BS: Killing Saddam

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 07:57 PM

kendall, consider police proceedure and how it came about. They spend a LOT of time learning "shoot-don't shoot" scenarios.

If someone is in your house, ostensibly stealing your TV set, here are some things you should consider:

1. They do not have a regard for the law. To what exent you don't know but they are IN YOUR HOUSE!

2. Is the TV the only thing they are after? How would you know?

3. Are they armed? How would you know?

4. Are there other robbers you don't see? Are they armed?

5. Do they intend you harm regardless of what you THINK they intend? How would you know?

Taking another person's life is something I hope I NEVER have to do. I would hate to have to live with that in my memory to the day I die. I know others who have, one of them being a police officer. He was in a "kill or be killed" situation and had to take the man's life. He was off work for a year. He went back in a limited capacity but finally had to quit the force. Floyd was their "go-to" guy for bad situations. He was a big burly man, solid and a very stable personality but taking a nother person's life shook him to the core.

Still, I would not hesitate to shoot someone in my house, a burglar, if I were not in complete control of the situation. My first course of action, were it possible, would be to leave the premises and call the police. Nothing I own is worth my life or his. But my family is.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Stevie D
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 01:13 PM

Hi All
Been finding it hard to have a discussion about this without people getting very immotive in theyre hatred. just like to say that it was good that Saddam was tried by his people in a democratic process, the sentence passed was within the rights of the country, and in the name of the people. But i really cant see why people in the western world who werent directly involved are filled with such hatred. people seem to think its ok to take a mans life in this way, perhaps they will behave the same way next time some unfortunate person gets theyre head hacked off by some obscure group claiming to be doing the work of Allah. if we cant rise above our hatred, how are we ever going to show our enemy that our way of life is the right one. and we can all live in peace and harmony, i have no affection for Saddam, and hate what he stood for, but an eye for an eye will make us all blind....i would also like to point out that i am not a lentil munching sandal wearing liberal. i have always voted Conservative.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: kendall
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 07:26 AM

Not to disagree with anyone in particular, but, and eye for an eye does not mean a life for a TV set. It means you may not exceed the original crime with a worse one.
Bill D, your question demands an answer. Here it is. If ANYONE came into my house with murder or mayhem on his mind I would protect myself and my wife and dog. Naturally. If I caught him stealing my tv set, I would NOT shoot him. A life for a tv set? Ridiculous.

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth only makes the whole world blind and toothless." (Mahatma Gahndi)

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 12:27 AM

Obviously GUEST (???), you don't realize that the Bible is also one of Islam's Holy Books.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:53 PM

I was only commenting upon how bizarre it seems that people here think quoting biblical passages to Muslims living in a secular state would make one iota of difference to their debating whether or not to use the death penalty.

A bit too Christian-centric for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 12:08 PM

GUEST, in all candor I ought to enlarge on what I just posted.

I draw a distinction between "a secular nation" or "a secular culture" and "a secular state". What you have described is a definition (not the only possible one) of a secular state, and in that way you are right. But that's not what I was writing about, and not what the discussion in this thread was about. You (or some other GUEST) had just referred to "a predominantly Muslin NATION", and asked why they would pay attention to the Bible. I was addressing that.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 11:52 AM

GUEST, I set "secular" to one side because I didn't want to write about it. It wasn't germane to what I had to say, because I believe Iraq is anything but a secular country.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Welnack
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 10:54 AM

Close enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 10:40 AM

Welnack, I believe that 100,000 number has been discredited almost as soon as it was released. You might want to check that out.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Welnack
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 10:36 AM

An "evil dictator" is a friend of the United States when he is ready to do business, and a mortal enemy when he is not. Far many more Iraqis have died due to the war Bush started than were killed by Saddam in the years prior to the invasion. The total number of civilian Iraqi deaths may well be more than 100,000. (The equivalent loss for the United States would be more than 1 million people.) Perhaps it should be Bush's neck in a noose!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: JennyO
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 06:38 AM

I think that's because all the action is happening over on the other Saddam thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 02:15 AM

Well, Saddam sure killed this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: JennyO
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:19 PM

100 - for what it's worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:18 PM

Oops!, Wrong Thread!, er, rope.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:16 PM

Dumper music?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Sorcha
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:15 PM

Well, it was video taped. I wonder how long til it shows up on the web?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:11 PM

Saddam Hussein has been hanged. While I am not sorry about his execution, I find unseemly the bumper music played on a local Los Angeles radio station to celebrate this event...the piece escapes me but it is on the order of the Hallelujah Chorus.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Sorcha
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:40 PM

Or if we'll get the Last Words, Last Meal, pictures with circles and arrows on the back explaining what each one is to be used as evidence....

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: voyager
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:31 PM

Been All Around This World

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:24 PM

I wonder if he was presented with the 'red card' prior to hanging?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Sorcha
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:19 PM

Well, whatever your opinion, it's over. He's dead. So it says now.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:53 PM

BFD
It's a continuation of the kind of phony legality that was established with the Nurnberg trials. Granted, the bastard deserves punishment, but there's no legal basis (except for the fact that he lost) for the US to have anything to do with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:47 PM

Surah 42:40 40. The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah. for ((Allah)) loveth not those who do wrong.

Surah 5:32. On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.

33. The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

From the Holy Qu'ran.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:41 PM

And your suggestion that Iraq's Muslims can somehow be swayed for/against the death penalty by biblical argument is absolutely bizarre.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:39 PM

Does Iraq have an official state religion?

If it does not, that makes it a secular state.

So why, Dave, do you think you can just set the secular to one side?

The US is also a secular nation. We do not use religion to justify capital punishment.

Now, plenty of Americans use their private faith to rationalize that capital punishment is morally right or morally wrong. But that doesn't mean they can set aside secular arguments--for or against--aside.

Your suggestion that secular governments need not look for secular legal arguments is...disturbing, to say the least. Fundamentalist religious views are not the tenets upon which secular nations are founded. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:24 PM

"Secular" to one side, because I'm not sure that it's operationally factual as to Iraq, but Islam is one of the "book religions". What we call the Old Testament is part of their holy books, and since they highly honor Jesus as one of the Major Prophets, I assume the New Testament (or at least parts of it) has a place, too.

That said, I think the Old Testament would be more persuasive to them than the new. And I don't know what the Koran says as to the concept of "an eye for an eye" or the like. I expect you can find passages in the Koran taking every possible approach to that concept. Therefore, "The Devil can quote scripture to his own purpose," as has been said.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:13 PM

Why on earth would a secular, predominantly Muslim nation, look to the Christian Bible for guidance on capital punishment?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:04 PM

Stigweard said, in part:

While I agree with this and some of your other comments Dave (I certainly disapprove of the sentence, not the verdict though), to say it's OK because Iraqi law says it is means you legitimise every judicial killing

Stigweard, show me where I said it was OK. I didn't. I said it was not murder, which is a tremendously emotional, pejorative term which tends to prevent a rational analysis.

As a matter of fact, if I were the judge who had to impose sentence, I would have had a hard time (as they perhaps did), not so much on humanitarian grounds as on the grounds that his execution may be counterproductive by making him a martyr, a red flag that can be waved around to justify anything. Some will say that's a political consideration. Yes, it is. But every judge who imposes a penalty for a crime necessarily has in mind the perception of the rest of the population.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: pdq
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:43 PM

Too bad he didn't ask to borrow a Grateful Dead concert.

I'm sure I could have edited one down to three hours.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:31 PM

He could watch Lord of the Rings.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:30 PM

According to Al-Jazeera, Saddam has about 3 hours to live.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:15 PM

Emma,

Look at it this way. If they hang Sad, the precedent will have been set to similarly punish bush for Iraqi war crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:11 PM

There is no pleasure to be gained from "I told you so" but I fear what this "revenge" will accomplish

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Alba
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:06 PM

Just saw on the TV that his execution will take place tonight 12.29.06 at 10.00pm ET.
no comment.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 05:43 PM

As for the legitimacy of the current Iraqi government: BS...

"Existing Iraqi law" is more BS...

Hey, folks, inspite of the fact that T-zer says there ain't no war going on in Iraq I don't see qwhere he is closin' Iraq as a vacation destination... There ***is*** a war going on...

(But, Bobert, who declared it???)

Who cares??? Declarations of war aren't the only measures of war...

But if you believe that there isn't a war going on Iraq then it's easy to throw out garbage like "existing Iraqi law" and, hey, if one is so inclined to argue a such a flat-earth position then what come into play is something I once heard in a socail workers woprkshop and that was: You can't argue with a crazy person...

So, yeah, if T-bird's position there isn't a war going on then all of his other positions can and should be taken as those of a crazy person...

Just an observation... No judegemnt...

Now as for the casualties: When I threw out the 100,000 number a while back I got the blast... I was called a lunatic and now a days those throwing the the grenades at me are the ones who are perfectly willing to accept the 100,000 number... Hmmmmmmm?

But the current grenade launchers here in Mudville really don't have a clue how many Iraqis have died... Nor do I... But lets get real here... Spouting numbers in the 50,000's is like sayin' the sky is is green... Proclamation, while making the grenade launchers fell all smug, doesn't actually make what they are sayin' accurate...

While I care deeply about every person who has died from the Bush invasion the number isn't the entire ball of wax here... But lets keep it in some perspective and when a methodology, which includes death certificates and family interviews, comes up with 650,000 and the Bushites here insisting on some McNamara/Nixon body count standard then it, as per in the past, makes the Bush apologists arguments look like Swiss cheeze... Okay, what if it's only 400,000, or even 300,000??? It sho nuff ain't what the US/Bush/governemtn wants us to know and that, given the rest of the lies they have allready been caught telling, is easily accepted...

Yet the Bush apologists here continue on their blind little journey down Karl Rove's PR pipe-dream and spout this stuff out as if it were fact... Problem is that Bush and you apologists here have major credibilty problems and you are quickly running out of time... That hot breath on the back of your necks is the breath of truth and everyone knows it, except you true believers...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 05:37 PM

In the KJV the word "kill" used in the Ten Commandments is actually "murder". This undoubtedly doesn't progress the debate as the semantics of "murder" is just as volatile as "kill" but at least it is a more accurate picture.

In Ecclesiastes the writer, alledged to have been Solomon ("Qoheleth" or..."he that crieth in the Hall" or " The Preacher") declares that there is a time and a season unto every purpose.

When we are living in comfort, half a world away we can debate our philosophical hearts out. When confronted with life or death choices at a moment's notice, what we do reflects what we truly believe and what is truly in our hearts.

And we may not even agree with ourselves (and herein lies the "double nested 'DO loop' behind post traumatic stress); with what we do when we don't have the luxury of debate. Reality bites, hard.

The reality of Iraqi jurisprudence may be distastful but it is what it is and we must deal with THAT reality and our REAL situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 04:36 PM

"can't see beyond the act of his death--it isn't an end of anything"

Exactly. The violence will increase to the point public opinion of the "war" will swell to the point we will be forced to leave. Saddam's hanging is the catalyst we need...and he deserves it although it was for 141 deaths, not the many thousands bush and cheney have tolled.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:32 PM

One thing for sure, dead men don't talk.

I'd like to know more about U.S. involvement with Saddam prior to the invasion. I guess we'll never know.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:23 PM

The Bible is an anthology, edited over the years by a heavy hand. Many of the didactic stories are meant to teach, not meant to be taken literally. Do you think this outcome is fair? What would you do instead? was lost as part of the dialog along the way. The storyteller [often a trickster] was replaced by the tyrant, who justifies acts by misreading the test.

If Saddam is killed tomorrow as a result of actions by George W. Bush, the invading U.S. troops will be an even more precarious situation than they are in today. And if Saddam is killed tomorrow, after all of the linkages and hype that Bush has managed to generate in his myth-making leading up to the invasion and continued presence in Iraq, those terrorists viewing Western, particularly American, targets, will have been given carte blanche.

Those who want to see Saddam executed for all of his crimes (those that the U.S. administration took umbrage over) can't see beyond the act of his death--it isn't an end of anything, it is only the beginning. And John Kerry was right about who ends up fighting in Iraq. It Takes Courage to Tell the Truth.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Amos
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:07 PM

In any case, Saddam has officially been turned over to the jurisdiction of an appointed Iraqi judge and the Iraqis will do to him as they see fit. It is no longer a question of American culture, but of Iraqi culture. This leaves little doubt as to where Mr Hussein will be on Saturday.

It would be nice to believe that seeing Iraq's token poobah of oppression meet a "just" end would go a long way to healing the internecine and tribal strife of Iraq, but I am sorry to say I find that palpably Pollyannoid and improbable.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: ard mhacha
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:50 PM

The death penalty is part of US culture, George Bush enjoyed his time as Governor of Texas sending people to their doom, so most people in the US won`t be put out by another death sentence.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:37 PM

Matthew 38-39

"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:30 PM

Excellent points Mr. D.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:11 PM

but the "new testament" is only relatively newer, and the precise dates of any book, old or new, are conjecture. It is not as if Matthew read Ezekiel and asked for a ruling. The bible is a bunch of writings by guys who may never have even heard of each other....it is not like reading a series of rulings in constitutional law, with detailed citings of what superceeded what.

I suppose if you were to ask 27 clergymen, you 'might' get a majority saying interpretation "X" is favored over "Y", but that hardly constitutes clarification.

(If someone can show me where the matter seems to be settled and adjudicated once & for all, I'd be most happy to study it.)

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:08 PM

How many Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war?
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Friday, Oct. 29, 2004, at 6:49 PM ET
The authors of a peer-reviewed study, conducted by a survey team from Johns Hopkins University, claim that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war. Yet a close look at the actual study, published online today by the British medical journal the Lancet, reveals that this number is so loose as to be meaningless.

The report's authors derive this figure by estimating how many Iraqis died in a 14-month period before the U.S. invasion, conducting surveys on how many died in a similar period after the invasion began (more on those surveys later), and subtracting the difference. That difference—the number of "extra" deaths in the post-invasion period—signifies the war's toll. That number is 98,000. But read the passage that cites the calculation more fully:

We estimate there were 98,000 extra deaths (95% CI 8000-194 000) during the post-war period.

Readers who are accustomed to perusing statistical documents know what the set of numbers in the parentheses means. For the other 99.9 percent of you, I'll spell it out in plain English—which, disturbingly, the study never does. It means that the authors are 95 percent confident that the war-caused deaths totaled some number between 8,000 and 194,000. (The number cited in plain language—98,000—is roughly at the halfway point in this absurdly vast range.)

This isn't an estimate. It's a dart board.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:51 PM

I think Greg B means, Bill D, is that while your quotes came from the Old Testament, there is a newer ruling, as given in the New Testament. I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:34 PM

"...the Christian supercession of the second quotation
in the book of Matthew...." ??? I'm not sure of the point. Do you mean there is some 'official' version of which biblical passages are 'ok'?(whatever THAT might mean in 100 conflicting Christian doctrines)

Whatever supercession you might cite, my point remains....Christians can & do find biblical support for almost any point of theology under debate. The bible is full of 'slewings', from Sampson to the stoning of harlots.....and the libraries are full of analyses debating whether they 'really' meant it was ok or not.

You really want to comprehend the arguments about 'rights' and 'fairness' and 'value'? Read Kant's Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals and 20-30 other philosophical works. If you are an honest man, you will emerge more confused than ever....and very likely become a pragmatist. Which will get you many disputes with other pragmatists over which opinion is the more pragmatic.

Bottom line: it is not a simple issue, and our challenge is to try to create a world in which death sentences are not needed...and in the meantime to cope & adjust.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:21 PM

Tried in an Iraqi Court, in accordance with Iraqi Law, for crimes committed against the Iraqi people.

Verdict Guilty - Sentence Death by hanging

Appeal rejected - Sentence to be carried out within 30 days in accordance with Iraqi Law.

As opposed to the death penalty as I am, I can see why this man must be executed in accordance with due process of Iraqi Law. Those he tortured, maimed and terrorised for 24 years must see that he has been brought to book and executed. That gives them closure with the complete and utter certainty that he cannot be returned to power.

Bobert ask the statisticians at John Hopkins who wrote this report you are so keen to peddle how many Iraqi civilians have been killed. The answer you will get will not be anywhere near 650,000. The statisticians from John Hopkins who wrote the report NEVER said 650,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed. What they said was MAY HAVE BEEN and that is very different.

It seems really odd that everybody who has tried to ascertain the actual death toll has completely discounted the figures you so ardently adhere to, they have done so for very good reasons Bobert.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Greg B
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:31 PM

Bill D...

To state:

>Yes...same with Christianity..."Thou shalt not kill" is in the same >book with "an eye for an eye", and a passage can be found supporting >ANY interpretation

ignores the Christian supercession of the second quotation
in the book of Matthew, along with a number of provisions
found in the Pentateuch (or Torah, if you prefer).

The Christian who quotes the Exodus passage as a justification
for capital punishment is in fact committing heresy.

Then again, it would seem that 'render unto Caesar...' might
apply to a discussion of whether or not the state (as opposed to
the individual) is empowered to mete out the ultimate penalty,
and there are arguments around how that admonition might apply
on either side of the (ahem) coin.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 12:15 PM

I am opposed to the death penalty - period. To cherry-pick who should or shouldn't be subject to judicial murder is somewhat hypocritical in my opinion.
I have no easy answers to what should be done with the tyrants who are responsible for suffering and death either in their own or other countries - it is to be hoped that some of them may even be voted out of office!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:26 AM

Well, T-Bird, like BB you have expressed nuthin' but you opinion... Perhaps you would like to ***prove*** the John's Hopkins methodology flawed... Until then, I'm stickin' with the 650,000... And the operative word here is "prove"...

But just as important is the question of legitimacy of the current Iraqi governemnt seein' as it was established while under the influence of an occupying army... For this reason, I believe that the US would be better served to turn Saddam over to a neutral third party until a legit and stable Iraqi gopvernment is in place... Sure, this might take years but, mark my words, the killing of Saddam under the cuurrent circumstances will a debate topic for the ages for historians and legal scholars...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 11:18 AM

"to say it's OK because Iraqi law says it is means you legitimise every judicial killing ... across the world, not matter how unjust, degrading and impinging on human rights each killing is."

this STILL misses the point. It IS legitimate because Iraqi law says so...'you' (in this case, Dave O.) does not legitimise anything. *IF* a country (or in the US, a state) abuses its legal rights and does things like use executions either carelessly or as a political or personal tool, *THEN* such executions are 'unfair'....which in not the same thing as "degrading" OR "impinging on human rights". It can easily be argued that one gives up their claim to 'human rights' if they commit certain crimes. You may disagree with this, but you do so from a subjective, personal viewpoint!

The ultimate point is "The death penalty" is neither 'right' or 'wrong' on any absolute scale. It is always an opinion, and as such, will always be an issue and used under various circumstances. The trick is to ensure that IF it is used, it is used as humanely and fairly as possible......and if it is NOT used, that some fair & reasonable way of protecting society from the worst criminals be developed in its place.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stu
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:18 AM

"required for their "Worst" Case figure (57,000+ at the moment)"

Ahhh, that's alright then.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stu
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:16 AM

"I think it is worth observing that Saddam was tried under Iraqi procedures, for Iraqi, not international, crimes"

While I agree with this and some of your other comments Dave (I certainly disapprove of the sentence, not the verdict though), to say it's OK because Iraqi law says it is means you legitimise every judicial killing (to be more precise - I still think it's murder but I take your point) across the world, not matter how unjust, degrading and impinging on human rights each killing is.

This is why the death penalty is wrong. Perhaps Saddam does deserve to die - but also it needs to be seen not everyone in the human race is willing to solve problems by killing.

"Those who have survived will not be able to relax until he's gone - because he is so wiley, so powerful that if he were to remain alive in captivity, he would surely bribe or influence his way to an escape."

You can't kill someone for what they might do - ridiculous.

But when it comes to crimes against humanity then he's not the only one, it just depends which side of the fence you're looking over from.

I therefore look forward to the execution of Henry Kissinger, for his part in directing secret operations involving kidnapping, torture and murder in South America as well as the numerous civilian deaths (which continue to this present day due to unexpolded ordnance) in Cambodia and Laos due to the illegal bombing in the 1970s, which he oversaw. As well his support for the whole Iraq debacle and the murder of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians whose only crime was to get in the way of an American military operation.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:53 AM

He is responsible for the torture, sexual degradation, mutilation, pain, humiliation and extermination of tens of thousands of people.

Bush & the BuShites you mean, right? Or is what they've done to be excused because they may not have [yet] reached the "tens of thousands" threshold?

Haw many thousands are OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:52 AM

The death penalty, like abortion and gun control and "prayer in schools" ...and several other issues...is a hot button for many people. They are strongly opposed or in favor; often without totally understanding their own motives or reasoning.

It is a historical fact that people have always killed other people - sometimes with 'official' sanction, sometimes without.

As noted above by Dave O., there are legal definitions for things like 'murder' that are very different from legal executions....but even for those who are strongly opposed to ANY killing, there are usually exceptions. If Saddam were in your house, threatening to kill your family, and you had a gun.....

So...for society, it becomes both an expression of attitude and a practical matter. When people get upset enough, their attitudes can alter, and when keeping 'enemies' alive becomes a lot more work (and expensive) than getting rid of them permanently, attitudes alter a LOT!
In Iraq, killing is, sadly, common.....that is, most everyone can justify killing 'them', whether 'them' means members of some other sect, or "foreign invaders and non-believers". Islam itself seems divided on the issue of killing, but certainly makes room for it, and clerics find it easy to justify.

Yes...same with Christianity..."Thou shalt not kill" is in the same book with "an eye for an eye", and a passage can be found supporting ANY interpretation.

As unfortunate as it is, the death penalty is useful....not only as as punishment and as a deterrent(maybe), but also so that society does not have to house and worry about those who don't respect others.......and this is the crucial concept....'reverence for life' is a wonderful idea, but in order to fully implement it, those who do not respect it must be denied it....and Saddam Hussein did not respect OTHERS lives...therefore, he deserves none FROM others.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 09:39 AM

Yo Bobert,

Your post of 28 Dec 06 - 06:50 PM, regarding the 650,000 odd Iraqi civilians that the John Hopkins statisticians say MAY HAVE BEEN KILLED. How about asking them how they have verified their figures. You will find out that they cannot do that because their total figures are based on an extrapolation, i.e. They are not real. None of their sample figures have been verified or confirmed, and as such must be regarded as being extremely suspect and should not be quoted as representing any factual figure.

IraqBodyCount on the other hand do require at least two sources to verify deaths for their "Least" figure while only one is required for their "Worst" Case figure (57,000+ at the moment)

Like the clowns who stated that 500,000 Iraqi Children under the age of five died as a direct result of sanctions.

Population of Iraq in 1990 - 18.3 million
Population of Iraq in 2003 - 23.6 million
Population of Iraq in 2006 - 26 million

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: freda underhill
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:35 AM

I thought I was against the death penalty. But I have realised I'm not, because I think Saddam Hussein should die. He is responsible for the torture, sexual degradation, mutilation, pain, humiliation and extermination of tens of thousands of people. Those who have survived will not be able to relax until he's gone - because he is so wiley, so powerful that if he were to remain alive in captivity, he would surely bribe or influence his way to an escape.

