Forums > Social Discussion > Saddam Hussein
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Posted:
Saddam Hussien has been sentenced to death by hanging. I just heard it on the BBC radio 4 news. It hasn't appeared on their news website yet but I'll give you a link when it does.
I'm not sure there was ever any doubt that the death penalty would be given... I still feel uneasy about it though. I really don't believe in the death penalty, but is it different in cases like this?
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6117910.stm
This is the web page so far.
EDITED_BY: Skulduggery (1162718478)
Saddam Hussien has been sentenced to death by hanging. I just heard it on the BBC radio 4 news. It hasn't appeared on their news website yet but I'll give you a link when it does.
I'm not sure there was ever any doubt that the death penalty would be given... I still feel uneasy about it though. I really don't believe in the death penalty, but is it different in cases like this?
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6117910.stm
This is the web page so far.
EDITED_BY: Skulduggery (1162718478)
Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
grrrr
keeping mouth shut
grrrr
keeping mouth shut
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posted:
i really dont understand the logic of ppl who want to spend money on keeping ppl who have commited crimes that recieve a life sentence in jail alive. like seriously theres such better uses for that money like education/hosipitals/the homeless etc etc
Written by: FireTom
I oppose the sentence and would rather like to see him locked up and the key thrown away.
i really dont understand the logic of ppl who want to spend money on keeping ppl who have commited crimes that recieve a life sentence in jail alive. like seriously theres such better uses for that money like education/hosipitals/the homeless etc etc
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourself, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous and talented? Who are you NOT to be?
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
did rotc for a bit, yes one of my friends died and left a wife and baby
Written by: fyrespirit
One of these friends has a newborn baby girl and now her husband is gone.....never got to meet his first born.....
did rotc for a bit, yes one of my friends died and left a wife and baby
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
member
44 posts
Location: Belfast
44 posts
Location: Belfast
Posted:
What about the graves in Iraq? Afghanistan? What about the money donated to South American Terrorists by the Bush Administration and the people that weaponry wiped out? You could just list and list....
Do you think he has been a good influence on Global Politics?
I am genuinely intrigued by your point of view as it's very rare that I hear someone actually stick up for him and his administration so I am interested to hear why you feel the way you do
Written by: faithinfireWritten by: Nonky
If it is Saddams 'crimes' which make it ok for him to suffer the death penalty, then why does that same logic not apply to people who have done (and are doing) much worse.
One example- George W. Bush. Another- Mugabe..
How come they get to live?
with bush we don't have mass graves
What about the graves in Iraq? Afghanistan? What about the money donated to South American Terrorists by the Bush Administration and the people that weaponry wiped out? You could just list and list....
Do you think he has been a good influence on Global Politics?
I am genuinely intrigued by your point of view as it's very rare that I hear someone actually stick up for him and his administration so I am interested to hear why you feel the way you do
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
i think the possible alternatives are even worse
i don't play what ifs
and it is upsetting for us in my group to have our friends killed, don't think that i don't care
but most of those in the military have volunteered to stay longer because they want to see the job through-i support them through that even if it means i might never see them again
i think the possible alternatives are even worse
i don't play what ifs
and it is upsetting for us in my group to have our friends killed, don't think that i don't care
but most of those in the military have volunteered to stay longer because they want to see the job through-i support them through that even if it means i might never see them again
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
member
44 posts
Location: Belfast
44 posts
Location: Belfast
Posted:
See- I can admire you saying that you support the troops who are doing their jobs. Thats fair enough to say that.
My opinion is that its supporting them more (and more productively) to impeach the arse of that incompetent chimp as soon as is humanly possible.
He is the one who is endangering US Troops by putting them in stupid positions like this one, the army of any nation depends on their leader to deploy them only when its completely necessary to do so. Can you truly say that they are there for the good of us all? Do you feel safer?
Bush and his administration have got more blood on their hands than any of the other players in this game. (IMO)
See- I can admire you saying that you support the troops who are doing their jobs. Thats fair enough to say that.
My opinion is that its supporting them more (and more productively) to impeach the arse of that incompetent chimp as soon as is humanly possible.
He is the one who is endangering US Troops by putting them in stupid positions like this one, the army of any nation depends on their leader to deploy them only when its completely necessary to do so. Can you truly say that they are there for the good of us all? Do you feel safer?
Bush and his administration have got more blood on their hands than any of the other players in this game. (IMO)
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
or it could be congress for not giving them the financial support to run a war with few casualties due to proper protection
or it could be congress for not giving them the financial support to run a war with few casualties due to proper protection
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
What about the people in New Orleans, who were lift to die?
Sure, there are no mass graves - because they where left to rot on the streets, or in the water for days on end. I understand that it wasn't bush's fault, but it is clear that he did not act as he should have done. His incompetence killed many people, and that's nothing to do with the wars.
Anyway, the mass graves were dug when the US supported Saddam, and the chances are they knew about them then. We know that the US gave him military intelligence that allowed him to gas the Iranians, for example.
