BS: Should they top Saddam?

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: DougR
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 11:41 PM

Bobert: "The current government in Iraw is not the legal government." Really? Then what government is?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 09:17 PM

Bite me, Oldster...

awww, jus' funnin'...

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:52 PM

Bobert, You never had it so good. You just feel guilty.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:56 PM

Thank you, GUEST, Shimrod, for pointing out yet again something that I have have tried to get folks to accept and that is that Saddam was one of the US's "company men"... Donnie Rumsfeld, *****after the Kurs had been gased*****, went to Irag with a boat load of gifts, including a gold plated M-16, to give Saddam for being such a team player...

This is something that the Bushites here gloss over but they ahve become very good at glossin' over stuff because the ****friggin' truth**** is in conflict with their hero's woof-woof-woofin'... Normal... Bushites have only one goal and that is to keep their party in power so that it can rip off the working class so they will gloss over anything that might stop the theft...

But, yeah... Had I been president, I jsut would have loaded up another boat full of goodies and sent Colin Powell over to present them to Saddam an' ahve Calin take Saddam aside and say, "Hey, ol' buddy, remember the "end around" we palyed on Iran??? We might need you to do it again. And, BTW, word on the streets is that you are killin' too many of yer own folks so cabn ya' kinda chill out..."

Yeah, that would have saved 650,000 Iraqis from being killed by the neo-cons and another 3000 plus Americans... Not to mention bankrupting the US financing a war while giving big tax breaks to the filthy rich...

But no... The neo-cons had to have their war... Now they have it where are the 2 architects of it??? In hiding... Well, not really... One of them, Richard Pearle, has just surfaced and is trying to do an "end around" of his own in blaming Bush for the quagmire that he himself was is responsible for...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:39 PM

I think he should be sewn into a sack with a dog, a rooster, a viper, and a monkey and thrown overboard, Roman style.

It was their highest form of punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 06:10 PM

Saddam's court stance will override his crimes? That's stretching it. He's not likely to be seen as a John Brown.

But we'll see.

It certainly is too bad it was such a high-profile trial. I suspect this was Bush's doing--his regime wanted pictures of Saddam on the news as often as possible--to remind his (Bush's) own base of one of the precious few successes of the wretched Iraq war--and to give giant intellects opportunity to make absurd predictions of Saddam's return to power. As we've seen here on Mudcat.

As I've said before, I would have handed Saddam over to the Kurds--or aggrieved Shiites. I don't think they would have had a high-profile trial.

At any rate, this was the verdict of an Iraqi court--and not a kangaroo court--whether we agree or not.   If you believe that irregularities in the trial are such that Saddam should be found innocent, I disagree. If you accept the death penalty for anybody, you'd have to accept that Saddam would be a good candidate.   If you don't think Saddam has earned the death penalty, if anybody has, you need to do more research.

At this point it would behoove the West to stay out of the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 12:53 PM

I certainly hope that despite the evident sentiment against any capital punishment, no Western group attempts to stop this planned execution.   That would be a serious mistake.

If Saddam has 30 days for appeals, so be it. But the West should not seek to interpose at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: breezy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 11:54 AM

Elba !

Bush may be open to critism and so might Blair but they never behaved as S H did.

He may have united Iraq but that was through brutal fear and intimidation of his subjects.

Hanging was and is barbaric and the western civilsed should object.

Final verdict must wait until all foreign troops withdraw and Iraq's destiny is in its own hands.

A final last minute stay on the trap door would be psychologically cruel or even opening the trap door and he only falls a short way but leaves him still supported on his feet, that'ld put the shits up him!

Sorry , must have seen too many films.

he should not be killed, murdered or executed.

To compare him as a figurehead in the same sentence as the Brish Royal family is preposterous and tantamount to treason , so off with the head of the thread contributor I say.

Got to go now to have me neck measured, for a shirt, who said 'Shroud'?