I admire people who are universally opposed to the death penalty, but in this case I can't go along with that view. I think he should be executed.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: kendall
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:24 AM

When you kill someone, you free that someone.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:58 AM

God is quoted in the Bible as saying "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked." And I happen to agree with Him. I relish the death of no man or woman (though I may sound like it at times!). I might feel differently if it were my family member who was raped and murdered or thrown into a wood chipper alive. That he should die is certain. The whole affair is black. I hope for better things for Iraq and the region. Peace and stability.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:36 AM

What is the difference between that and the way you post.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:33 AM

He deserves a long, slow death. Why give him the mercy of a quick death and martyr's status?

I think its interesting that some of you say it is because of Iraqi law that he receive the death penalty but c'mon - how long has this been the law in Iraq? You make it sound as if it has long-standing precedence. Why not just slit his throat and leave him by the roadside?

Why don't the new rulers of Iraq just put his head on a stick to prove that they now have the power. Its about power, after all. It has nothing to do with ethics or morals.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 09:45 PM

I think it is worth observing that Saddam was tried under Iraqi procedures, for Iraqi, not international, crimes. Iraqi law provides for the possibility of the death penalty. The court chose to impose that penalty, upheld by the appropriate appellate body.

That's not "murder". You may disapprove of the verdict, or disapprove of the sentence, or the finding on appeal, but "murder", no. The word "murder" has a meaning in law, and it's not just an imposed death of which you disapprove.

No, that's not semantics. It's definition.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Peace
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 08:02 PM

"He will hang, according to Iraqi law."

Actually, he will hang according to Newton's Law.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: fumblefingers
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 07:09 PM

He will hang, according to Iraqi law. Good.

It's intesting to hear so many versions of ad hoc law, moral equivilence,etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Peace
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 07:05 PM

'I-Casualties has also started tracking Iraqi civilian and military deaths, relying largely on media reports since the US government says it keeps no record of civilian casualties.

"The counting of civilians is the harder job and in many ways the more strategically fraught task," said Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow at Brookings.

I-Casualties gives no overall figure for Iraqi casualties and the site says the daily deaths it publishes are only a baseline, noting that actual numbers are higher.

The widely varying published totals by other groups are controversial since they are seen as an index of coalition failure to bring peace to Iraq.

At the separate "Iraq Body Count" website, which relies on media reports, civilian deaths are reported as ranging from a minimum of 51,897 up to 57,452 as of Wednesday.'

from here.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 06:50 PM

Yo, BB...

No, the number of deaths in Iraq has ****not**** been "proven false"... Yeah, you may wish to believe your so-called experts but to say that the Johns Hopkins findings have been "proven false" is nothing more that ****your**** opinion and nuthin' else...

There are very well qulaified folks involved in standing by this number that have more education than everyone here in Mudcat combined...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 05:57 PM

The little bit of truth, or at least the hint, is the sauce, the sting. I'm not running for office. And dead serious is still dead. Lighten up a little and you'll live longer, if that's what you want to do.

If Saddam had followed that advice he might still be in power and ruler of a happier country.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 05:25 PM

Slag...it's never too late to learn that " satire, irony and sardonicism" don't translate well in out-of-context print. *IF* that's all you were doing, you need to practice your delivery. We have had many similar posts that were dead serious.

That sort of attempt got a senator from Virginia in trouble, and lost him his re-election.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 01:43 PM

That's a very interesting report. I just wonder if it is the same and consistant standard which applied during Saddam's regime? Is this the Iraqi cultural standard for justice? And if it is, have we made a difference in Iraq? Maybe this proves that we HAVEN"T interfered with Iraq's ability to govern themselves (just a thought).

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 01:32 PM

Greg B, if it is clear that he committed genocide, why not hang him for that crime, if you must hang him at all? For my money he is innocent of genocide until proved guilty in a credible judicial process. So far no court, credible or otherwise, has found him guilty of genocide.

Dave O, two internationally respected human-rights organisations were given accreditation to observe the court proceedings against Saddam,and to interview witnesses, advocates etc. No doubt this was thought prudent in view of a tendency around the world to see the court as an instrument of US foreign policy.

If you would like to read the report that came out of all that scrutiny, here's a link: The Dujail Trial.

I suggest you do read it, then come back here and have another stab at responding to Bobert.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:41 PM

Thank you Bill D. Not everyone appreciates the T'eatre de Absurd. Some day you may learn what satire, irony and sardonicism have in common. To know me is to love me!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:28 PM

*sitting here, mezmerized at Slag's post above.....wondering how any one could cram so many ridiculous, prejudiced, asinine thoughts into one paragraph*

......just the 'idea' of Saddam "accepting Jesus as his savior" boggles the mind, not to mention the sly praise of Hitler.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 11:34 AM

Thank you, Peace.

