Saddam to Swing
 

Any thoughts on this?

Here's a thought...

His death is irrelevant and in no way justifies the war in Iraq and it was highly unlikely that his trial was fair, or that it would even be possible for him to have a fair trial in Iraq.

Although I agree with everything you've said Radar, he's still obviously guilty of many evil crimes.

I think that among the people who have been sentenced to the death penalty, at least we know he deserves it.

Now, does that mean I think this is some great victory for the motherland? Not at all, this "war" is more aptly described as an invasion, and his death is irrelevant to the current conflict, as stated above.

I'm against the death penalty on principal, so this is a hard one for me to rationalise. Firstly because I don't think one human has a right to take anothers life. With regard to Sadam, I don't think him being murdered will in any way make up for what he's done. You can't kill the same person hundreds of times anyway can you? Could he be dangerous if left alive to rot in prison? Probably. Is it safer to remove him from the earth? probably.

He is an incredibly corrupt man. I don't think he could be fixed.

I agree with Aliantha, the war is STILL unjustified and everything, but saddam does deserve to be punished.

I agree with everything you've said except I think he's more dangerous dead than if he had been held in prison for the rest of his life. Now he's goning to be a martyr, and martyrs are more dangerous than prisoners.

I don't think he will be a martyr. Although he took care of the Sunnis, it was a tribal thing rather than religious. I don't think the religious leaders, of any persuasion, will want a secular martyr.

That said, Kim and some of the other dictators might use him as an example of US aggression. :2cents:

Saddam to Swing?

how does he get his wife and the other couple into prison? they have multiplayer conjugal visits? You think he'd be happy with his wife after such a long separation. I suspect that Elspode is somehow mixed up in this.

Meh. Around these parts, we put a guy to death last Wednesday, and we've got another one scheduled for the day after tomorrow.

Some people here are taking strange, convoluted positions, apparently for the sake of seeing how well they can play philosophical Twister.

Whelming the dictator is good. Making a democracy where there was autarchy before is good, however many junior-grade tyrants and oppressor wannabes have to get shot in the process. People of that kind wouldn't work for a successful democratic republic in any case. I cannot believe any Libertarian can't accept this, which is why radar and I always fight. Dictators never fall before a radiation of righteous indignation. They do fall to the bullet -- or the drop.

Mission Accomplished...?

Ha. Very good point, people are taking this as some symbolic victory, I suppose.

I am against the death penalty for many reasons... now one more. This will just martyr him.
In some ways, he is already one to "his people".

Clodfobble, I wish I had never looked at that link, this kinda stuff really intrigues me and when I went one link further to the watch list....I'm seriously hooked and it will occupy my mind for days.

Now I will be researching at least two of those cases to follow them through and get up to date.

The death penalty has always sparked something in me, since early school days.

You used to be able to see a list of all the last meals everyone had requested, but they took it down because it was a rather popular link and they decided it was too morbid.

I have been for the death penalty all my life, for one big and I believe unanswerable reason: it shows our willingness to fight evil all the way to the very end. Good should not be in the business of quitting the contest at some self-imposed point.

That, and there's the complete lack of criminal recidivism once they're dead. It may not be all that prissy nice, but it does control the damage evildoers can do. That there is no appeal beyond the grave, well, that's just the flip side of carrying justice this far. Kvetching about it too much does not become us.

And, hey, if we should kill a few innocents, in the name of Good, it's a great way to teach Evil that we mean business.

Teaching evildoers that we mean business, in terms their defective minds understand, is the entire and I believe overwhelming point.

By accidentally executing innocent people, what "lesson" do we "teach" Evil? Which side are we on, then?

Umm. I may be wrong, but I'd imagine there's a fairly low recidivism rate for people who serve a life sentence.

Also: Man walks free from jail, goes to a cornershop, pulls out a gun and shoots the shopkeeper, he is then convicted of murder and sentenced to death by lethal injection... result = 1 dead, innocent shopkeeper + 1 dead, guilty murderer.

But: Flawed police evidence and a poorly constructed defense by a defence lawyer, leads to the suspect ( a shopkeeper by trade) being wrongfully convicted of his wife's murder and sentenced to death by lethal injection.....result = 1 dead, innocent shopkeeper + 1 dead, innocent shopkeeper's wife.

How is the second situation a victory for justice?

It don't mean a thing
if it ain't got that Swing...

Interesting comments.

The chances of me taking back my country have just recently improved.

I'm not really a bad guy you know. And...I am sorry for all those bad things that I'm supposed to have done. :blush:

Will you let me out now?

no, you can stay in jail and rest there for the rest of your life. :)

:sniff: But I promise on a stack of Korans that I'll be super duper good and not kill anyone or spin a power drill through peoples' eye sockets.

How about now? :)

Not till you say you're sorry for putting live, conscious people in the wood chipper feet first, you naughty boy.

Nope...you can still stay there! Bad bad baaaaaad boy!!!

If you murder a murderer it just makes you one too and nothing else, same goes for sanctioning it.
It cannot be self-defense if they are strapped to a chair or table.
The point is to be better than the guilty.

I totally agree rkz.

I have, for as long as I can clearly recall, been of the mind that one should show her willingness to be better than evil all the way to the very end. Good should not be in the business of doing wrong. We should all be in the business of leading by example; of being just, not of justifying what we do.