Also, we have been digging mass graves for all the people we have killed in the war.
As I said before, there are many people in the world who are just as bad as Saddam and it is only the political spin that has brain washed us that makes us think he is somehow worse than is. After all, we're the good guys, right? It's not like we've been at war or occupying Iraq for most of the last 100 years, is it?
What about the people in New Orleans, who were lift to die?
Sure, there are no mass graves - because they where left to rot on the streets, or in the water for days on end. I understand that it wasn't bush's fault, but it is clear that he did not act as he should have done. His incompetence killed many people, and that's nothing to do with the wars.
Anyway, the mass graves were dug when the US supported Saddam, and the chances are they knew about them then. We know that the US gave him military intelligence that allowed him to gas the Iranians, for example.
Also, we have been digging mass graves for all the people we have killed in the war.
As I said before, there are many people in the world who are just as bad as Saddam and it is only the political spin that has brain washed us that makes us think he is somehow worse than is. After all, we're the good guys, right? It's not like we've been at war or occupying Iraq for most of the last 100 years, is it?
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
BRONZE Member
member
51 posts
Location: Travelling, Spain
member
51 posts
Location: Travelling, Spain
Posted:
Does anyone know why Sadam is been punish for?
This trial was just, and I say just, for the killing of 146 civilians 25 years ago. Just for that. He´s supossed to have a few more trials for different things, but ¿casualy? 2 days before the elections on the states he is punished to die? And casualy Bush, who is using Iraq as his main ´miracle¨ has something to say.
Is kind of suspicious for me!!
What happens with all those kurdists that are waiting for him to be punished for killing their families? They want justice, and a trial for what he did to them,..
They are thinking to hang him in 30 days!!!
Does anyone know why Sadam is been punish for?
This trial was just, and I say just, for the killing of 146 civilians 25 years ago. Just for that. He´s supossed to have a few more trials for different things, but ¿casualy? 2 days before the elections on the states he is punished to die? And casualy Bush, who is using Iraq as his main ´miracle¨ has something to say.
Is kind of suspicious for me!!
What happens with all those kurdists that are waiting for him to be punished for killing their families? They want justice, and a trial for what he did to them,..
They are thinking to hang him in 30 days!!!
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_sentenced_to_death_for_Dujail_killings
I'm not sure that this is going to help Bush much in the mid terms. If anything, getting Iraq on the news is going to harm him, because I guess that people are getting fed up with 'out men' getting killed for no good reason.
I like this: https://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGMDE140372006
edit: one more thing I heard last night: The US control who sees Saddam at the moment. a BBC reporter wasn't allowed to see him or anyone on his legal team because of 'security reasons'.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1162900043)
Written by: wikinews
The sentences of death and life in prison carry an automatic appeal, and no time-limit is set for the appeals court review of the case. The law mandates the death sentence to be carried out within 30 days, after all appeals are exhausted.
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_sentenced_to_death_for_Dujail_killings
I'm not sure that this is going to help Bush much in the mid terms. If anything, getting Iraq on the news is going to harm him, because I guess that people are getting fed up with 'out men' getting killed for no good reason.
I like this: https://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGMDE140372006
edit: one more thing I heard last night: The US control who sees Saddam at the moment. a BBC reporter wasn't allowed to see him or anyone on his legal team because of 'security reasons'.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1162900043)
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Be your so kind to answer the initial question and you may understand the logic much better:
"why do we kill people who killed people to proove that the killing of people is wrong?"
Or maybe you provide a valid answer, so can understand your logic?
IMO the only valid reason to kill him would be due to the fear that he could escape prison and be reinstalled or something like that. The death penalty is not justice, it simply drags one down to the same level as the killer. How can he experience all those thousands of inocent getting killed, when he's got only one life to loose?
And all american presidents who made him strong and supported him (with intelligence and weaponry) would need to get hanged just like him... 'cause Ben, if you're talking about money for homeless and stuff - I dunno what to say really. This is completely off - at least IMHO
For sure he'll stand there and just swear and shout "Allah Akbar" and die. Ppl will turn him into a martyr - especially since he was sentenced a short time before US elections.
IMO all this is simply stupid and short sighted, like US foreign politics in general - why not giving him 20 years under regular prison conditions to think about what he has done?
Written by: ben-ja-menWritten by: FireTom
I oppose the sentence and would rather like to see him locked up and the key thrown away.
i really dont understand the logic of ppl who want to spend money on keeping ppl who have commited crimes that recieve a life sentence in jail alive. like seriously theres such better uses for that money like education/hosipitals/the homeless etc etc
Be your so kind to answer the initial question and you may understand the logic much better:
"why do we kill people who killed people to proove that the killing of people is wrong?"
Or maybe you provide a valid answer, so can understand your logic?
IMO the only valid reason to kill him would be due to the fear that he could escape prison and be reinstalled or something like that. The death penalty is not justice, it simply drags one down to the same level as the killer. How can he experience all those thousands of inocent getting killed, when he's got only one life to loose?
