service exacted in case of an emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of the community;



(d) any work or service which forms part of normal civic obligations.

ARTICLE 5
RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY
1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:



(a) the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;



(b) the lawful arrest or detention of a person for non-compliance with the lawful order of a court or in order to secure the fulfilment of any obligation prescribed by law;



(c) the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;



(d) the detention of a minor by lawful order for the purpose of educational supervision or his lawful detention for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority;



(e) the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts or vagrants;



(f) the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.

2. Everyone who is arrested shall be informed promptly, in a language which he understands, of the reasons for his arrest and of any charge against him.

3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1(c) of this Article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial.

4. Everyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedily by a court and his release ordered if the detention is not lawful.

5. Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of this Article shall have an enforceable right to compensation.

ARTICLE 6
RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL
1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:



(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;



(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;



(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;



(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;



(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

ARTICLE 7
NO PUNISHMENT WITHOUT LAW
1. No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed.

2. This Article shall not prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations.

ARTICLE 8
RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others....

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/80042--d.htm
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:28 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 81):
The people that judged Saddam can in no way be 100% partial towards the figure that until 3 years ago ruled them.

Amazing how you can post some of my own words but disregard the explanation that was in the same post. Here it is again:

Judges, even though human, with human likes and dislikes, make their rulings based on the laws before them and the rules for their proceedings. In other words they put their human prejudices aside.

I knew a judge and knew for a fact that he personally did not like a particular race. I also saw him rule in favor of persons of that race any number of times - based on what the LAW said. Having watched the Charlie Manson trial I'm pretty sure Judge Charles K. Older disliked Manson and disapproved of his continued existence. I'm also pretty sure that Manson got a very fair trial, especially since he himself disrupted it constantly, and in the end was not sentenced to death.

Now, are you saying that Iraqis are unable to do that?
Now, are you saying that Kurds are unable to do that?
Now, are you saying that Shia are unable to do that?

What are you saying. That these ethnicities are flawed? Defective as human beings?

Why do you say they could not give fair verdict?
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:39 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 84):
I state, flat-out that you, TACAA320 care more about the execution of Saddam Hussein than you do the 400,000 dead in Darfur.

How do you know that ?

Just only because what I said in this thread ? In such case many of us are guilty [guilty of what ?].

Don't judge me if you don't want to be judged !

I'm not only concern about Darfur's people, but for the 100.000 civilians dead in Iraq: " One of the first attempts to independently estimate the loss of civilian life from the Iraqi war has concluded that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians may have died because of the U.S. invasion."

And I didn't say so, was the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...icles/A7967-2004Oct28.html
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:50 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 83):
You DO get the world news where you live don't you?

Yes, Slam, and stop implying that anyone that does not agree with you is stupid. And i stand to what I said, if Saddam is in prison in an Arab/Muslim prison, who you say will get inflamed if he satys locked, nothing should happen as long as its Iraqis that are imprisoning him.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 86):
What are you saying. That these ethnicities are flawed? Defective as human beings?

No, far from that, in fact I am saying they are human, and if you would care to read what I wrote, i also said that I would not have been able to do it myself. It's like judging a family member who is a criminal. Could you honestly say that a son could judge a father for example, no matter how horrendous the crimes? Would it not be fair to say that a third, more objective party could be less biased?

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 86):
Why do you say they could not give fair verdict?

I don't feel like repeating myself over and over, i think I already explained this
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:07 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 88):
I don't feel like repeating myself over and over, i think I already explained this

Yes you have. They are unable to rise above themselves because they are [Iraqi]/[Kurd]/[Shia]. As I expect that you are none of the above your remark is racist and bigoted. That is the one and only definition of racism and bigotry - the conclusion that by reason of race, religion or culture one is unable to rise above certain limitations.

You have not offered any other explanation.

Who cares whether you or I could rise above our personal feelings.
What matters is that judges can, else civilization is doomed.

Even if judges struggle with it, other dispassionate persons have written laws for ALL their citizens and Saddam Hussein was tried under those laws, not ones written especially with him in mind. Where is the human flaw in that?
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:26 am

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 87):
may have died because of the

"May" Indicates a certain level of probability or likelyhood short of certainty. A guess.

"because of" Does not mean that the US killed them. It means, at worst, that we beheaded their repressive totalitarian regime and their own natural "peaceful and tolerant" nature took over and they began killing one another. It is completely appropriate to subtract from the total number of Iraqis dead the number, extrapolated from Saddam's years in power, that would have been killed anyway. It is not reasonable that "zero" would be the number of violent civilian deaths. Or hadn't you thought of it that way?

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 87):
I'm not only concern about Darfur's people

You are concerned for Darfur's people?
Are you now?

In the Non/Av forum there have been 6 (six) threads with the word Darfur in their title.

You DID NOT POST ONE TIME in any of these six threads.

