Death penalty for Saddam Hussein

[HioMrSan]

The trial was a joke, but really... who cares?

Everyone knew he would get the death penalty, and the trial was simply a formality. He deserves an execution by the gas chamber at the very least. Hanging is getting off easy.

[Arctures]

I wonder if his death is gonna be filmed.

[I AM THE PROPHECY.]

this is an outrage

free saddam

[LAMBORGHINI FCUKER]

make simfile you expert stepmania buff

[Geschpooklichkeit]

I don't get why it matters how one dies. They all end the same. The only way this could have gone better is if he would have been sentenced to a stoning.

[Irobeth]

for everyone saying hanging is weak, they could hang him in a matter that strangles him, but doesn't break his neck.

[seiya256]

I guess Eddie Izzard was wrong about how many people you need to kill before we don't know what to do with you. (See history section in Dressed to Kill.)

(edit: The proper past tense for hang when referring to the execution is "hanged" not "hung".)

[CardinalDan]

Actually I think the high sentence was influenced by public oppinion.
Cruelty is in the middle east some kind of historical standard when dealing with criminals.

Having said that, it could also be that the court found an analogy to the Nuremberg Trial, where also the death penalty was decided to be by hanging.

Just like with Nuremberg Trial the end of Saddam's trial can mean an end of some era, at least politically. The man that once used to shake the country is now to be hanged, no better symbol of changes I could think of.

Funny how looking at this eldery, broken man one can almost feel pitty for him.

[Razer]

Originally Posted by Reenee

make simfile you expert stepmania buff

SADDAM'S COURT SENTENCE -DEATH BY HANGING REMIX-

[CardinalDan]

Originally Posted by Razer_2mb

SADDAM'S COURT SENTENCE -DEATH BY HANGING REMIX-

Hmm....

A harangue against the validity of the court that found him guilty, then the fitting of the noose, then the hangman releasing the door, followed by a gurgle of the hanged man...

For some reason, I have a morbid curiosity about this...

[Amp Divorax]

Originally Posted by normac

Asssasinated defense lawyers, three different judges presiding over the same case, first judge resigned because he complained the government was tampering with the trial too much, trial taking place in Iraq which rules out a fair and impartial hearing, etc. etc. Does any of that sound like a part of a fair a legitimate trial?

Keep in mind I'm not arguing his guilt. Only the cirumstances under which he was found guilty.

If you want to talk about fairness, then you should remember that his government was responsible for killing 5,000 civilians in Halabja on March 16th, 1988. There's also the way he dealt with government officials in his own country that disagreed with him, which in one case included the guy getting killed and his chopped up body delivered to his wife the next day! It's kinda hard to talk about fair and impartial when the man was guilty from day one due to the public actions that he had taken under that role!

[I AM THE PROPHECY.]

Originally Posted by nova

Funny how looking at this eldery, broken man one can almost feel pitty for him.

I think you'd find that outside of his remaining supporters within Iraq there aren't a whole lot of people who feel this way

[normac]

Originally Posted by Amp Divorax

If you want to talk about fairness, then you should remember that his government was responsible for killing 5,000 civilians in Halabja on March 16th, 1988. There's also the way he dealt with government officials in his own country that disagreed with him, which in one case included the guy getting killed and his chopped up body delivered to his wife the next day! It's kinda hard to talk about fair and impartial when the man was guilty from day one due to the public actions that he had taken under that role!

Like I said, I'm not defending the fact that he's done terrible things, only that he was tried unfairly. If death was inevitable all along, then why the trial in the first place? We could say that Bush is responsible for the death of just as many Iraqi civilians for ordering the whole invasion. Should we sentance him to death by hanging as well after a sham trial?

Reading nova's posts: You're so right. His death is only to serve as symbolism for a new era politically. If he remains alive then there will always be supporters for him.

[Paul]

I can't wait for video's..

[Amp Divorax]

Originally Posted by normac

Like I said, I'm not defending the fact that he's done terrible things, only that he was tried unfairly. If death was inevitable all along, then why the trial in the first place? We could say that Bush is responsible for the death of just as many Iraqi civilians for ordering the whole invasion. Should we sentance him to death by hanging as well after a sham trial?

Reading nova's posts: You're so right. His death is only to serve as symbolism for a new era politically. If he remains alive then there will always be supporters for him.

You can say the same thing about confessed serial killers in Indiana who get the death penalty for much less than what he's done. Also, trying to compare the decisions made by the two of them doesn't really work too well since Saddam's actions were deliberately done for one. While Bush did start a war, he didn't do it with the expressed intention of causing widespread terror or intentionally killing innocent civilians. Yes, there are innocent civilians who have died in OIF, but I should state that such a thing is unforunately unavoidable in a war!