Saddam execution order upheld....thoughts?

[rjohnstone]

[StukaJU87]

Argos, I'd like to ask you a hypothetical question, if I may.

"An armed man bursts into your house. Before you can react, he punches your lights out and ties you up. He then waits for you to come to, just enought to see him execute your family while you watch. Your wife and kids blown into oblivion. Then he politely unties you, hands over the shot gun, and tells you he is done and that he is sorry. He will let you live and wait while you call the cops to come get him."

Having lived through and being witness to that:

Would you rack that 12 Guage and finish business, or call the cops first?

Would you want your tax dollars spent on keeping him in prison at the cost of 25-65 THOUSAND dollars a year? If the money doesn't matter to you, wouldn't it bother you that he is getting 3 hots and a cot. Roof over his head. Free medical care.

All this while you try to maintain your sanity and try to put some kind of life back together.

[wulfe13]

It doesn't have to do with defined circumstances. It has to do with interpretation. Words are nothing but mental constructs we have to express ideas and emotions. If you disapprove of execution and find it barbaric, you consider it murder. Period.

This is very simple. And I'm pretty sure that you understand it and are just arguing for the sake of defending yourself against a "secular progressive assault". If that's the case, I can't help you understand anything about my opinion. But if you'd like me to try and explain why I don't support capital punishment, I'll be happy too.

That is, of course, if the people on this board can consider differing opinions without insulting people and acting like children. So far this thread is looking grim in that regard.




I'm not concerned about what they want--that's not the issue. They're entitled to their opinion just as we're entitled to ours. It's no more acceptable to kill Hussein than it was for him to commit the crimes that he did. Since when do two wrongs make a right? They don't. You teach that to your children, but when emotions come into play, it's out the window.

2 wrongs? I don't believe it's "Wrong" to kill someone that murdered thousands, I think it's the "Right" thing to do! He ended their lives, what's wrong with ending his? They're not killing him because they "think" he might have killed them. We KNOW he did it.

Why is it always wrong to execute someone? How is it barbaric? Why should a murderer deserve to live?

[Argos]

Sex is just raping, intercourse, child molestation.... it's all the same thing. Yeah, who needs those damn pesky words....

Since you can't mentally parse the specific circumstances causing one act to be different from any other similar act, I will never know or understand you.

And yes, the term "State Sanctioned Murder" is a catch phrase mostly used by secular progressives. The same ones who screamed at Vietnam vets coming home for being child killers, protesting executions, yet want to take your 14 year old daughter to an abortion clinic without your knowledge because it's freedom of choice to kill a baby.

It doesn't have to do with defined circumstances. It has to do with interpretation. Words are nothing but mental constructs we have to express ideas and emotions. If you disapprove of execution and find it barbaric, you consider it murder. Period.

This is very simple. And I'm pretty sure that you understand it and are just arguing for the sake of defending yourself against a "secular progressive assault". If that's the case, I can't help you understand anything about my opinion. But if you'd like me to try and explain why I don't support capital punishment, I'll be happy too.

That is, of course, if the people on this board can consider differing opinions without insulting people and acting like children. So far this thread is looking grim in that regard.

Ah, but you said "in ANY context"! Now you're rethinking it already. You shoulod think of the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Iraqis who were murdered by Saddam, and the millions of their family members who mourn them. Do you think imprisoning him, in a country as unstable as Iraq, is what they want? No, they want him dead, and he deserves it for the depth and depravity of his crimes.

I'm not concerned about what they want--that's not the issue. They're entitled to their opinion just as we're entitled to ours. It's no more acceptable to kill Hussein than it was for him to commit the crimes that he did. Since when do two wrongs make a right? They don't. You teach that to your children, but when emotions come into play, it's out the window.

[Firebird V]

Amen. Well said Stuk.

[StukaJU87]

As someone with a little insight into the criminal custody buisiness, discussions like this never cease to amaze me. Now mind you, in NJ we have the death penalty, but it has not been implemented in a really long time.

We have inmates that have raped and murdered children, mafia hitmen, serial killers, car jack murderers, old lady killers. Some motherfuckers that would kill you for the 5 bucks in your pocket. Any kind of perverse and horrendous crime imaginable.

Why on earth anyone can think that the world is a better place with these scumbags breathing and eating up our tax dollars is beyond me. Exection is murder? Tell that to the families of the victims whose lives were destroyed by these inhuman, filthy animals.

[horns666]

Sadam's execution...?
Most know it was coming regardless by whom or what government sytem.
Then afterwards, lets move on and forget about it.
The media is giving him more attention then he is deserving of.

+ a billion

[Soap]

Sadam's execution...?
Most know it was coming regardless by whom or what government sytem.
Then afterwards, lets move on and forget about it.
The media is giving him more attention then he is deserving of.

[lerxstcat]

I mean "we" the US. Donald Rumsfld met face-to-face with Saddam in December 1983 and March 1984 to reestablish full relations with Iraq with the idea of bolstering Iraq as a regional buffer against Iran. He even declined to say anything about the Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iran and assured Saddam that our statements against use of chemical weapons were general and not directed at Iraq in its war with Iran. We then gave them considerable financial aid and even seed stock for bio-weapons development.