Would you like to know how many times you have expressed your humanitarian concerns for Saddam Hussein's life?

I can get that number for you.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:27 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 78):
I agree, but even here there are some punishments that I think will be more effective than the death penalty, depending of the case. Especially for sexual offenders. Call me primitive, but a rapist should niot be senteced to death, but should be castrated and kept in jail for the rest of his life. I think these sort of animals will suffer more without their "weapons" than dead. I know, this is probably very cruel, but rape (even worse if it is with minors) is a crime that makes me sick. I can't even imagine what I would do to one of them If I caught them.

I suspect you would not be alone in wanting to exact revenge, and it is a very natural feeling, I believe.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 78):
Bush and Saddam can't be compared, that's for sure, but I don't believe Bush acts in the interest of the USA, but rather in the interest of himself and his circle of business. But honestly, this should be part of another thread

Agreed, although I will respond to the following:

Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 74):
What was the service to the American nation by invading Iraq?

The U.S. has made it its policy to ensure that the circumvention of international expectations concerning weapons of mass destruction, support of terrorism, and the like will not occur, and by liberating Iraq, this policy was initially served. The handling of post-liberation matters is a somewhat different story.

[Edited 2006-12-31 23:53:52]
What's fair is fair.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:32 am

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 88):
Yes, Slam, and stop implying that anyone that does not agree with you is stupid.

Stop pretending not to know things...

The news, every single day, carries accounts of the people of the Middle East being incensed over something. They are furious that American boots are on their holy sand. They threatened arson and murder over cartoons. They condemned Salman Rushdie to death because he wrote a book unflattering to Mohammed. They hate Israel even though Saddam Hussein killed more Muslims and more Arabs than Israel did.

Most of us are sick of the pretense that these things are not so.
Aren't you tired of it yet?

[Edited 2006-12-31 23:35:17]
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10738
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:40 am

What would make an international tribunal impartial? Everyone has their prejudices, if your son worked for a company in Europe that lost millions of dollars because Sadaam cancelled a contract, and you are a judge on this tribunal, will that influence your judgement? Lets say your daughter's mother in law husband was the one who lost his job and you are the judge?
If we say that these examples are extreme, what makes them so? Sadaam gassed the Kurds, do we automatically remove anyone who has any idea what chemistry is, this sound silly but I can make up a lot more, thats the point of the fuitility of this line of reasoning. Iraq is not a backward country, its people are not from the stone age, they do know how to stand upright. Prior to the war most of the west welcomed them and traded with them inspite of the UN.
How exactly do we expect Iraq to become a better "civilized" society if we demand that they do things "our way", what exactly makes our way correct?
Our western history is full of empires and dictators all who "knew" that their way was correct.
 
TACAA320
Posts: 7153
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 3:03 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:50 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 90):

"May" Indicates a certain level of probability or likelyhood short of certainty.



Quoting SlamClick (Reply 90):

"because of" Does not mean that the US killed them.

Like EZEIZA said :"stop implying that anyone that does not agree with you is stupid."

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 90):
You DID NOT POST ONE TIME in any of these six threads.

I'm not obligated to do so. And it doesn't means that I wasn't concern about them.
Try to understand something. I'm not obligated to participate in ALL threads about an specific theme to express also an specific feeling.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 90):

Would you like to know how many times you have expressed your humanitarian concerns for Saddam Hussein's life?

If you understand the word "humanitarian" as synonym of "pro life" or "against death penalty", then you're right. Otherwise, you're wrong.
As a human being and as a Christian Catholic I don't accept the death penalty.
'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. Albert Einstein
 
Springbok747
Posts: 3993
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:06 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 75):
And you have still not explained it. Just because YOU do not approve of the death penalty does not mean that the entire trial was "a total charade" does it?

I am not aganist the death penalty. But the trial was flawed. There was no way Saddam could have been found not guilty. So thats why I am asking..what was the point of this trial. Ok..it showed the Iraqi people that it is possible to bring tyrants to justice. But this 'justice' was carried out by the spineless puppet Iraqi government. Saddam should have been tired in the US (since it was the US troops who found him), by a fair jury, not in a Kangaroo Iraqi court.
אני תומך בישראל
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:30 am

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 95):
But the trial was flawed.

I'm sorry but ethics should demand that anyone making that statement back it up with exact quotes from Iraqi law and accurate extracts from the transcript of the trial proving how Iraqi law was violated.

Anything else is just presenting personal belief as fact.

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 95):
Saddam should have been tired in the US

Saddam's crimes were not committed in the US. How about in YOUR country?

Better yet: Calling all of you Muslims on this forum, especially those of you who have lived in the Middle East for substantial periods. How do YOU guys think that idea would be received in the "Arab street?" We remove former heads of state to the US and we try them?