And all american presidents who made him strong and supported him (with intelligence and weaponry) would need to get hanged just like him... 'cause Ben, if you're talking about money for homeless and stuff - I dunno what to say really. This is completely off - at least IMHO
For sure he'll stand there and just swear and shout "Allah Akbar" and die. Ppl will turn him into a martyr - especially since he was sentenced a short time before US elections.
IMO all this is simply stupid and short sighted, like US foreign politics in general - why not giving him 20 years under regular prison conditions to think about what he has done?
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
SILVER Member
Friendly Fire Fiddler
103 posts
Location: Munich, Germany
Friendly Fire Fiddler
103 posts
Location: Munich, Germany
Posted:
[Quote]The comparison of the current to the situation of assassinating Hitler is eraneous. Whilst killing Hitler would have saved millions of lives, Hussein is in custody.[/Quote]
The Hitler exemple was to debate the principle of death penalty. He is classic case of justification IMHO.
(Even though you may now argue if assasination could be right BEFORE he commited his crimes against humanity ...)
Anyway to clarify, I was not comparing Saddam with Hitler.
And I agree while it's right to hang Saddam for the crimes he committed, its sad that probably 95% of leaders with blood on thier hands die in bed ...
[Quote]The comparison of the current to the situation of assassinating Hitler is eraneous. Whilst killing Hitler would have saved millions of lives, Hussein is in custody.[/Quote]
The Hitler exemple was to debate the principle of death penalty. He is classic case of justification IMHO.
(Even though you may now argue if assasination could be right BEFORE he commited his crimes against humanity ...)
Anyway to clarify, I was not comparing Saddam with Hitler.
And I agree while it's right to hang Saddam for the crimes he committed, its sad that probably 95% of leaders with blood on thier hands die in bed ...
SILVER Member
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
Posted:
Gomorrha: that's *exactly* the difference between assassination and capital punishment... you aren't preventing ANYTHING or saving ANYONE by sentencing him to death.
comparison with assassination, (which is still taking a human life and therefore I do not agree with) is fallacious argument.
Gomorrha: that's *exactly* the difference between assassination and capital punishment... you aren't preventing ANYTHING or saving ANYONE by sentencing him to death.
comparison with assassination, (which is still taking a human life and therefore I do not agree with) is fallacious argument.
--pogo (pat) [forever and always]
Future Mrs Pogo
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place
Posted:
There is no easy answer either way...
I don't personally see taking a life as punishment.....it kind of sends the message that murder is justified if it's in the sake of 'Justice.'
Karma is a quite the bitch-kitty!!! What you send out comes back to you...imagine just what Saddam will be paying.
There is no easy answer either way...
I don't personally see taking a life as punishment.....it kind of sends the message that murder is justified if it's in the sake of 'Justice.'
Karma is a quite the bitch-kitty!!! What you send out comes back to you...imagine just what Saddam will be paying.
"Absence is to love what wind is to fire...it extinguishes the small, enkindles the great."
--Comte Debussy-Rebutin
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
Like Pol Pot for instance.
I find the idea of killing someone for killing others confusing.
thats what handy about the law i suppose, and politics too. you can make exceptions depending on how you feel about it. If you have enough power. read: money.
It would be silly to think that saddam doesnt still have massive support from the iraqi people. They will martyr him and the backlash will be horrendous. The question is... what is more important than letting more soldiers and civilians die?
Like Pol Pot for instance.
I find the idea of killing someone for killing others confusing.
thats what handy about the law i suppose, and politics too. you can make exceptions depending on how you feel about it. If you have enough power. read: money.
It would be silly to think that saddam doesnt still have massive support from the iraqi people. They will martyr him and the backlash will be horrendous. The question is... what is more important than letting more soldiers and civilians die?
Love is the law.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Sorry Gomorrha, I was confused by your Avatar
however
With all due respect, I personally would compare Hitler and Hussein - just not in this final situation... If Hitler would have gotten caught alife, I would also say: don't have him killed. The killing of such figure always produces a myth, always they are turned into some kind of legend. I'm even sad, that Hitler was able to kill himself and got burnt by his supporters... it shouldn't be this way.
Assassinating a dictator, or somebody who is a threat to (many million) people, I clearly can find compassion for (as a sidenote, Hitler was announcing his politics in his book "my struggle", long before in power. Whoever took the time to read it, knew what Hitler was truely about).
After reviewing the entire argument, it's pros and cons, I cannot follow up with the idea of death sentence in general and I am very happy that it is not legal in Europe anymore.
There is a multitude of reasons why, a few (important ones especially in the Hussein case) are:
a) why killing people, who killed people to proove that killing of people is wrong? Just doesn't make sense to me.
b) why liberating someone from his misery, especially when he was causing people to suffer lifeterms (from war injuries, gas, torture, killing relatives, etc) within a few hours, days, weeks, months - or even 10 years? Why not keeping him until nature demands it's right?
c) why turning him into a martyr, by hanging him (under "US occupational law")?
d) why endangering even more civilians and UN troops, by forthcoming uprising?
e) why letting the US presidents, who were setting him up in the first place get away and hang him (as the messenger)?