And Bush didnt even win the last election as far as many are concerned, so , what yer going to do about that guys?

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Peace
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 11:42 AM

I think you are right, McG of H. It was foolish not to shoot him when he was first fount. "Oops! I coulda sworn he had a gun."

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 11:23 AM

I'm sure there are lots of people in Iraq who would like to see Saddam hanging. Mind you a lot of the same people, especially among the Shi'ite majority would be even happier to see Bush and Blair sharing the gallows with him.

That's not the point. The time for all this should have been when the occupation was over and when there was a stable government in charge. The trial and the execution will do nothing to bring that day closer, quite the reverse. I predict it will turn out to be a serious mistake, like so many things that have been done over the last couple of years.

"And, given his history, it will not be easy to sell Saddam as a martyr." History does not bear this out. The execution will ensure that for many people the image of Saddam will be of him defying the court as it sentenced him to death, and this will be likely to overshadow the terrible crimes for which he was responsible. That is how these things work out.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Peace
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 10:49 AM

Saddam's work.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Peace
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 10:47 AM

The people of Halabja would likely agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 10:45 AM

Today's 'Independent' newspaper (UK) contains a typically grim article by the great journalist, and authority on the Middle East, Robert Fisk. He details (again - see his recent book, 'The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East') how Britain and America supported Saddam until, presumably, he no longer served their purposes or got out of hand. To quote Fisk: "We ... sent thionyl chloride [a component of mustard gas] to Iraq in 1988 at a price of £26,000. Yes, I know [this, together with other chemicals] ... could be used to make ink and fabric dyes. But this was the same country - Britain - that would, eight years later, prohibit the sale of diphtheria vaccine to Iraqi children (sic) on the grounds it could be used for - you guessed it -"weapons of mass destruction". ".

So, although, in my opinion, Saddam richly deserves to be executed we should remind ourselves that his death will deflect our attention from the cynical, hypocritical machinations of the geopoliticians who themselves are also complicit in so much death and suffering.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:36 AM

And just how is that "national governemnt" doing these days, T???

And on who's accountin' do you define "droves"??? Related question: What are your sources???

I remember makin' the statement that 100,000 Iraqis had died and you, I believe, and others jumped down my throat and stated, rather matter-of-factly that I was some kinda heretic... Your side had the numbers at somethin' like 14,000... Now we learn that I was way off as an independent estimate by an organization with no particular axe to grind has the numbers as much as 650,000!!!

So when I hear folks talking about "droves" and usin' terms like "national governemnt", yeah, there's that same ol' cynicism in tthe folks who have been telling the story... Especially seein' that the story tellers haven't been able to muffle the entire story and that Iraq has, as I and others predicted, fallen into civil war...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST,Janine
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:47 AM

I just can't agree with state killing of anyone. The trial was not entirely legit and was paid for by the US Government, I believe. He should have been tried by an international court for real justice to have seen to have been done. Anyway didn't the US Government supply him with the weapons that he used to such horrible effect anyway? There must be an island somewhere where he can be left to serve out his days. I'm sure to that his execution will lead to yet more bloodshed in that unfortunate country.
Jan

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:38 AM

Kevin, if you don't think large numbers of Shiites and Kurds are happy with this verdict--and even some Sunnis are--you are deluding yourself. You can criticize the trial if you want--I suspect any trial for crimes against humanity can probably be attacked on procedural grounds -but portraying it as the action of a puppet government--and that seems to be your implication-- is over the top.

And, given his history, it will not be easy to sell Saddam as a martyr.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 06:33 AM

"...he must be executed within 30 days"

The thirty days rule only comes in after the appeal process is finished. I imagine the length of time that takes will be decided by political considerations, as was pretty evidently the case for the timing of the verdict.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 06:05 AM

Bobert asks me to define what I mean by "the Iraqi people".

