Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Hussein to hang within 48 hours

  1. Dec 29, 2006 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member


    Some Sunnis are promising all-out civil war. One journalist noted that Hussein is not worth the havoc and suffering it will cause.

    What do you think? What do you expect? Is this yet another blunder for the Bush admin, or will this help to provide closure in some sense that will be beneficial?

    Although I no longer support the death penalty, when it comes to tyrants of this magnitude, its seems that a higher...or perhaps a lower standard must apply. At the same time, if I could undo what's been done in Iraq by us, I would prefer to see him as a crippled dictator who was made powerless. Now we have a martyr.
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 29, 2006 #2
    Bye bye so-damn-insane.
  4. Dec 29, 2006 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    How could it be? The Bush admin isn't executing him.
  5. Dec 29, 2006 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Yet the ire of Sunnis will be directed at the Bush admin.
    It seems to me that the allied forces ought to be a bit more machiavellian:
    A "prince" who restrains a local regime backed by him may gain more sympathy in the population at large by showing "mercy" in certain instances by overriding the local regime's policy.
  6. Dec 29, 2006 #5
    Iraq would be a far happier place if that genocidal dictator were still in power. No kidding. :frown:
  7. Dec 29, 2006 #6
    I can see saying it would be different, as that would be without dispute.

    However, to say that it would be far happier... I think this may be stretching a bit. Do you think all the women raped by his henchmen would agree with you?
    How about the kids whose fathers disappeared into the torture chambers never to return?

    Certainly, Iraq is a mess. Without a doubt, innocent people die there everyday. Is it better than when Saddam was in power? To be honest, I don't know - I'm not an iraqi. In my opinion, anyone who tries to pretend to know the state of affairs in that country without actually living there is deluding his or herself.

    Back to the topic at hand...

    I don't think the death of Saddam will have much of an effect on the day to day operations of the country. Insurgents are still going to wire up car bombs as they have done before. I seriously doubt that they (the insurgents) have held a certain amount of their power in reserve in the event that saddam is executed.
  8. Dec 29, 2006 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This is quite true. However, the US occupation makes the US responsible for what the Iraqi government does, and the US became responsible under international law by virtue of a military occupation of a sovreign state. Even if that were not the case, the US, by force, depose the Sunni-dominated regime of Saddam Hussein and allowed the Shii to assume control of the Iraqi government. For the moment the Kurds are on the sidelines, but they aren't sorry to see Saddam gone.

    It is a matter of perception on the part of some Sunnis. If all they perceive is that the US invaded and occupied Iraq, captured Saddam, and delivered him to the Shii - well then that pretty much means that the US is responsible for what ultimately happens.

    In many ways, the US military has behaved as Saddam's military behaved, except that the US did give warning and allowed most civilians (non-combatants) to leave places like Fallujah when they attacked.

    Unfortunately, that seems to continuing under US occupation.


    Last edited: Dec 29, 2006
  9. Dec 29, 2006 #8
    Is it any different now? Torture by militas and "police" keep on going, even more prevalent than under Hussein.


    Insurgents? Car bombs? You seem to be a few years behind, friend. It's mass kidnappings, mass torture, mass murder, bombings of landmark buildings, and open civil war. It's no longer "insurgents" vs. "occupiers", it's now Sunni militia vs. Shia police death squads.
  10. Dec 29, 2006 #9


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    AFAIK, that's only true if the occupying power is running the country. We are not. [edit: Actually, that probably means, by definition, that we are no longer an "occupying power".]

    I recognize that we (Bush) will be blamed for everything, my point is simply that just because people choose to blame us (Bush) doesn't automatically make everything our (Bush's) fault.
    That really is an absurd thing to say, Astronuc. With the exception of the prisoner abuses, our military conducted itself in a mannar utterly unlike how Saddam's military behaved. When being tasked with things within their expertise, our military is equal to the best in the world for both skill and conduct. For Saddam's military's conduct, you can pretty much just copy down the Geneva conventions in bullet-point form - he violated pretty much every relevant section, from human shields, to cannon-fodder. About the only illegal tactic he normally uses that he didn't was chemical weapons - and if he could have, he would have.