It clearly boils down to "winners justice", IMHO - and I can't even call it justice as I think that capital punishment is not the way to teach anybody anything.
Maybe one could call it: Suicide by US government???
Sorry Gomorrha, I was confused by your Avatar
howeverWritten by: Gomorrha
The Hitler exemple was to debate the principle of death penalty. He is classic case of justification IMHO.
(Even though you may now argue if assasination could be right BEFORE he commited his crimes against humanity ...)
Anyway to clarify, I was not comparing Saddam with Hitler.
And I agree while it's right to hang Saddam for the crimes he committed, its sad that probably 95% of leaders with blood on thier hands die in bed ...
With all due respect, I personally would compare Hitler and Hussein - just not in this final situation... If Hitler would have gotten caught alife, I would also say: don't have him killed. The killing of such figure always produces a myth, always they are turned into some kind of legend. I'm even sad, that Hitler was able to kill himself and got burnt by his supporters... it shouldn't be this way.
Assassinating a dictator, or somebody who is a threat to (many million) people, I clearly can find compassion for (as a sidenote, Hitler was announcing his politics in his book "my struggle", long before in power. Whoever took the time to read it, knew what Hitler was truely about).
After reviewing the entire argument, it's pros and cons, I cannot follow up with the idea of death sentence in general and I am very happy that it is not legal in Europe anymore.
There is a multitude of reasons why, a few (important ones especially in the Hussein case) are:
a) why killing people, who killed people to proove that killing of people is wrong? Just doesn't make sense to me.
b) why liberating someone from his misery, especially when he was causing people to suffer lifeterms (from war injuries, gas, torture, killing relatives, etc) within a few hours, days, weeks, months - or even 10 years? Why not keeping him until nature demands it's right?
c) why turning him into a martyr, by hanging him (under "US occupational law")?
d) why endangering even more civilians and UN troops, by forthcoming uprising?
e) why letting the US presidents, who were setting him up in the first place get away and hang him (as the messenger)?
It clearly boils down to "winners justice", IMHO - and I can't even call it justice as I think that capital punishment is not the way to teach anybody anything.
Maybe one could call it: Suicide by US government???
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
SILVER Member
the 1337 poier
346 posts
Location: england
the 1337 poier
346 posts
Location: england
Posted:
I dont agree that sadam should be killed or any other human being, and if you do kill him you would have to kill Bush and every other leader for that matter, as 200 deaths to your own people is alot better than thousands done by someone interfering with other peoples politics just because they want some oil. And anyway after a survey being made pretty much all iraqis thought that there lives were better under the rule of Sadam and i would suggest that rather than being a disgusting, vile, cruel man (as some, i dont think anyone on this forum has said) he was just trying to make his country better (saying this i dont agree with his choice of ways and that what he did was wrong).
I dont agree that sadam should be killed or any other human being, and if you do kill him you would have to kill Bush and every other leader for that matter, as 200 deaths to your own people is alot better than thousands done by someone interfering with other peoples politics just because they want some oil. And anyway after a survey being made pretty much all iraqis thought that there lives were better under the rule of Sadam and i would suggest that rather than being a disgusting, vile, cruel man (as some, i dont think anyone on this forum has said) he was just trying to make his country better (saying this i dont agree with his choice of ways and that what he did was wrong).
ive got a fuzzbox and im not afraid to use it
R.I.P. gayfest
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
people have been saying that we cannot judge the iraqis because thier belief system and legal system is different, so even though there is outside influence ultimately the iraqi court made the decision and if they want to hang him....
people have been saying that we cannot judge the iraqis because thier belief system and legal system is different, so even though there is outside influence ultimately the iraqi court made the decision and if they want to hang him....
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
You are completely right, Faith: We have no right and power to change their decision.
But what we can do is to demonstrate and give evidence that we have truely learned one thing:
Killing is wrong!
It's clearly recorded in all religious testaments, who are we to decide who's an exception to this rule? Ain't we ridiculing our own morals and beliefs by supporting this rule?
Anyone willing to start an online petition in favour of changing the death sentence into a life long term? Raise your hand...
You are completely right, Faith: We have no right and power to change their decision.
But what we can do is to demonstrate and give evidence that we have truely learned one thing:
Killing is wrong!
It's clearly recorded in all religious testaments, who are we to decide who's an exception to this rule? Ain't we ridiculing our own morals and beliefs by supporting this rule?