Otherwise, what's the point? So what if you can say: "my ideas, my intentions, are better than yours?"

I agree, and I think the confusion starts when people define "good" and "evil' as groups of people instead of actions.

Excellent point Flint.

Thank you. I find a similar confusion concerning the word "freedom" . . .

And by, not accidentally at all, executing the guilty ones, what lesson do we teach?

Understand that we are still on the side of right even when we make mistakes. Errors are to be regretted, but don't ask us to go paralytic. Evil's too tough for us to let up on it.

If there's one thing I cannot in conscience ask for, it's the kind of divine perfection you seem to want. This is a human endeavor.

Rkzen, here your thinking is all wrong. You are misusing the term "murder," and thus setting up a total falsity. The difference between a rightful killing and a wrongful killing has been recognized at least since the Bronze Age. Rkzen, that is an awfully long distance to be behind the curve. Someone who cannot distinguish a rightful killing from a wrongful one is not an enlightened person by any measure, no matter how much he may hope otherwise.

Execution is self defense, extended to the whole of society, at least in the following of just and proper laws. A sign of good government such as ours is that execution is not over-used, in the fashion of the non-democracies. Non-democracies' overuse of death sentences is enough to give the entire thing a bad name, true -- but this should not delegitimize anyone else's efforts at damage control. In the end, that's what an execution is -- it's damage control.

Bad people try to undermine social self-defense. Good people understand it and uphold it.

Murderers are bad mmmkay.

Would it be "right and just" to prosecute and punish a frenchman in English. No, justice should be in the language the defendant understands.

Executing violent criminals is justice in their language. Appropriate response is the true high road. :behead:

And accidentally executing a few innocents is the language of: ???

The only swinging Saddam has in his future is on a swingset.....shooting a rifle into the air laughing. :)

There are no innocents over 2 years old. :cool:

Oh well, as long as they're guilty of something.

"And remember: Evil will always prevail, because Good is dumb."

if it's wrong to kill, then it's wrong to kill.





(checks the ten commandments for the small print)

The ten commandments were a covenant with the Jews. I'm not Jewish.:p

The Commandment proscribes wrongful killing, Jay. Even people who aren't Bible scholars know about that.

I'm speechless really. That's why I'm typing instead. I cannot understand the pathetic excuses and justifications some people here have for killing other people.

Murder is wrong full stop! Period! The end! Finito! There's nothing more to add!!!

How very reactionary of you, UG. I read it. The word "wrongful" doesn't appear in my list of commandments. It's just not there. You can use it as an excuse to kill, as I suspect you must and you may, but you're just making (more) shit up. As usual.

As to wrongfulness, who's to judge? You're waaaay overdue for a plank-check, brother.

Biblical scholars know the wording is actually "murder". "Kill" is a mistranslation.

mmm.... these would be christian biblical scholars?

Why? :question:

Because no one has the right to life or death over another person.

You will want to avoid the thread about the kid that got raped... lot of unrepentant blood-lust in there too. Sounds like the eighteenth century.

Well, here's something I'll share with you, and you can call me a hypocrite if you like when I'm done.

If anyone laid a hand on my kids, I'd kill them myself. Does that mean I've changed my mind or have double standards? Nope. I fully realize that what I'd be doing is wrong, and I'd pay the consequences for my actions willingly, and if there is a God, he'll be the one to judge me when the time comes, otherwise, I'll just have to come back again and learn the lesson I missed this time round.

No one touches my kids and that's about all there is to it.

Me too. And that makes sense. When it's your own kid, your opinions are based on your emotions, which are naturally strong when dealing with your flesh and blood. When you discuss public policy in general, you are able to let your brain do the work. It's the difference between mob mentality and rule of law.

But who made that rule? What makes you state that as an absolute and not your opinion? :confused:

I never said it was anything more than my opinion. Obviously it's not a fact because the death penalty exists in some place.

I remember about ten or fifteen years ago there was a very disturbing case over here, where two children aged (if i recall correctly) 10 and 12 or thereabouts, lured a two year old who had become seperated from his mum in a shopping centre away, and then killed him.

The boys were caught on cctv talking to the toddler and holding his hand as they led him away from the shopping centre.

One of the things that stayed in my mind, was a terrifying scene as the boys were put into a police van and taken from the court back to the secure unit they were being held in. A mob had formed and attacked the van. Adults hurling themselves, and bricks and bottles at the van, screaming in a frenzy of bloodlust. I kept thinking to myself: I know what they've done is hideous, but these are still two children. two clearly very disturbed young boys. In interviews they were tearful, one of them broke down several times and wanted his mum. But the mob of adults, some of them probably with children the same age. looked as if they would tear these two kids limb from limb if they'd been able to get hold of them. It still makes me shiver when i think about it.

it's not set in stone...oh wait...
 

Not everybody shares this opinion/follows this rule. Those who don't, are called "murderers" . . .

James Bulger was the little boys name. It was shocking. I will never forget this case.

My wife and I have a pact.
If either of us gets murdered, the other does not get a lawyer that will consider the death penalty. If the state insisted, we would not participate.
We have discussed this more than once & we both know we have the strength of our convictions; having both had family members murdered in the past.
I would not for my son either & believe the same for her.
I teach him values that I must live, or all I have said to him, all I have tried to be for him, is a lie.
His legacy would not just be more senseless murder and to have his parents become murderers as well, no.