    One of the terrible ironies here is how Hussein's vast number of crimes are being conveniently forgotten, and not just by our enemies. He was only convicted of a few specific crimes, but that's only because there is no point to convicting someone for thousands of separate crimes all with the same punishment. It would be a waste of time during which he could already be dead.
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2006
  11. Dec 29, 2006 #10
    There's no point in comparing Hussein's actions with the U.S. military - it's an easy strawman. The issue that is very relevant today, is comparing Hussein's crimes with those of the de facto rulers of Iraq, the vast street militas.
  12. Dec 29, 2006 #11


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    True enough. For that, though, the comparison is not an easy one. Hussein's actions were not consistent enough to simply extrapolate out to how he'd be acting now if he were still in power. A lot of what he did was simply Stalinist solutions to "problems" like the existence of the Kurds and those were individual acts, killing tens, hundreds, or thousands of civilians at a time. Whether he would have done similar things today had he been in power is something we have no way to know, though for the worst act (the Kurds), that problem was "solved" and wouldn't need to be solved again.
  13. Dec 29, 2006 #12
    I'm against the death penalty in all cases. The crime for which he was convicted was a relatively small one. Relative to HIS other crimes that is, not to crimes in general. I think it would be fitting if he spent the rest of his life in court defending himself against the relatives of all of his victims, one at a time.

    In hindsight, we can now see that it was his brutality that kept Iraq together. If the US had not toppled him, he would eventually have died and perhaps the country would have fallen to its present condition anyway. That's what happened to Yugoslavia when Tito died.
  14. Dec 29, 2006 #13


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Read Thomas Ricks's book "Fiasco". There were several cases where American soldiers murdered Iraqi civilians. Look at the sweeps that various units did - rounding up all males age 16-60 in an area and sending to Abu Ghraib and other prisons were they were detained for months. That is pretty much what Saddam's army did.

    In Haditha, Memories of a Massacre
    Iraqi Townspeople Describe Slaying of 24 Civilians by Marines in Nov. 19 Incident


    Ricks recognizes that units like the 101st did an excellent job in working with locals. However other units like the 4th Infantry Division were brutal on occasion.

    Last edited: Dec 29, 2006
  15. Dec 29, 2006 #14
    I don't see how this supports your claim that "the US military has behaved as Saddam's military behaved." Your example of this occasional brutality is that some people were rounded up and then released. Is that how you see the behavior of Saddam's military?

  16. Dec 29, 2006 #15
    my halfhearted attempt at playing the devil's advocate has failed.

    However, in the process I believe this thread has become derailed. It has become focused on contrasting the actions of the US occupational forces and its enemies with that of Saddam Hussein.

    Rach3: In your post regarding my statement (the only one that was actually relevant, sorry) that I don't think it will have an effect - it would seem that you agree with me. ie, the situation really can't get too much worse.

    To those that were hurt by Saddam, I don't know that it will provide much closure. Certainly it would be a relief to know the man who tortured you couldn't do it again... but this may pale in comparison to the day to day anxiety of living in a war zone...

    I think closure will only come, if ever at all, when the iraqi people are able to contain the violence and govern themselves.
  17. Dec 29, 2006 #16
    My greatest concern is that Saddam's execution will only fan the flames of the insergencey. Admittedly he was a brutal dictator, but we can now see by looking at the the insergency and murders based on religious differences, that his actions kept total chaos in check.

    We haven't been able to do that with; high explosives, phosphorus, quazi napalm, smaw ne, or street patrols. We have a lot of Iraqi blood on our own hands.

    I would rather that they send the guy into a very Spartan exile rather than make a martyr out of him.

    And BTW it is the American military who have held Saddam in a cell all of this time, not the Iraqi army or police.
  18. Dec 29, 2006 #17

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Russ, we invaded, we caught him, we held him for a trial that could only end one way, and now we have handed him over. We could just as easily have imprisoned him here as we did Noriega, or we could have killed him on sight and ended it long ago.
  19. Dec 29, 2006 #18
    i'm not sure if saddam will be much of a martyr. it seems most groups supported him out of self interest or out of fear, not because of an ideology. i don't think many people who are not currently participating in this conflict will become participants because of what happens to saddam... maybe some patriotic ex-military people would, but most of those people are already tapped as it is.

    i expect a lot of bombings/killings to be attributed to revenge over saddam's death, but most of those would have happened anyway. i think a lot of people will pay lip service to saddam's fate, but vary little new action.
  20. Dec 29, 2006 #19


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It appears he was just executed!!!
  21. Dec 29, 2006 #20
    Got any source?
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Hussein to hang within 48 hours