Anyone willing to start an online petition in favour of changing the death sentence into a life long term? Raise your hand...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
Posted:
if you think sadam killed 200 people you odviously know very little about the situation though the exact figure will probly never be know it was closer to 600,000 - 1.2 million. iraqies in a contry of 22 million people.
and while i agree bush is no saint you should be carfull about geting caught up in the anti-bush feaver while america may have killed ALOT of inocent civilens the US did at least make an effort to avoid colataral damage.
for example they never gassed entire villiges of men, women and children because of there race.
after riseing to power bush didn't force the people left from the old goverment to execute there comrades who refused to support him.
bush doesn't have his own supporters terrifyed that them and there familys will be executed for disobaying him.
bush never instituted public executions by beheading of those he concidered sinful mostly women accused of prostituion to bolseter the religous faith of the nation.
and while the storys of the methods used at gentanimo bay are certainly not plesent the acts of sadam make them look like primary school bulling as sadam used methods such as fingernail-extracting, eye-gouging, genital-shocking, bucket-drowning and secret police rapeing prisoners' wives and daughters to force confessions and denunciations.
while i dont beleave in the death penelty i find it moraly difficult to suggest any other punishment that comes close to matching his crimes.
as for bush im no fan of him and i for one think the world would be better if he never gained power but to compaire him to sadam is simply rediculus
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163006431)
Written by: the_poier
I dont agree that sadam should be killed or any other human being, and if you do kill him you would have to kill Bush and every other leader for that matter, as 200 deaths to your own people is alot better than thousands done by someone interfering with other peoples politics just because they want some oil.
if you think sadam killed 200 people you odviously know very little about the situation though the exact figure will probly never be know it was closer to 600,000 - 1.2 million. iraqies in a contry of 22 million people.
and while i agree bush is no saint you should be carfull about geting caught up in the anti-bush feaver while america may have killed ALOT of inocent civilens the US did at least make an effort to avoid colataral damage.
for example they never gassed entire villiges of men, women and children because of there race.
after riseing to power bush didn't force the people left from the old goverment to execute there comrades who refused to support him.
bush doesn't have his own supporters terrifyed that them and there familys will be executed for disobaying him.
bush never instituted public executions by beheading of those he concidered sinful mostly women accused of prostituion to bolseter the religous faith of the nation.
and while the storys of the methods used at gentanimo bay are certainly not plesent the acts of sadam make them look like primary school bulling as sadam used methods such as fingernail-extracting, eye-gouging, genital-shocking, bucket-drowning and secret police rapeing prisoners' wives and daughters to force confessions and denunciations.
while i dont beleave in the death penelty i find it moraly difficult to suggest any other punishment that comes close to matching his crimes.
as for bush im no fan of him and i for one think the world would be better if he never gained power but to compaire him to sadam is simply rediculus
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163006431)
My nunchucks vital statictics 
weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches
Future Mrs Pogo
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place
Posted:
You know, this whole debate comes down to the fact that what all the world wants is POWER!!!
It's not about oil...it's not about death...it's about 'Whoever dies with the most toys wins!!!' And that is meant figuratively...not literally!
Saddam (So-Damn-Insane) Hussein is not the first, nor will he be the last...I believe he should be made to live and to suffer miserably for the crimes that he committed but, 'cruel and unusual punishment' is looked down upon (and WTF is the definition of that anyway in this world) while putting someone to death so that they can become a figure of martyrdom in the eyes of their supporters is okay???
I am just completely friggin' confused!!! And maybe none of what I've said has made sense but, I am tired of seeing hostility directed at Americans because of an ignoramous of a leader!!! I saw his as a power-hungry weasel before he was ever elected and KNEW that he would only bring grief on the whole world!!!
Ok...rant over!!!
You know, this whole debate comes down to the fact that what all the world wants is POWER!!!
It's not about oil...it's not about death...it's about 'Whoever dies with the most toys wins!!!' And that is meant figuratively...not literally!
Saddam (So-Damn-Insane) Hussein is not the first, nor will he be the last...I believe he should be made to live and to suffer miserably for the crimes that he committed but, 'cruel and unusual punishment' is looked down upon (and WTF is the definition of that anyway in this world) while putting someone to death so that they can become a figure of martyrdom in the eyes of their supporters is okay???
I am just completely friggin' confused!!! And maybe none of what I've said has made sense but, I am tired of seeing hostility directed at Americans because of an ignoramous of a leader!!! I saw his as a power-hungry weasel before he was ever elected and KNEW that he would only bring grief on the whole world!!!
Ok...rant over!!!
"Absence is to love what wind is to fire...it extinguishes the small, enkindles the great."
--Comte Debussy-Rebutin
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
Wow, you nicely glossed over the fact that the us administration DOES kidnap people, voilate human rights, invade countries, occupy countries, torture prisoners and etc...
I would suggest that very few of us really know what went on in iraq, 99% of the news we get is propaganda designed to provoke thje reaction you had exactly.....
'Sure bush is bad, but look at that guy over there, hes waaaay worse.... And look, a gay reverned doing a line of speed!!!'
It makes me so damn sad when people think there are degrees of inhumanity. There is not.
The problem is deciding a suitable punishment. People get the death penalty for killin one person. Let alone mass murder and war, invasion, crippling third world economies and killing millions by famine and starvation.
