This will not exactly endear the US to many in the world.On November 5th, 2006, Saddam was sentenced to death by hanging. Critics have alleged that the date in which the verdict is read live to the world, November 5, was deliberately motivated by the Bush Administration to influence the U.S. midterm elections scheduled just two days afterward; American officials reportedly have a heavy influence on the court.
Yep, i know. This is completely redundant IMHO, even the "symbolic" value of this trial and sentence are overestimated. But anyhow, like most people, i don't really care.Astronuc said:Apparently Saddam Hussein has been found guilty and has been sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanity.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003348279_saddam05.html [Broken]Meanwhile, Iraqi officials canceled all military leaves, ordered the Baghdad airport closed and imposed an indefinite curfew from 6 a.m. today in the capital and the religiously mixed provinces of Diyala and Salahuddin, home to Saddam's birthplace and the Shiite town at the center of his trial.
ptabor said:They should've shot him in the face while he cowered in his hole like the dog that he is.
Instead we had to waste resources to try this animal - and now even more time and money is going to be spent on an appeal. What a crock.
Well, we've preserved the original for posterity. I simply quoted what was there, and I wasn't inferring anything, although the comment about US influence was a concern. Hopefully the US influence was simply technical, i.e. helping with the court and trial structure.russ_watters said:You picked an ironic part of the article to quote, Astronuc: there's a big, pink warning at the top of the page that the neutrality of the article may be compromised by "weasel words" and the section you quoted contains one fact followed by two weasel words - and both have since been removed from the article.
:rofl: That just doesn't look right! :rofl: I hate weasel words and weasel-worded statements. Of course, we know that anyone can edit Wikipedia, so statements, particularly those of a political nature, must be given proper scrutiny.Wikipedia said:You can help Wikipedia by improving weasel-worded statements.
Well, we're supposed to be the 'good guys', and good guys don't shoot unarmed people in holes. We've got to go through the process.They should've shot him in the face while he cowered in his hole like the dog that he is.
Instead we had to waste resources to try this animal - and now even more time and money is going to be spent on an appeal. What a crock.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061106/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_verdict [Broken]Duel rallies continue after Saddam verdict
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Jubilant Shiites marched by the hundreds Monday, celebrating Saddam Hussein's conviction and death sentence as Sunnis held defiant counter-demonstrations...
Hopefully resentment is not simmering and building. The rate of violence while still high has not increased. I would hope that people get tired of it and move on to being more peaceful and productive.The surge in violence expected after the Sunday verdict on Saddam's trial for crimes against humanity still did not materialize. An Interior Ministry spokesman credited a round-the-clock curfew in Baghdad and two restive Sunni provinces.
But Iraq's relentless death toll continued: the bodies of 50 murder victims were discovered Sunday, the bulk of them in Baghdad, police 1st. Lt. Thaer Mahmoud said.
Baghdad, which has a mixed Shiite-Sunni population was relatively quiet Monday, with offices and the international airport closed and few cars or pedestrians on the streets.
Astronuc said:Apparently Saddam Hussein has been found guilty and has been sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Saddam_Hussein
This will not exactly endear the US to many in the world.
That's the key point, like it or not.The yearlong trial that ended yesterday with a sentence of death by hanging for Saddam Hussein had serious legal flaws that left doubts about whether he was allowed to present a full defense, international legal experts said.
Lawyers and human rights advocates broadly agreed that the Iraqi tribunal’s proceedings frequently fell short of international standards for war crimes cases. But even critics of the trial said the five Iraqi judges who heard the case had made a reasonable effort to conduct a fair trial in the face of sustained pressure from Iraqi political leaders for a swift death sentence. American lawyers pointed to substantial evidence offered by the prosecution implicating Mr. Hussein in the crimes against humanity with which he had been charged.
“Did this meet the standards of international justice?” asked Jonathan Drimmer, who teaches war crimes law at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington. “The answer is no. But to look at the ultimate verdict, it certainly is consistent with the evidence presented.”
It would seem revenge, retribution and retaliation are still very much part of human behavior.CAIRO, Egypt November 9, 2006, 5:02 p.m. ET · Egypt's president came out strongly against hanging Saddam Hussein, saying in remarks published Thursday that it could make Iraq explode into more violence. But Iraq's prime minister said the execution could take place by the end of the year.