Bobert, if you insist on throwing out numbers that have already been proven false, you weaken the rest of what you say.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: EBarnacle
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

I have been considering this issue lately. Even though I generally oppose the death penalty, I have come to believe that the only people who should be eligible are those who have overseen mass murder.

That means heads of state who start wars or murder their own people or passively allow their followers "to do it on their own." These people are condoning major offenses.

Killing some slob who believes that he will go to heaven as part of a jihad is not punishment. It is giving him [and they are mostly male] what he wants. If we cannot reasonably turn him off, how can we kill other individuals at this level? On the other hand, killing the megalomaniacal monster who sent him or them is entirely another story, whether or not there is direct blood on his hands.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 09:43 AM

Well, one thing is for sure... We now see why Bush didn't wnat to sign on to the World Court...

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Duke
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 08:06 AM

Kill him, don't kill him. Hate Bush, don't hate Bush. None of this matters. These people are going to keep on killing each other forever because that's what they do. As for Bush, don't worry about him, worry about who the next president will be. Bush has only a short time left and the next guy will have at least four years to do what he wants.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Hrothgar
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 06:10 AM

I'm still against the death penalty, even for someone like Saddam.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stu
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 05:10 AM

"What are we to do with people like that?"

Well, we don't sink to their level for a start, so we don't go around killing people (even though our governments seem happy to).


"First, hanging him is not murder, since it is to be done under the sanction of the recognized government."

An old argument that doesn't hold water - you are arguing semantics here. This is judicial murder aided and abetted by the US and it's allies. Killing people "under the sanction of the recognized government" legitimises all sorts of state murder all over the world - from the mass murder of criminals and dissidents in modern China to the atrocities of the Nazis. Saddams own government was a 'recognised government' - it just wasn't voted into power.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Slag
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 02:05 AM

Well, the Iraqis could hang him and at this point that seems to be what is going to happen. I hope he accepts Jesus as his Savior before that occurs.

It really seems such a waste though. No one else in the world has exhibted Saddam's amazing ability to control Iraq, let alone make a real political force of it. Why not re-instate him to power? Why, he'll have that country whipped ointo shape in no time at all.

If only Hitler had caring people around him in his day instead of so much unwarranted hostility. As a Socialist leader he had really taken Germany from the depths of dispair to new heights, healed the economy and helped his people to hold their heads up proudly. Instead that beast FDR and his band of warmongers (Winnie Churchill and Joe Stalin) drove the poor man to suicide. Its just as well, I guess. They would have hung him too. I mean they hung so many of his hench-, er I mean aides and confidants.

Gee, they should have taken Roosevelt and THAT crew and tied them all up in a big loving embrace and hung the whole lot of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Peace
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:16 AM

Halabja. May his soul rot in Hell.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:15 AM

You're right there Texas Guest & they don't walk either. Once they're gone the chapter of the book closes too. From where I sit that is the most scary thing for those that have blood on their hands now. The blood never washes away so the sooner the book closes the safer they'll all feel. No one will ever ask who in this country had a hand in dealing out death, that is at least no one that'll get an answer.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Texas Guest
Date: 28 Dec 06 - 12:02 AM

The thing I find most interesting about Saddam's impending death is not only that it is coming SO QUICK, but that it is coming AT ALL.
How many times over the last thirty years or more have you read about some sadistic bastard running a country somewhere in the world and killing/raping/murdering people left and right while he is in power, only to be overthrown, tried, found guilty and sent into exile - never to be punished for his crimes? So why is Saddam being killed
instead of exiled to a foreign land? Also, why is he being put to death so quickly? That's a question I would like to have answered
by the most inept man who ever lived in the White House. Interesting,
but maybe it's because - dead men don't talk.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:51 PM

Let those that he commited crimes against try him & let them cast the first stone. That is their way. Let us try our own here or hand over the bunch to an legal international court & let the world try them all & let the world deal with their fate.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:34 PM

Thats your judgment, Bobert. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is your opinion. Quite a number of other countries have recognized it, and it has sovereign rights.

Maybe so, Dave O, but a lot of other people and nations are appalled at the wholesale fraud that Bush has perpetrated on the world with his assault on Iraq. In the world, I think YOUR opinion is in the minority. Instead of pulling off what he thinks is a macho trick of hanging Saddam after a "fair trial," with that act of revenge Bush is going to torque this war up to the next level. I guarantee it.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:34 PM

Bobert told us:

The governemnt of Iraq that has appointed judges and overseen the trial of Saddam is completely and totaly bogus...

Thats your judgment, Bobert. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is your opinion. Quite a number of other countries have recognized it, and it has sovereign rights. If you complain that it's based on violence imposed, without much if any say by the populace to be governed, I would point out that far and away most governments in the history of the world can be so described.

Therefore, should Saddam be hanged then I would think that Bush should be hauled up on charges as an accomplice to murder..