Im one of the lucky ones in that I believe everyone gets whats coming to them. And its not just for what you do. Its for who you are because deep down we all know the truth.
Written by: robnunchucksWritten by: the_poier
I dont agree that sadam should be killed or any other human being, and if you do kill him you would have to kill Bush and every other leader for that matter, as 200 deaths to your own people is alot better than thousands done by someone interfering with other peoples politics just because they want some oil.
if you think sadam killed 200 people you odviously know very little about the situation though the exact figure will probly never be know it was closer to 600,000 - 1.2 million. iraqies in a contry of 22 million people.
and while i agree bush is no saint you should be carfull about geting caught up in the anti-bush feaver while america may have killed ALOT of inocent civilens the US did at least make an effort to avoid colataral damage.
for example they never gassed entire villiges of men, women and children because of there race.
after riseing to power bush didn't force the people left from the old goverment to execute there comrades who refused to support him.
bush doesn't have his own supporters terrifyed that them and there familys will be executed for disobaying him.
bush never instituted public executions by beheading of those he concidered sinful mostly women accused of prostituion to bolseter the religous faith of the nation.
and while the storys of the methods used at gentanimo bay are certainly not plesent the acts of sadam make them look like primary school bulling as sadam used methods such as fingernail-extracting, eye-gouging, genital-shocking, bucket-drowning and secret police rapeing prisoners' wives and daughters to force confessions and denunciations.
while i dont beleave in the death penelty i find it moraly difficult to suggest any other punishment that comes close to matching his crimes.
as for bush im no fan of him and i for one think the world would be better if he never gained power but to compaire him to sadam is simply rediculus
Wow, you nicely glossed over the fact that the us administration DOES kidnap people, voilate human rights, invade countries, occupy countries, torture prisoners and etc...
I would suggest that very few of us really know what went on in iraq, 99% of the news we get is propaganda designed to provoke thje reaction you had exactly.....
'Sure bush is bad, but look at that guy over there, hes waaaay worse.... And look, a gay reverned doing a line of speed!!!'
It makes me so damn sad when people think there are degrees of inhumanity. There is not.
The problem is deciding a suitable punishment. People get the death penalty for killin one person. Let alone mass murder and war, invasion, crippling third world economies and killing millions by famine and starvation.
Im one of the lucky ones in that I believe everyone gets whats coming to them. And its not just for what you do. Its for who you are because deep down we all know the truth.
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
robnunchucks: i think what you said was well put, and glad someone went through the details (not glossing over as was said)
robnunchucks: i think what you said was well put, and glad someone went through the details (not glossing over as was said)
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
BRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
Posted:
if you think i glossed over the problems of the US that was not my intent i freely achnoloage that the US has made many many mistakes. As for the 'Sure bush is bad, but look at that guy over there, hes waaaay worse' i dont understand what point your trying to make yes bush is bad and yes sadam hussain is worse. To achnolagle the evil of sadam hussain has no effect on the evil done by bush in my mind? however oddly it seems to in yours.
as for the degrees of inhumanity to say that there is not such thing to take a very very complex issue like morality and tries and boil it down to two catagorys good and evil people this is a gross oversimplifcation. let us assume what you said as true and there are only two kinds of people the humain and the inhumain
now we have a hypothetical situtaion of an old homeless man on the street begging.
Person 1 walks past seeing the homelessmans plite he gives him a large amount of cash
person 2 walks past and ignores the homeless man plite later that day from malnutrion the homeless man comes ill and later dies
person 3 sees the homeless man and attacks him stabing him several times before standing over him laughting and kicking him as he slowly bleads to death
can these 3 people be placed into just 2 catagorys or is person 2 a shade of gray not quite fiting into ether remeber that we will be executeing the inhumain people for there crimes
"crippling third world economies and killing millions by famine and starvation." would come under the 2nd person it isn't the US job to be soly responsable for the wellfair of the entire world yes they could have helped these people but it isn't the same as haveing them all gased. as for mass murder??? do you have proof that the US has intinaly gone out of its way to execute large numbers inocent people if you do i suggest you contact the UN. yes the war resulted in the deaths of inocents but war always does and remember sadam as repeatly attacked naboreing contrys without provocation resulting in the deaths of roughtly 2 million people.
to conclude yes there are shades of gray when it comes to humanity it would be foolish to suggest there wasn't and yes sadam hussain is worse than bush that was the only point i was trying to make
oh and as for 99% of the news and media we see been properganda thats just bollex and i think you know it.
oh and as for kiddnaping and totureing people yes the US does do that but to date i've never heard of people in gentanimo bay haveing there eyes gouged out or there family and spouse raped infront of them
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163072252)
if you think i glossed over the problems of the US that was not my intent i freely achnoloage that the US has made many many mistakes. As for the 'Sure bush is bad, but look at that guy over there, hes waaaay worse' i dont understand what point your trying to make yes bush is bad and yes sadam hussain is worse. To achnolagle the evil of sadam hussain has no effect on the evil done by bush in my mind? however oddly it seems to in yours.
as for the degrees of inhumanity to say that there is not such thing to take a very very complex issue like morality and tries and boil it down to two catagorys good and evil people this is a gross oversimplifcation. let us assume what you said as true and there are only two kinds of people the humain and the inhumain
now we have a hypothetical situtaion of an old homeless man on the street begging.
Person 1 walks past seeing the homelessmans plite he gives him a large amount of cash
person 2 walks past and ignores the homeless man plite later that day from malnutrion the homeless man comes ill and later dies
person 3 sees the homeless man and attacks him stabing him several times before standing over him laughting and kicking him as he slowly bleads to death
can these 3 people be placed into just 2 catagorys or is person 2 a shade of gray not quite fiting into ether remeber that we will be executeing the inhumain people for there crimes
"crippling third world economies and killing millions by famine and starvation." would come under the 2nd person it isn't the US job to be soly responsable for the wellfair of the entire world yes they could have helped these people but it isn't the same as haveing them all gased. as for mass murder??? do you have proof that the US has intinaly gone out of its way to execute large numbers inocent people if you do i suggest you contact the UN. yes the war resulted in the deaths of inocents but war always does and remember sadam as repeatly attacked naboreing contrys without provocation resulting in the deaths of roughtly 2 million people.
to conclude yes there are shades of gray when it comes to humanity it would be foolish to suggest there wasn't and yes sadam hussain is worse than bush that was the only point i was trying to make
oh and as for 99% of the news and media we see been properganda thats just bollex and i think you know it.
oh and as for kiddnaping and totureing people yes the US does do that but to date i've never heard of people in gentanimo bay haveing there eyes gouged out or there family and spouse raped infront of them
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163072252)
My nunchucks vital statictics
weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
I never said there was black and white. I simply mean that everytime someone makes a decision, they know deep down the truth of it and will - prepared or not - live with the consequences of it.
I dont consider the US responsible for helping third world countries, I consider it in a large part, responsible for crippling them.
I do think that most of the media we recieve is biased. Whether its left or right wing, I care not.
I wont respond to your last statement. Im horrified by it.
EDITED_BY: ado-p (1163074963)
I never said there was black and white. I simply mean that everytime someone makes a decision, they know deep down the truth of it and will - prepared or not - live with the consequences of it.
I dont consider the US responsible for helping third world countries, I consider it in a large part, responsible for crippling them.
I do think that most of the media we recieve is biased. Whether its left or right wing, I care not.
I wont respond to your last statement. Im horrified by it.
EDITED_BY: ado-p (1163074963)
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
I agree, it's only 95% propaganda. The Media is a joke, as anyone who has seen a report on something they know a lot about will know. As someone who has been the subject of the media on a local level, it's easy to see how twisted it is.
BNP bomb arms raid on the BBC? No thank you! He's white for Gods sake! Oh look, a towelhead with internet assess, close London down!
To be honest, I think the fact that the US has campaigned to make torture legal is very telling. We will nver hear about things like this from the Media because of the propaganda.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1163079253)
Written by: robnunchucks
oh and as for 99% of the news and media we see been properganda thats just bollex and i think you know it.
I agree, it's only 95% propaganda. The Media is a joke, as anyone who has seen a report on something they know a lot about will know. As someone who has been the subject of the media on a local level, it's easy to see how twisted it is.BNP bomb arms raid on the BBC? No thank you! He's white for Gods sake! Oh look, a towelhead with internet assess, close London down!
To be honest, I think the fact that the US has campaigned to make torture legal is very telling. We will nver hear about things like this from the Media because of the propaganda.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1163079253)
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
BRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
Posted:
It makes me so damn sad when people think there are degrees of inhumanity. There is not.
this to me implys to me you think there are human and inhuman people surely anything else would involve degrees of inhumanity?
I dont consider the US responsible for helping third world countries, I consider it in a large part, responsible for crippling them.
i'm not well informed enough on this subject as 3rd world contrys is a very wide catagagory i'ed be happy to hear any information you have on it afew examples would do nicely
I do think that most of the media we recieve is biased. Whether its left or right wing, I care not.
fair enough we're in agreement however been bias one way or the other is very diffrent from %99 of all media been govermenet propaganda. infact haveing a range of opion is the sign of a free press that was all i was saying
I wont respond to your last statement. Im horrified by it.
good then again we are in agreement
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163078960)
It makes me so damn sad when people think there are degrees of inhumanity. There is not.
this to me implys to me you think there are human and inhuman people surely anything else would involve degrees of inhumanity?
I dont consider the US responsible for helping third world countries, I consider it in a large part, responsible for crippling them.
i'm not well informed enough on this subject as 3rd world contrys is a very wide catagagory i'ed be happy to hear any information you have on it afew examples would do nicely
I do think that most of the media we recieve is biased. Whether its left or right wing, I care not.
fair enough we're in agreement however been bias one way or the other is very diffrent from %99 of all media been govermenet propaganda. infact haveing a range of opion is the sign of a free press that was all i was saying
I wont respond to your last statement. Im horrified by it.
good then again we are in agreement
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163078960)
My nunchucks vital statictics
weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
Nope, I dont think there is either. Only life, choices and consequences. Take that as you will.