The Iraqi electorate Bobert who turned out in droves despite the threat of bomb and gun on three occasions to elect a national government.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 05:48 AM

I am not saying that it is the case here - but IF it were obvious that this one man (despite all his crimes) could end the current bloodshed, unite the people and bring peace to Iraq and keep Iran at bay - as its leader - would it be the best thing to do?

The Western leaders did once think something like this........

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 07:57 PM

While being sentenced today Saddam spoke over the judge and said "I put a stop to sectarian violence...the court is owned by invaders and are servants and slaves of the US etc."

Saddam's case is now in appeal but by law he must be executed within 30 days so there will not be much time left to hear his protestations.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 06:28 PM

Pity he was rushed to trial before a local election to select a new government - the trial having been started under a puppet government chosen by the invader was one of his 'defences' - and may help inspire those who seek his 'martyrdom'.

Put him back in his hole, I say - he was there by personal choice, I say.... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 06:12 PM

And it appears they have decided.

When did that happen?

It can hardly be denied that there has been a certain amount of "interference" with Iraq over the years, and it is still taking place.

A country under occupation, with a civil war under way is not the right setting for a trial such as this. The right time would have been after all foreign troops were out of the country and a stable government was in place. And at that time he should have been tried for the whole range of crimes which can be laid at his door - including the most serious ones, even those which might be embarrassing to the American government.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 05:44 PM

And it appears they have decided.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 05:43 PM

Let the Iraqis decide. And don't interfere.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 05:17 PM

I have a feeling that an executed Saddam might be a more effective figurehead than the live one. "Saddam Lives!" and so forth.

Very true. He will be immortalised as a fighting man. Standing under duress in a court and pointing a very strong finger whilst engaging in a shouting match with the judge.

Far better he be left to linger and drool into a pathetic figure of forgotten old age.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Rasener
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 04:07 PM

Dont forget to stick Tony Blair in the same cell.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 03:40 PM

"Sea of turds" - eloquent phrase there. An unpleasant image, but undeniably powerful.

I have a feeling that an executed Saddam might be a more effective figurehead than the live one. "Saddam Lives!" and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 02:45 PM

I don't think so, Old Guy; his chips are cashed. He is a figurehead to some and that's all; a bit like the British royal family. As long as they are figureheads, people put up with them or even like them - but if they were suddenly given power, we'd see attitudes change.

Greg, I can't blame you for taking the attitude that "prevention is better then the cure"; I disagree personally, but I can see where you are coming from. It is a very fine balance and I simply choose this particular side of the fence.

Hrothgar, I saw on the other related thread that CH has volunteered, so that's resolved.

The whole business of Iraq, Saddam, the war etc is such a filthy mess that nobody can dip into it and come out totally clean. Decisions such as to stay or not to stay, to execute SH or not, to force Iraq to split into three or not etc etc are impossible to make with 100% guilt-free conscience. It's a sea of turds - you just choose your raft and hold on to it. But whatever happens, you'll be splashed.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Old Guy
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 01:32 PM

The day they captured the bastard I said as long as he is alive, there is a chance that he will come back into power.

And I still say it.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 01:29 PM

I am sure he would last long enough to be put on a war crimes trial for that 8 year war against Iran. With an interesting list of co-defendants, though I doubt if they'd be too likely to turn up.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 01:20 PM

Drop him into the Majles in Tehran by parachute and see how long he lasts?

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Shaneo
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 01:03 PM

Did he kill more people in Iraq than The George Bush Army ?
2 wrongs never make a right , just because Saddam killed a load of people does not give George Bush the right to kill even more.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 12:46 PM

Incarceration in isolation for life kept Nazi Rudolph Hess alive for a very long time - before he finally succeeded in killing himself- if I remember correctly he was close to 90 years old.

From what I have read, Hess was miserably unhappy. Alive, yes.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 11:50 AM

Of course executing him is a way of ensuring Saddam can never stand trial for the war of aggression he waged against Iran, in which an estimated one million people were killed - which will very much suit the people in high places in other countries who assisted him in this, notably in the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 11:42 AM

I've always been rather puzzled why imprisonment tends automatically to be thought of the soft option in cases like this.

