Saddam setenced

The news media here were predicting a fresh outbreak of violence if he is sentenced to death (as opposed to a, er, stale outbreak?)

Anyway, I think Robert Fisk was right - the US and allies will withdraw as their domestic political expedients demand - and leave the Iraqis to "...slash each other to death".

What a dog's breakfast. They won the war but, as predicted, they have not won the peace.

Deane

Now is a prudent time to withdraw. The only reason for any occupation is to protect oil supplies.

We toppled a tyrant, the Iraqi people now have to do the rest.

Regards

Mick

quote:

Death by hanging.

Shame that. I'd rather he spent the rest of his days in one of the cells he was fond of incarcerating others in.

Don't agree with capital punishment, even for him. But life should mean life and it doesn't have to Archer type comfy either.

Steve.

I agree, he should remain in a cell until his natural life ends, with Jeffrey Archer as a cell mate. Somehow death seems too easy for him and too difficult for the politics.

nah! hope the hanging is live on sky, hd preferably.

quote:

Originally posted by scottyhammer:
nah! hope the hanging is live on sky, hd preferably.

Would you like the (life-long) responsibility of pulling the lever too??

After Nuremberg, who was more punished? Those who quickly got what they presumed to be coming to them anyway (including Goering by his own hand), or Hess languishing the rest of his days ignominiously in Spandau?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:

quote:

Death by hanging.

Shame that. I'd rather he spent the rest of his days in one of the cells he was fond of incarcerating others in.

Don't agree with capital punishment, even for him. But life should mean life and it doesn't have to Archer type comfy either.

Steve.

I cannot agree with the death sentence either. He is a murderer, no question, but killing him makes the new regime the same.

A life of misery and confinement, spent reflecting on what he has done and what he has lost is far more of a punishment.

I would have no problem whatsoever in 'pulling the lever' on Ian Huntley.

The fact that the evil bastard still lives (and I'm paying to keep him alive), disgusts me.

John.

The people Saddam Hussien killed did not have the benefit of a trial. Let alone the option of lifetime imprisonment.

The states that do not have capital punishment are telling the criminal one thing: No matter what crime you commit,no matter how heinous, or how many people you kill, your life is assured.


The beggar who kills is sent to the electric chair. Should not the same fate befall the high and mighty ?

I agree with the verdict and punishment.


Regards

Big Brother

Lock him up for life. Executing him is barbaric and shows us to be no better than he was.

It has taken the death of 750,000 to oust him from power. Has it been worth it?

quote:

The states that do not have capital punishment are telling the criminal one thing: No matter what crime you commit,no matter how heinous, or how many people you kill, your life is assured.

Untill you screw up on income tax.

I don't agree with capital punishment. It is, however, one of the penalties available in the country in which he perpetrated his tyranny and I suspect it is better for the judiciary there to follow the rule of law than to depart from it as Saddam Hussein has done throughout his own rule.

I oppose the dealth penalty on principle, but if there were ever a case for it, it is Saddam and his thousands of followers. I think they should line them up, try them fairly, and consign them to the same fate. We will never be safe until we are rid of these people. Maybe not even then.

I wondered about the possibility of putting a well-fed tiger in his cell and then only allowing them water.

G

quote:

nah! hope the hanging is live on sky, hd preferably.

Can't tell if you're joking, I hope so.

One of the more distressing elements of this huge tradgedy has been the ghoulish videoing of executions. Things like this only serve to remind me how little progress humanity has made.

If it's wrong to kill, it's wrong period. A miserable life in solitary to reflect is a far more appropriate treatment.

I don't begrudge paying one penny of tax if it goes to provide things like due process of law and humane treatment. To do less would, in my view mean we were no better.

Regards,

Steve.

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
I wondered about the possibility of putting a well-fed tiger in his cell and then only allowing them water.

G

I thought that an end to brutality was what the invasion was all about - not a continuation under a different tyrant.

Deane

Surely you remember that the invasion was all about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction (and, of course, had nothing to do with trying to secure oil supplies).

The brutality carries on regardless: it's just that more are dying at present than ever happened under Saddam's rule.

Graham

Arising from the above posts:

1. Why is the death penalty wrong 'on principle'?

2. Why is it morally superior to rejoice at the prospect of a person mouldering away in jail for the rest of their life?

3. Why might a lifetime in prison allow the criminal to reflect on his evil ways? Psychopaths, by definition, do not ply such mental avenues.

4. How does favouring the death penalty make the supporter no better than the criminal? I favour it yet I have killed very few - and not just because my garden is too small to host a mass grave! Am I really the same as a mass murderer?

Saddam's sentence will doubtless lead to endless appeals, pleas for clemency and maybe even the taking of hostages against his release.

He should have been taken from the place of sentence to the place of execution and the matter concluded directly. On principle ( !

Fraser

Inevitably, this thread is becoming polemic, and will surely only become more so...

But it does seem odd that a reasonable conscientious questioning of Capital Punishment per se should be interpreted by some/many as a tacit approval (or not so tacit) - or at least non-disapproval - of the gross, inhuman and illegal barbaric acts of this criminal.

Why should that follow?

If Saddam was given a life sentence then any organistion or country assocated with his imprisonment would be subject to numerous attacks and kidnappings to attempt to free Saddam.

The only trouble with hanging - if it is done properly- is that it is too quick and painless a death for the bastard...

quote:

his imprisonment would be subject to numerous attacks and kidnappings to attempt to free Saddam.

Possibly.

Also, give it 10 years (say) for a regime change in Iraq to be on the cards (free elections, Baath Party re-elected??) and Saddam could be out of prison and taking revenge on all and sundry.

Best to let the justice system in Iraq take its natural course, after the due process of appeal, of course.

Cheers

Don

Why should there be an appeal as a matter of reflex?

Is there new evidence to be adduced or would it just be on the basis that the sentenced party doesn't fancy the sentence?

Fraser

quote:

Originally posted by Fraser Hadden:
Why should there be an appeal as a matter of reflex?

Is there new evidence to be adduced or would it just be on the basis that the sentenced party doesn't fancy the sentence?

Fraser

From what I read, the appeal is a matter of course under Iraqi law when a death sentence is handed down and involves a panel of judges reviewing the case to make sure the trial was fair and balanced. If they find that it wasn't then a retrial is granted - if fair; sentence must be carried out within 30 days.

The man is guilty and deserved to be punished. He is no less guilty than Bush and Blair however. They all have blood on their hands.