This cozy relationship was reinforced a few days before the Kuwait invasion when Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam that the US "had no opinion" on Arab-Arab conflicts, including the border dispute with Kuwait.

Google "US-Iraq Relations" and you'll get plenty of info on our close alliance with Iraq in the 1980s until August 1990.

When you say "we" do you mean the United States , various Nato countries or ...? I'm not sure from the stats I've read the United States was prominant among the trade partners Iraq had. I never saw any claims of US chemical weapons sales either. Just some 'dual use' stuff and one case of an illegal sale of something that could be used in making mustard gas which was prosecuted. Most of the chemicals seem to have come from other countries.
I have read somewhere that Saddam carried out the Kuwait invasion under the mistaken impression that the US would do nothing. The story ran that he was mislead by an unclear diplomatic exchange.
It's a really interesting history that I've not read enough about. It is probably too recent to be able to get a reliable picture though. Many of the sources cited in that Wikipedia article were really poor for instance. It is ironic that this period of machiavellian manuvering is now hailed by opponents of the current idealism as a period of rational policy making that ought to be repeated.

[xenophobe]

i'm not distorting anything. **snip** people have special words for different kinds of killing is to make them feel more comfortable about themselves.

That is a contradiction and a distortion. So we have different definitions for different actions so people can feel more comfortable with themselves?

Do you really believe that horse puckey? Wow...

Those are cases of killing. Some were called executions, some were called cleansing, some were called unjustifiable homicides, blah, blah, blah. What a bunch of bullshit - it's all just KILLING. This isn't about liberal vs. conservative to me nor is it any goddam agenda. You really don't know me well enough to say that.

Sex is just raping, intercourse, child molestation.... it's all the same thing. Yeah, who needs those damn pesky words....

Since you can't mentally parse the specific circumstances causing one act to be different from any other similar act, I will never know or understand you.

And yes, the term "State Sanctioned Murder" is a catch phrase mostly used by secular progressives. The same ones who screamed at Vietnam vets coming home for being child killers, protesting executions, yet want to take your 14 year old daughter to an abortion clinic without your knowledge because it's freedom of choice to kill a baby.

[rjohnstone]

wrong. pacifism is an opposition to war and violence, it is not fundamentally a stance that you must allow someone to brutalize or murder you. iow, self defense is not in conflict with pacifism.

I guess my description was a bit off...
I'm talking about those idiots who will not defend themselves in ANY situation.
They are so opposed to violence that they will do nothing to defned themselves.
I've seen these kinds of people. I've always thought of them as pacifists, but perhaps there's another term for them I'm not aware of. Moron comes to mind, but that's my opinion.

[hippietim]

Kinda reminds of a pacifist.
Put one in a true life threatening situation and see how firm their convictions really are.
I guarantee most will fight back.

My test for anyone claiming to be a pacifist is to punch them squarly in the face. If they try and fight back, they're lying hypocrites.

wrong. pacifism is an opposition to war and violence, it is not fundamentally a stance that you must allow someone to brutalize or murder you. iow, self defense is not in conflict with pacifism.

[hippietim]

Semantics? Hardly. Spin it however you want. Call it genocide or serial killing if you want as well. Your use of english is paramount. If you do not wish to use the correct meaning for words, then you're distorting the truth.

i'm not distorting anything. killing is killing. sometimes it is necessary. that people have special words for different kinds of killing is to make them feel more comfortable about themselves.

Murder is a deliberate and intentional act of depriving someone of their life. Killing someone who has deprived many people of their lives, a murderer, condemned to death will die. The state is not murdering him. Yes, they are killing him because of the crimes he committed.

...and that is the finely split hair I was referring to. Again, it's all killing.

If you want to get into semantics...
State Sanctioned Murdering would include Ruby Ridge, Waco, Tiananmen Square, the Holocaust, and any other event where government forces killed civilians in cold blood without just cause... And putting a person on trial and sentencing them to death isn't semantics, it's a liberal phrase that is misconstrued to further a political agenda.

Those are cases of killing. Some were called executions, some were called cleansing, some were called unjustifiable homicides, blah, blah, blah. What a bunch of bullshit - it's all just KILLING. This isn't about liberal vs. conservative to me nor is it any goddam agenda. You really don't know me well enough to say that.

[lerxstcat]

Of course not. Self defense and the defense of one's family is one matter. Execution is another.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating releasing Saddam without punishment. But I'm not a proponent of deliberate killing.

Ah, but you said "in ANY context"! Now you're rethinking it already. You shoulod think of the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Iraqis who were murdered by Saddam, and the millions of their family members who mourn them. Do you think imprisoning him, in a country as unstable as Iraq, is what they want? No, they want him dead, and he deserves it for the depth and depravity of his crimes.

[24seven]

If you think things in Iraq are nuts now,wait til they hang him.

Personally,I don't think they will execute him,the UN will step in....

i agree with you.