Different situation altogether. First, hanging him is not murder, since it is to be done under the sanction of the recognized government. "Murder" is a crime under conditions defined by a sovereign government, and I feel confident in stating that never in the history of the world has a sovereign government defined a crime of murder so as to outlaw the working of its own laws and authority. And while Bush (for whom I hold no brief) undoubtedly has/had influence with that government, his position is remote enough that "accomplice to murder" could not apply even if the laws and legal process of Iraq could be said to define themselves and their own actions as murder.

---
Someone said something to the effect that the only purpose hanging Saddam could serve would be for revenge. Though I think that's wrong, I'll grant that just for the purpose of argument, and point out that, while many in our culture deprecate revenge as a motivation, revenge is a very powerful and living part of Arab culture, and could be seen in that culture as a perfectly valid reason for putting him to death. (And by many, many in our own culture, too!)

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Greg B
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:07 PM

Then again, so long he is alive, there are those who'll kill in
order to try to free him.

The court is composed of Iraqis--- whether you regard the 'government'
as legitimate or not, the court is as legit as say, the World Court
in the Hague.

It is clear that he committed genocide.

What are we to do with people like that?

It seems to me that some people do things so heinous that they
give up their status as 'persons.' They align themselves with
such evil actions, that they abrogate the rules which normally
apply. Even, I'm afraid, from people like myself who generally
oppose the death penalty.

Add to that that such a penalty is very culturally apropos in
that part of the world--- and I'm afraid I have to say 'hang
the bastard, and do it soon.'

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 07:05 PM

YES!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:57 PM

Would those all for hanging saddam be willing to publicly hang Bush with the worlds cameras trained on them and to be held accountable for evermore?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:36 PM

The governemnt of Iraq that has appointed judges and overseen the trial of Saddam is completely and totaly bogus... Therefore, should Saddam be hanged then I would think that Bush should be hauled up on charges as an accomplice to murder..

(But who is going to hold Bush accountable, Bobert???)

Nevermind that one...

How many Iraqis did Saddam kill over what period of time??? Bush has killed upwards of 650,000 in 4 years so I'd say that if Saddam down get hanged then Bush might need to be hanged 3 or 4 times...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: John O'L
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 06:22 PM

When your son hits his brother you hit your son and say "That's to teach you not to hit people."

And then you sit back and wonder how your family got to be so dysfunctional

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 04:24 PM

Kill him? He shouldn't even be tried in this country. Did we sign on to be a part of any international court? No! Are we afraid if held in an international court our dirty laundry would be hung out to dry? The only ones who should be on trial here is this present administration, it's just more blood on they're hands. We had no right to invade Iraq, it was illegal & we therefore have no right to try anyone, it's just as illegal.   

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 04:23 PM

The Cat got a piece of Peace's piece.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 04:14 PM

killing saddam will lead to more deaths. Life imprisonment wouldn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bert
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 03:09 PM

A pithy comment there Peace!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Peace
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 02:59 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 02:38 PM

Hang Saddam between two thieves? Now that would be kind of symbolic, but I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: ard mhacha
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 02:27 PM

I do not believe in the death penalty but if they are going ahead with it, hang the two thieves on either side Blair and Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 01:41 PM

When he is executed, you may be surprised at the reaction from Sunnis. Not all Sunnis loved him.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bert
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 01:14 PM

They wouldn't need to convert each other, they are two of a kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 01:00 PM

ha. Which do you think would convert the other, Bert?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bert
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 12:47 PM

If you REALLY want to punish him lock him away in a cell with Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST,Cruz
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:47 AM

I am for capital punishment.

All war criminals should be hung by the neck until dead...including our own.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:42 AM

Keeping him locked away for life will even more turn him into a martyr.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Amos
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:10 AM

The only possible advantage would be removing him from the gene pool. But it will also institutionalize the death penalty and establsih a long enduring hatred for the Iraq government by those who supported Saddam. Not a good trade, eh?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 11:00 AM

don't hang him....turn him loose on the street in a Shite neighborhood, and let him explain how his regime wasn't really so bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:24 AM

Perhaps they should just slit his throat like the Sunni muslims do.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 10:20 AM

Hang them both together locked in a love embrace.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: kendall
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 09:25 AM

I'm still against the death penalty. NO ONE has the right to take another's life. And killing Saddam will surely make him a martyr.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: eddie1
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:25 AM

When Saddam gets hung, anyone who wants one will have a martyr. If Bush was hung would anyone want him for a martyr?
Seems to me hanging Bush would cause a lot less trouble!

Eddie

Subject: RE: BS: Killing Saddam
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 05:21 AM

Revenge. We're very big on revenge.

Pity we all can't seem to see the need for revenge against Bush.

Spaw

Subject: BS: Killing Saddam
From: Stu
Date: 27 Dec 06 - 04:59 AM

Any time now.

What does killing him acheive?