Personally I think it is a terrible idea. Not just against all sorts of international law but really provocational toward the people of the ME.

The US troops found him while in the performance of their duties supporting an Iraqi police/military operation. They turned him over to the legal authorities in Iraq. Nothing else would have been proper and you know as well as I do that there would have been a howl all over the world if we'd "kidnapped" him, or "extraordinary-renditioned" him. Why the riots and embassy bombings and demonstrations in Europe and San Francisco would eclipse anything seen so far. The only reason he was in US military custody when not actually in the courtroom was simple logistics - we had a more secure place to keep him.

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 95):
a Kangaroo Iraqi court.

There it is again. "Those ignorant savages in Iraq couldn't possibly operate something as sophisticated as a court trial!" Am I the only person on this forum who has even a tiny bit of respect for the Iraqis trying to forge a new nation and sees this as gross bigotry?

Tell you what Springbok747 In 25 words or less, why are Iraqis incapable of operating a fair and impartial legal system like one might find in the Hague?
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:50 am

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 94):
Like EZEIZA said :"stop implying that anyone that does not agree with you is stupid."

I am not. I am implying, no, I am stating it straight out: What you posted was dishonest.

I posted the definitions because they completely dismantle any point you were trying to make with that WP quote.

Stop implying that what I post in response to your comments is only directed at you. I write for all readers of this forum, even when replying to you. So even if I was stating the obvious what makes you think it was for your benefit. There are many on here who do not read and write English as well as you do.

Also your concern for the hundred thousand Iraqis allegedly killed since the start of the war was only posted because you could blame the US for them. You didn't even comment on the obvious facts that I presented for you - that they were mostly killed by fellow Muslims.

You did not address the fact that the total could be reduced because we have every reason to believe that, were he still in power, Saddam Hussein would have killed a certain number anyway. Some credible sources estimate on the order of 62,500 per year average over a lengthy period. That would have made Saddam's body count 187,500 for the same period. If that is correct the US invasion reduced the total killing - even counting the war.

Quoting TACAA320 (Reply 94):
I'm not obligated to do so. And it doesn't means that I wasn't concern about them

You are right. You don't have to post on every thread, or even on any thread. But you CHOSE to post dozens of times protesting the killing of Saddam Hussein and NOT ONCE protesting the nearly half-million dead in Darfur. You voted with your keyboard. You voted with your time. Fourteen posts on this thread alone, zero on all the Darfur threads. You voted:

Saddam Hussein 14, Darfur 0
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:57 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 89):
Yes you have. They are unable to rise above themselves because they are [Iraqi]/[Kurd]/[Shia]. As I expect that you are none of the above your remark is racist and bigoted

haha, the R word! give me a break! I said I could not judge properly if being put in the same position. Am I also a racist of myself? Why don't you give some evidence of what you are saying instead of bashing anyone that does not agree with you? This thread has gone along pretty smoothly and both pro and against have given their views with valid points, you on the contrary are trying to enforce your view, no matter what. The R word ... jesus ... are you doing this on purpose?

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 89):
the conclusion that by reason of race, religion or culture one is unable to rise above certain limitations.

Again implying racism. As I said, it is only human to have sentiments. Maybe you don't, but I suspect 99.9% of iraqis have something to say about Saddam, and although someone correctly stated that there is no guarantee that an intl' tribunal could be 100% unbiased, I presume that anyone will have it easier by judging someone that did not directly affect them (in a positive or negative way) than someone who has had the accused, especially if the accused is such a high profile, as hi sleader. Let me put it in another way. You get robbed by some guy. The case goes to court. Then you find out the judge (or soem jury member) is the suspect's neighbour. What would you think? would you not prefer a judge who has had nothing to do with the suspect? How does that make me a racist????

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 96):
I'm sorry but ethics should demand that anyone making that statement back it up with exact quotes from Iraqi law and accurate extracts from the transcript of the trial proving how Iraqi law was violated.

And you are an expert in what exactly about Iraq? You give your opinions as well as everyone else does, why can't you respect that? besides, if there is one thing everyone has agreed upon is that Saddam was guilty of everything that he was accused for, the argument is about how the sentence should have been applied, so there are really no rights or wrongs and no need for knowing iraqi law in depth.
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
 
User avatar
EZEIZA
Topic Author
Posts: 4421
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:09 am

RE: Why Execution?

Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:02 am

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 97):
Also your concern for the hundred thousand Iraqis allegedly killed since the start of the war was only posted because you could blame the US for them

I'm going to assume that this was directed to me, so, what are you talking about? When in this thread did I blame anyone about anything? Are you sure you are reading the right posts? I have been and still am pretty much anti Bush and I have my views about this war, but I have never even mentioned the US in this thread, except for a small remark about Bush, which if you would care to read, I said it should be kept for another thread.
Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Dutchy, skyservice_330, TheF15Ace and 29 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos