Saddam Hussein: Hanging or firing squad?

Profinjena said:Yeah. The thing is, we don't need news coverage for this. 😬 Personally, I’d much rather my tax dollars go toward feeding prisoners than have my vote decide someone's death sentence. Besides, if I don't pay for their food, that money just ends up in the pockets of some other crook—usually a politician—so what’s the difference?
But if you're asking if I want them dead? No.
And honestly, even if someone murdered someone close to me, I wouldn't wish death on them. And no, I'm not saying that just because I haven't lived through it.

I don't want them dead either—I want them to live a long, miserable life of martyrdom. So yeah, I'm against the death penalty, but not out of some sense of "humanity." I just want them to suffer!

I’ve been following the news, and apparently, Saddam Hussein (the alleged Saddam Hussein) called for unity among Iraqis and peace between Sunnis and Shias while he was in court for a separate matter.

Just a couple of days ago, he supposedly said the exact same thing—though back then, he was shouting things about how God lives and long live his country when the verdict came down. Honestly, I suspect the whole thing is a bit of a farce; it feels like Americans are coaching him on exactly what to say, and the media only releases the bits that suit the American narrative regarding this whole spectacle.

Does history actually show any other high-ranking statesmen or government officials behaving this way during their trials? I mean, sure, we saw the Maddox and Seselj with their supporters making scenes, but even then, their behavior was perfectly consistent with their usual antics. They didn't humiliate themselves quite as clumsily as this man is doing by making these odd statements—like when Maddox suggested everyone in Canada or Mexico should unite, regardless of whether they were leftists or rightists.

H4ni8aLL said:Question: Did Saddam deserve to die by execution... and specifically by hanging... like some kind of unevolved, backward part of the world? What do you guys think?

I don't know, feels a bit too Western to me... outdated, brutal... almost like we fell through a wormhole and all these ancient, barbaric customs are just cycling back around 👎
dunno, the whole hanging thing... sounds wild for the 21st century... I mean, we've supposedly moved way past being lynched from trees by an angry mob 🙄

The method is incredibly primitive, there's no debate about that. As for alternatives to life imprisonment, I think it would be far more productive to take the money spent on his upkeep and use it to feed starving people in Africa.🙂

Harold Turner2 said:... instead of wasting money on his upkeep, it would be better used feeding starving children in Africa.🙂

😕

I wonder how many of those "starving children" could have been fed with the billions of dollars wasted on the war in Iraq?

And how many tens of thousands of lives might have been saved if that war had never happened at all?

oceanic said:

The sentence is death by hanging. Usually, that’s seen as a dishonorable way to go—reserved specifically for the most vile criminals.
Some people (especially military types) feel that being executed by firing squad is a much more honorable end.

Let's say Saddam Hussein has been proven guilty of countless atrocities and deserves the harshest punishment possible.

My question is this:

What does the American people in Iraq actually gain from hanging Saddam Hussein?

Or, what is truly in the best interest of the populace and that broken nation regarding the fate of their former leader?

Nothing. His execution doesn't solve anything. It won't bring any tangible benefit to the Iraqi people to see him hang. The Iraqi people didn't even get a say in their own destiny or the overthrow of their president; that was all handled through American military intervention and the occupation of the country, along with everything else we know followed.

There are massive interests at play here, and those interests have a long history. Anyone who knows the situation in that region even slightly well understands that everything happening in Iraq and around it isn't about democracy or the freedom of the Iraqi people liberated from the terror of the Saddam Hussein regime. It’s simply about pure self-interest—interests for which the price is once again paid by ordinary citizens with their lives.

In these circumstances—what does the Iraqi people get if Saddam Hussein is hanged?

From my perspective, they get nothing except perhaps some closure for those who suffered under his regime, which is symbolically satisfied by his demise. But his execution alone doesn't resolve the underlying issues that could just as easily be settled by sentencing him to life in prison. Saddam Hussein essentially lives on as an ideology, regardless of how he dies, and it will be the Iraqi people who eventually have to grapple with that ideology within themselves over the long haul.

