Saddam Hussein to be hanged

[Borde]

Je... yeah, Hitler is allways a good example when you want to defend dead penalty because each and every of us would be glad to punch him until he was dead and cold. However, as civiliced people, we should learn to disociate what we desire to do than what's right to do. And killing a man, no matter how much we hate him, is simply not right. It's not right because it's like falling down to those criminal's level.
"- I hate you, thus, you must die"
If we are against murdering, we must leave no doubt.
Besides, those who think that being against dead penalty is being too soft, I'd like to remind them that there are fates worse than dead in this world. And those don't necesarily imply physical nor even explict psychical torture.

As for what RW_66 said:

Did he have a US lawyer?

Actually, I think he did.

I mean, seriously, do you know a place that WOULD NOT have found him guilty of crimes against humanities?

Of course, not. That's beyond discusion. (Well, at least no reasonable contry)

The only thing more obvious than his guilt, was the probable penalty.

Actually, that's right. Acording to the iraki law, he was going to be killed, no matter what. But, as Jari said, it would have been wiser to send him to de Hague like that other bastard, Milosevich. If we are talking about crimes against the whole humanity, then let the interantional law judge him.

 

[James]

I've lightened up a bit with regards to my "hang him at all costs" style of thought, but I still think the man is a drain on civilization and perhaps prison would be too good for him, I mean, have you seen pictures of his cell? He spends his free time drinking green tea and gardening! Gardening for Christ's sake!

Imprison him for life, but take away the soft pleasures the man gets, at the very least.


When I compared Eichmann and Hussein, you'll note I put 'kidnapping' and 'trying' in quotes, and then in brackets wrote that those two words were VERY SUBJECTIVE.

That said, he was retrieved against his will, which constitutes kidnapping in the loosest sense of the word.

And, Hussein is guilty, do not get me wrong - I'm no sympathizer. But it would seem that, as with the Eichmann case, the judges did not attempt to determine whether or not he was guilty or innocent - everyone walked in knowing he was guilty, and everyone walked out knowing he was guilty.

It's all subjective, like I said originally, afterall.

 

[Midgar]

I agree with James. It is a waste to spend so many resources on this one horrible person. Just because we can keep him alive doesn't mean that we should though. A civilized scociety wouldn't kill him, but we are FAR from being civilized in the ways that you are thinking.

About Hitler, I actually admire him somewhat because to me, he was the only honest politican ever...  :evil:

 

[Jari]

I mean, have you seen pictures of his cell? He spends his free time drinking green tea and gardening! Gardening for Christ's sake!

I haven't, but that sounds pretty reasonable. Two different things here. First, he is currently under arrest, not being punished of anything. Second, even if he was being punished, the point of imprisonment is just that, imprisonment. Not torture. Not driving someone insane.

Just like prisons in Nordic countries (and in quite a few others, I think), offer several modern conveniences. Inmates are often allowed to keep TVs, radios, coffee makers and game consoles - if there's room. Which is good. Like I said, it's not supposed to be torture, and most of the inmates are expected to return to society one day... and I'd prefer that they return sane.

I won't even bother to wait until someone says that everyone wants to be in a prison like that. They don't. Nordic countries have one of the lowest incarceration rates (warning: links to pdf-file) in the world. As you can see, imprisonment in itself is a valid punishment.

I agree with James. It is a waste to spend so many resources on this one horrible person. Just because we can keep him alive doesn't mean that we should though. A civilized scociety wouldn't kill him, but we are FAR from being civilized in the ways that you are thinking.

And because we shouldn't keep him alive, we are not civilized society and we shouldn't keep him alive because we aren't civilized society?

Circular reasoning. You - we - or whoever don't become magically civilized unless we work towards it.

Second, this is not about keeping someone alive, this is about not killing someone. Different things. Terri Schiavo was kept alive, Saddam should be kept from being killed. And yes, we absolutely should refrain from killing him, or "keep him alive", if you prefer that. The most basic human right is the right to live.

As far as your waste of resources go, even if we ignore the fact that Saddam is just one man, and thus requires not very much resources at all, you'd still be far better off trying to limit the consumption by the general population in western countries. Simply because it's many, many times larger than the amount of prisoners. Currently, there are countless of things that drain more resources than giving prisoners humane living conditions.

About Hitler, I actually admire him somewhat because to me, he was the only honest politican ever...  :evil:

Oh, I gotta hear this one. Please explain.

 

[James]

I mean, have you seen pictures of his cell? He spends his free time drinking green tea and gardening! Gardening for Christ's sake!

I haven't, but that sounds pretty reasonable. Two different things here. First, he is currently under arrest, not being punished of anything. Second, even if he was being punished, the point of imprisonment is just that, imprisonment. Not torture. Not driving someone insane.

Just like prisons in Nordic countries (and in quite a few others, I think), offer several modern conveniences. Inmates are often allowed to keep TVs, radios, coffee makers and game consoles - if there's room. Which is good. Like I said, it's not supposed to be torture, and most of the inmates are expected to return to society one day... and I'd prefer that they return sane.

I won't even bother to wait until someone says that everyone wants to be in a prison like that. They don't. Nordic countries have one of the lowest incarceration rates (warning: links to pdf-file) in the world. As you can see, imprisonment in itself is a valid punishment.

You believe it reasonable that the murderer of an untold number of people deserves to be sitting around, drinking green tea and gardening, a luxury that maybe a dozen people in Iraq can afford, and a luxury that even not many of the western world can afford between schooling, work, family, etc?

If we ended up capturing Hitler, is it your belief then that he too should have been given such amenities?

People can remain perfectly sane without gardening, without drinking tea. Give him a couple of books, maybe an encyclopedia or two. Let him work on his understanding of how the world outside of Iraq works, anything. Maybe give him a picture of Stalin or two to hang above his bed (the two look so similar it'd be wrong not to). Put him to work, maybe. One of the points of imprisonment is that the person recognizes the fact that they are in prison. Living the sweet life behind bars is hardly imprisonment.

Might as well lock him up in the Bastille, no?

However, the reality of the Bastille was much different than the mystique created by the King. All of the rooms until the year 1701 were left unfurnished. Wealthy political prisoners were allowed to bring in their own furniture, many even brought their own servants with them. Meals were of generous proportions, and more luxurious meals could be bought if the prisoner was wealthy enough. Most prisoners were docile. They were allowed to walk freely around the fortress, talk with officers and other prisoners and play games. Many had their own personal hobbies, and a few were even allowed to visit the city of Paris on parole. The Bastille was much more comfortable, even homelike, than the horrific rumors that circled around France proclaimed.

 

[Jari]

You believe it reasonable that the murderer of an untold number of people deserves to be sitting around, drinking green tea and gardening, a luxury that maybe a dozen people in Iraq can afford, and a luxury that even not many of the western world can afford between schooling, work, family, etc?

Yes.

It's not his fault that the coalition of the willing fcuked Iraq up.

If many of the western world have no time for such things... well, it's not Saddam's fault either. Purely their own bad time management.

If we ended up capturing Hitler, is it your belief then that he too should have been given such amenities?

Of course.

One of the points of imprisonment is that the person recognizes the fact that they are in prison.

You'd think that he might notice such things when he finds out that he can't leave the place.

Might as well lock him up in the Bastille, no?

I wouldn't have issues with it.