I rather suspect that Saddam might actually prefer being executed. Which is a very good reason for not executing him.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Zany Mouse
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 11:31 AM

Bobad:   I'm not sure that would be such agreat punishment. They are actually very alike and would probably end up best of friends!

Rhiannon

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:52 AM

A fitting punishment would be having Saddam and GWB sentenced to share a prison cell for the remainder of their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:52 AM

looks like I'll have to change those bloody guitar srings myself...

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:51 AM

"not actually universally beloved" (double negative not intended)

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:37 AM

So far, it appears, the widespread violent reaction which was to be provoked by the death sentence appears not to have occurred.   Protest, yes, but no huge upswing in attacks by Sunnis on Shiites.

The Sunnis actually have more important concerns than the life of their supposed leader, who was not actually not universally beloved even by Sunnis--they, like other Iraqis, were aware they were living in a police state.

Sunnis are actually still far more concerned with 2 huge issues which have been festering for a long time--the fact that they cannot trust the police since the "Iraqi police" is riddled with Shiite militia, and the fact that they need to be guaranteed oil revenue from other areas of Iraq outside the "Sunni area".

On top of this, they, like all Iraqis, are still also concerned about down-to-earth issues like jobs, electricity, water, health care etc.

The fate of Saddam is far down the list.

And if we are concerned about Iraq, the same should be true for us.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:25 AM

Saddam's crimes were against Iraqis. If Iraqis sentence him to death for those crimes, it's not our business to interfere. And we would be incredibly stupid if we did.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:04 AM

Agreed. If murdering him appeases some people because of the number of lives he took illegally, then Bush deserves to swing first.

Both are blots on humanity. But one of them has the potential to threaten our planet, and it ain't Saddam.

Let them both rot in prison for life.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Zany Mouse
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:57 AM

I'm with Congo Chimp one this one. Murder is murder and as we are so called 'civilised' we should not be murderers, regardless of the provocation. As he wasn't killed on the battlefield we have no right to take his life.

A HARD life for the rest of his life would be a far better punishment.

Rhiannon

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:32 AM

Sure- as long as they string up the U.S. politicians who originally created and supported him when it suited their purposes along side of him.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:30 AM

Teribus,

Define "Iraqi people"....

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 08:23 AM

Because he is SO powerful is the very reason why we have to think carefully.

His martyrdom will mean the genocidal psychopaths will multiply dramatically.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 08:21 AM

Perhaps we should give him an ASBO (that's an 'Anti-Social Behaviour Order for our American friends)- and then let him off when he breaks the terms of it.

I know, let's let him off altogether - murdering ten of thousands of people isn't so bad - especially if you've had a deprived childhood ... is it?

Then, of course, other World Leaders, I can think of, have murdered/are murdering ten of thousands of people, and many of them got away with it/are getting away with it - so why not Saddam?

Why is it that we only start to seriously agonise about morality when we are considering the fate of power-crazed, genocidal psychopaths rather than when they are slaughtering their victims?

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: greg stephens
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 06:37 AM

George Papavgeris: you say "no exceptions" and that's a very attractive view and I wish I could totally support it. But just suppose Hitler hadn't saved people the trouble, would you really have locked him up for life, providing a focus for God knows what political movements? I can't help feeling that "hold your nose and pull the lever" might have been the necessary attitude? Not an attractive attitude, I admit.

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Rasener
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 05:47 AM

death sentence given and he will hang.

But will he?

Subject: RE: BS: Should they top Saddam?
From: Hrothgar
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 04:55 AM

Megalomaniac?

Not guilty on grounds of insanity?

Stick him in a looney bin and see if that destroys his credibility?

I stick to my objection to the death penalty based on this simple question: How do you choose your executioner - to whom do you give the right to take a human life in cold blood?