The statement from President Hosni Mubarak of Eygpt broke an uneasy silence among Arab leaders over Sunday's verdict by an Iraqi court, which convicted Saddam for the killings of some 150 Shiite Muslims after an assassination attempt against him in 1982.
Mubarak, a regional heavyweight and a top U.S. ally, appeared to speak for many in the region who are uneasy about seeing a former Arab president tried and sentenced -- no matter how much they disliked Saddam's regime. Analysts suggested Arab leaders are worried about the precedent an execution would set, and said Arab publics often identify with their leaders.
"Carrying out this verdict will explode violence like waterfalls in Iraq," Mubarak was quoted as saying by state-run Egyptian newspapers. Hanging Saddam "will transform (Iraq) into blood pools and lead to a deepening of the sectarian and ethnic conflicts."
Saddam has appealed, and is being separately tried for genocide in the deaths of about 180,000 Iraqi Kurds, mostly civilians, during a crackdown in the late 1980s.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki confirmed this week that both legal procedures would go on simultaneously and that Iraq's three-man presidential council is pledged to allow Saddam's hanging if the court rejects the appeal.
vanesch said:Personally, I do not care about what happens to Saddam, he was a bad guy.
However, I'm more concerned with the *reason* for his dead sentence. Apart from the fact that one can have doubt about the process' fairness, the problem is that Saddam is a former head of state that is condemned to be hung for being responsible for the death of 150 civilians as a direct consequence of his orders.
Well, if those killings happenend with the same intention and in the same way as Saddam, then YES they should be hung if the death penalty is valid in such countries. I am thinking of Kim Y I, Ahmadinejhad, Mugabe, The president from Syria, HAMAS etc etc...Now, there are some other heads of state who are responsible for the dead of less than 200 civilians as a direct consequence of the execution of their orders! Are they also going to be hung ?
I don't think those were the people vanesch had in mind!marlon said:I am thinking of Kim Y I, Ahmadinejhad, Mugabe, The president from Syria, HAMAS etc etc...
Any crimes he committed were committed against Iraqis, so having him tried by Iraqi courts was the appropriate thing to do.Anttech said:I think this will be the straw that broke the camels back. I think that executing Sadam is not the right thing to do. He was an evil man, and did evil things, but I am against the death penalty. I believe In this case it will escalate tensions, between Sunni's and Sheia factions, it won't bring any good, and will make a martyr. I don't believe the court is without its outside influences, and to be honest is more akin to a kangaroo court than anything. He should have been tried outside Iraq, and outside of the Neo-con's influence, in an international court. my 2 cents. No good will come from his death.
I know that but he is wrong and that was my point. It is very obvious that the people i named are not in the same league (as "heads of state") as the people Vanesch had in mind.Gokul43201 said:I don't think those were the people vanesch had in mind!
I agree but i feel you are objecting to a point i never wanted to make. I did not just say "look at the intention". We are judging leaders here not just civilians. When we are talking about leaders we are talking about regimes and THERE is the specific difference i wanted to point out.Besides, it's not what the intention was, but that there was intent, that's important. Whether I kill 150 people for their money, their political opposition, or their refusal to kiss my feet first thing every morning is immaterial.
As always, the reason Saddam is being tried and hung is that he's the bad guy that lost the war.
To be honest, IMHO it is only an Iraqi court because it is situated in Iraq. The whole country is propped up by Foreign military forces, and the court is yielding to what these foreigners believe is justice. The outcome everyone knew before the process started. Judges have been changed, lawyers shot.. Its not 'normal' to say the least.Any crimes he committed were committed against Iraqis, so having him tried by Iraqi courts was the appropriate thing to do.
I don't understand your point marlon, do you mean that Leaders should be tried because of the way they govern?I agree but i feel you are objecting to a point i never wanted to make. I did not just say "look at the intention". We are judging leaders here not just civilians. When we are talking about leaders we are talking about regimes and THERE is the specific difference i wanted to point out.
OfcourseAnttech said:I don't understand your point marlon, do you mean that Leaders should be tried because of the way they govern?