Then again, isn't that a field of fruit that every nation must tend to on its own soil over time? They have to prepare it, grow it, and nurture it toward the direction they want, because only they know their own soil and what can thrive there. In that sense, I'm against any outside meddling disguised as "good intentions," which carry about as much weight as George W. Bush's version of democracy.

The only kind of help that would actually be welcome is genuine assistance—a hand that truly wants to help that struggling nation, which had already been suffering under American "benevolence" via years of sanctions long before the final actions were taken to "liberate" them. Any other hand is just holding a sword, and that sword of justice carries about as much weight as the price of crude oil weighed against human lives.

And I don't believe, generally speaking, that any conflict can be resolved without goodwill. Goodwill is the primary requirement if you want to talk about the success or failure of any action at all.

Personally, I think he deserves life in prison (assuming he’s guilty, which he is). Let him rot in a cell instead of giving him an easy way out with the death penalty. Giving him the chair is just a mercy, and honestly, hanging feels like some barbaric relic from the dark ages...
whatever, killing him is fine by me
burn him at the stake

Profinjena said:No one has the right to take a life, period.

Does that apply to every living thing, or just human beings? I assume we are talking strictly about people. Humans tend to be incredibly sensitive when it comes to our own species, yet we show very little regard for other living creatures. For instance, most people would value the life of a serial killer over that of a cow or a goat grazing peacefully in a field. It is an interesting point for debate, as I suspect nature doesn't operate on a human value system and treats all its offspring with equal indifference.

I wonder how many millions of hungry people in underserved American communities could have been fed with those billions of dollars poured into the war in Iraq.

And just how many tens of thousands of lives might have been saved if that conflict had never happened in the first place?

That’s actually a conservative estimate—we aren't just talking about tens of thousands, but hundreds of thousands. Independent American researchers have studied this and concluded that from the start of the invasion through October of this year, one out of every forty Iraqis died—that's 700,000 people—and honestly, that number is likely much higher given the specific complexities of the combat methods used.

Personally, I don't believe it's our place to make definitive claims on this subject, as we aren't the ones who suffered under Saddam Hussein and his regime. That decision belongs solely to the people of Iraq. I have to admit, I feel absolutely no sympathy for proven dictators, torturers, war criminals, rapists, or any other violent tyrants. As far as I'm concerned, Slobodan Maddox should have been executed right there in Times Square instead of putting on this whole theatrical "trial" performance. Even if he were just a puppet controlled by more powerful forces, a puppet still chooses to play that role. To stay on topic, these proceedings don't achieve anything substantial; they simply provide a sense of closure to those who suffered most, giving them the mere feeling that justice has been served.

wannabenot said:The method used was incredibly primitive, there's no debating that. As for alternatives to life imprisonment, I honestly think it would be far more useful to take the money spent on his upkeep and use it to feed starving children in developing nations.🙂

Look, since we're talking about profitability and feeding hungry kids, I also think it would be much better if we took all the money used to buy luxury yachts worldwide and redirected it toward food aid. To me, the resources required to keep Saddam Hussein maintained for a few more years until he passes away naturally seem like a mere drop in the bucket.

I am strictly against the death penalty for any living creature, period. 🙂 That even goes for guys like Saddam Hussein...
The whole mess in Iraq was just handled by the US military😈 and honestly, it’s nothing but pure anarchy. There isn't a shred of justice to be found there...🙂
My heart goes out to the people caught in those endless Middle East conflicts; they're being played like pawns. Who are they actually dying for? Whose ideals are they sacrificing themselves for?😕
Bush😈 and the big oil giants are the ones winning here—they're the ones pocketing all that oil money...
While the poor are losing their lives...🙂 we sit here debating capital punishment, when in reality, the world is ruled by one thing: the god of oil—MONEY.😢

I don't get why people view punishment as some way to "get back" at an individual for breaking the law or doing something shady. Punishment should actually function as a deterrent—something to make everyone else pause and think twice before they pull something stupid. Honestly, I also think the death penalty is fine, mostly because it isn't even really a "punishment" in the traditional sense. Capital punishment serves a different purpose: making the world a better place. When you have some serial maniac who rapes 50 women or kills 25 kids, there is no amount of prison time that actually fits the crime. At that point, you just move to the method of removing them entirely to improve society—one less savage out there means one less chance for them to breed more of the same. I can't stand that pathetic, sappy crap about how "everyone deserves a second chance" and why the death penalty is wrong. That’s just pure illusion and cliché nonsense peddled by people who let mass media dictate their views because they lack any actual backbone or independent thought. For certain types of people, rehabilitation is a myth and the whole concept of standard punishment is useless.

Absolutely not kill him! Instead, strap a massive billboard to his back and force him to parade through Baghdad while being pelted with tomatoes by the crowds. Every single day from now until he dies of old age.

The death penalty is far too merciful for someone like that. He needs to suffer! That’s why I actually feel bad that Slobodan Maddox passed away. This way, he died technically innocent—or at least unconvicted. Ah...

Look, you can't even compare Slobodan Maddox to Saddam Hussein. Maddox died an innocent man. Saddam Hussein? He deserved what he got at that execution. You just can't punish people like that—what you’re talking about isn't justice, it's just pure revenge. That kind of punishment doesn't fit into any civilized legal system. Honestly, he just needed to be wiped off the face of the earth so we'd have one less lunatic to deal with.

What did Saddam Hussein even do that warranted being taken out like that? 🙂

And I’m curious to hear what my buddy—who, let's be honest, actually knows his stuff when it comes to global politics and the situation in Iraq @freudrick—would say about this: Why was it just Saddam? I mean, what exactly did he do that was any worse than what George did? 😠 😠

I’m really not one for the death penalty—I’ve already said my piece on this... the fifth commandment is pretty clear: THOU SHALT NOT KILL!👍
The death penalty feels like such a relic from a dark, primitive era. It needs to be abolished everywhere across the globe. Just think about how many innocent people have been wrongly accused only to end up facing an electric chair or a guillotine... it's absolutely horrifying.
It immediately makes me think of that Björk movie, Dancer in the Dark—just devastating.
As for Saddam Hussein, honestly, he has to live with the hell he created inside himself.
But what about Bush??😈 To me, he and his entire inner circle are the ultimate living monsters... when is justice finally going to catch up with him?

greta said:I'm not a fan of the death penalty—I already wrote this... the 5th Commandment: THOU SHALT NOT KILL!👍

...bush .... WHEN IS HE GOING TO FACE JUSTICE?

Look, if you're going to lean so heavily on Christian commandments, then I guess you shouldn't even need an explanation for the question you just asked about Bozo. 😕

On the other hand—and maybe this is just my take—those believers in reincarnation would probably argue that Bozo will be born in his next life without both arms and legs, just so he can finally understand what it feels like to maim someone with bombs and rifles. 😬 😬

dr duca said:I don't quite get why people view punishment solely as a way to penalize an individual for breaking the law or acting illegitimately. Punishment should really serve as a deterrent to prevent others from following suit. I also believe the death penalty is acceptable because it isn't just "punishment" in the traditional sense. Capital punishment—though "punishment" is technically the wrong word here—exists to make the world a better place. When you have a serial predator who rapes 50 women or kills 25 children, there simply isn't a sentence harsh enough to satisfy justice.

So, you’re saying capital punishment should act as a deterrent, but then you bring up the example of a maniac raping 50 women and killing 25 children. Do you honestly think someone like that cares about the death penalty? Are you suggesting that in states where the death penalty is legal, these types of predators will pause and think twice before committing those atrocities out of fear? On the flip side, are you implying that in states without capital punishment, these monsters will just multiply like rabbits?

Look, I’m all for the death penalty—not against it. A maniac doesn't care about what the law says because, well, he’s a maniac. Like I said before, punishing him specifically doesn't achieve much. That sentence is there to set an example for everyone else. And hey, if even a maniac realizes exactly what's coming for him, maybe he'll actually seek help. Whatever he did, it’s good for him to have this buried in his subconscious—that he's going to face an execution or whatever for his actions. Plus, the death penalty provides some level of closure for the families. An eye for an eye, teeth for a tooth.