On a personal level I wouldn't bat an eye lid when the time comes, but then again if/when he does get put to death I fear it would incite more hatred towards the west ( UK/America ) which would be a bad thing. So having said that they should let him spend the rest of his life in jail.
Saddam to be executed
- Thread starter Richardp
- Start date
Sponsored Links
they should have just filled in the pit they found him in
job done
job done
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,765
- Reaction score
- 2,641
- Country
ricicle said:
Or Ne Win's military Junta in Burma...
Over tea tonight I asked my son the same question. "Is it right to execute this man". There was a long silence, his mouth stopped chomping and his eyes rolled as if searching the air for an answer. No answer was forthcoming so I gave a reply to my own question.
Though many lived in fear of their lives and many murdered by the hands of this man I think it wrong to execute him because in so doing we make ourselves no better than he in showing no compassion or respect for life.
It may have been better if he were confined in prison or in a remote and confined area to live out his days alone, giving him time to reflect his wickedness and perhaps he may have changed.
Sadly, as I write the guy may have been put to death and the greatest sadness is that all those hypocritical world leaders will come forward now condemning his execution.
Though many lived in fear of their lives and many murdered by the hands of this man I think it wrong to execute him because in so doing we make ourselves no better than he in showing no compassion or respect for life.
It may have been better if he were confined in prison or in a remote and confined area to live out his days alone, giving him time to reflect his wickedness and perhaps he may have changed.
Sadly, as I write the guy may have been put to death and the greatest sadness is that all those hypocritical world leaders will come forward now condemning his execution.
Sponsored Links
GTL said:
same feelings....but if your family was involved ?
ricicle said:Should never have got involved.Must be some other reason for interest in the region......
Didn't see us rushing in to Uganda to oust Mugabe.....
wasn't it Idi Amin in Uganda? Mugabe is Zimbabwe.
well, he's gone now and the British and Americans are trying to distance themselves from it saying its good that the Iraqi government have dealt with it in their own way with no pressure or influence from the west and Bush said this morning that its another step towards democracy 'Democracy being the definitive word'' now why do the arabs hate the west? after all, are we not made up of the most civilised nations of the world? Oh! and they filmed it
going by the confused look on his face i think he thought that he was going to see an execution?, but he couldnt work out what Johnny "Mad Dog" Adair and his mates doing there?.
and Bush said this morning that its another step towards democracy 'Democracy being the definitive word'' now why do the arabs hate the west? after all, are we not made up of the most civilised nations of the world? Oh! and they filmed it going by the confused look on his face i think he thought that he was going to see an execution?, but he couldnt work out what Johnny "Mad Dog" Adair and his mates doing there?.
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2005
- Messages
- 6,345
- Reaction score
- 268
- Country
Richardp said:
Not all Arabs hate the west.
First we need to understand why they seem to hate each other...
What Hope for Arab Democracy?
-
Did anyone mention - dumbing down?[url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0 said:
Wealth and Power, Power and Wealth.... Forever entwined.
-
Eddie M said:ricicle said:Should never have got involved.Must be some other reason for interest in the region......
Didn't see us rushing in to Uganda to oust Mugabe.....
May have missed him, he's the president of Zimbabwe
It doesn't matter about any of the others, unless they have oil, which is why Iran is mentioned a lot. The US is short of oil, and will plunder (oops, I mean defeat terrorism perpetrated by the axis of evil) if it can get away with it, for the next 50 years or so, when the oil will be irrelevant (who keeps mentioning oil?), so they can stop defeating terrorism.
2
2scoops0406
libby lou lou said:
It's the huge difference between being objective and subjective.
I think the world is better off without him in it, but I do agree with many of the sentiments here that question whether this was a smart decision for the region. Not being a military man I cannot understand the reasoning for going to war when there is not an imminent or pressing danger, and the evidence that has been presented in the last couple of years certainly questions the validity of the war. The problem I have always had is when people discuss whether a war is legal or not, surely all war is immoral, and armed conflict can only be "legal" when in pure self defence of ones own people or those who are unable to defend themselves from an aggressor. Using this definition then president Bush and Prime Minister Blair have got their own questions to answer.
Well then, you must be one very naive US citizen Eddie.ETHunter said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1305709,00.html
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."
He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."
And: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html
International lawyers and anti-war campaigners reacted with astonishment yesterday after the influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal.
In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."
President George Bush has consistently argued that the war was legal either because of existing UN security council resolutions on Iraq - also the British government's publicly stated view - or as an act of self-defence permitted by international law.
But Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable.
Sponsored Links