Thats a pretty weak response. If you do so not know that plight of third world countries then I suggest you get informed.
Bias and Propaganda from the media are the same thing. Maybe Sym is right and its only 95% I didnt say that it was 'governent' propoganda. You said that. Though is not the first time you've taken me out of context. So i'll leave it.
If we were in agreement about the horrific implications of your statement. Then you would not have made it and we probably wouldnt been be argueing.
Nope, I dont think there is either. Only life, choices and consequences. Take that as you will.
Thats a pretty weak response. If you do so not know that plight of third world countries then I suggest you get informed.
Bias and Propaganda from the media are the same thing. Maybe Sym is right and its only 95% I didnt say that it was 'governent' propoganda. You said that. Though is not the first time you've taken me out of context. So i'll leave it.
If we were in agreement about the horrific implications of your statement. Then you would not have made it and we probably wouldnt been be argueing.
Love is the law.
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
i'm not in agreement wholly with either rob or ado-p here.
i personally do not believe in a universal 'right' and 'wrong' or 'good' and 'evil'.
as such, i would argue that there are degrees of inhumanity, but these degrees are specific to each person - if you don't feel any guilt for an act after you have committed it, it is not inhuman to your mind.
most days, i don't feel guilty about walking past homeless people and not donating my time/money/food to them.
i would concede to ado-p's standpoint that this might be seen as an inhuman act by some and it is my own moral/ethical code that lets me go on thinking that it is not inhuman (or perhaps only 'a bit inhuman' as someone speaking from rob's standpoint might contend).
but in national and international societies, there are things called 'laws' that help to mark out moral lines for all of us to follow.
many laws are about stating what 'inhuman' (or 'non-selfless') acts are 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' to the society as a whole.
in many cases, its not illegal to kill someone in self-defense.
i would venture that most people, if they were protecting themselves/their loved ones from an attacker intent on killing or seriously harming them and they accidentally killed that attacker, would not consider their act to be an inhuman one.
but killing another person *is* inhuman in most people's books - and if there truly are no degrees of inhumanity, the circumstances of the inhuman act should not even matter.
does the commital of the inhuman act of 'killing another person' not make the defender as bad as other killers (or proxy-killers cos i doubt bush has ever shot someone) such as bush or saddam?
is not the ordering of the deaths of people as much of an inhuman act as actually carrying out those killings?
and if so, why is it just saddam that is being put to death?
where are the people who pushed the button on those gas chambers...?
and on that note, i hereby submit this interesting article
cole. x
i'm not in agreement wholly with either rob or ado-p here.
i personally do not believe in a universal 'right' and 'wrong' or 'good' and 'evil'.
as such, i would argue that there are degrees of inhumanity, but these degrees are specific to each person - if you don't feel any guilt for an act after you have committed it, it is not inhuman to your mind.
most days, i don't feel guilty about walking past homeless people and not donating my time/money/food to them.
i would concede to ado-p's standpoint that this might be seen as an inhuman act by some and it is my own moral/ethical code that lets me go on thinking that it is not inhuman (or perhaps only 'a bit inhuman' as someone speaking from rob's standpoint might contend).
but in national and international societies, there are things called 'laws' that help to mark out moral lines for all of us to follow.
many laws are about stating what 'inhuman' (or 'non-selfless') acts are 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' to the society as a whole.
in many cases, its not illegal to kill someone in self-defense.
i would venture that most people, if they were protecting themselves/their loved ones from an attacker intent on killing or seriously harming them and they accidentally killed that attacker, would not consider their act to be an inhuman one.
but killing another person *is* inhuman in most people's books - and if there truly are no degrees of inhumanity, the circumstances of the inhuman act should not even matter.
does the commital of the inhuman act of 'killing another person' not make the defender as bad as other killers (or proxy-killers cos i doubt bush has ever shot someone) such as bush or saddam?
is not the ordering of the deaths of people as much of an inhuman act as actually carrying out those killings?
and if so, why is it just saddam that is being put to death?
where are the people who pushed the button on those gas chambers...?
and on that note, i hereby submit this interesting article
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
BRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk
Posted:
ok i think i see where were geting our wires crossed im not saying bush is a nice guy or bush is absolved of guilt for anything like what im trying to say is hes the lesser of two evils or more to the point that sadam is the greater of two evils that though bush and sadam have both done things wrong sadam crimes have show more sadistic cruly and inhumanity the only reason for my original post (which started all this) was because the poier said was trying to make out that saddam wasn't as bad as bush which i dont agree with at all in my eyes thats like compaireing jack the ripper to adolf hittler there in diffrent leauges. as for wether bush deserves to be put on trial for war crimes i dont know, there is a case to be made for it sure but thats for another arguemnt.
ok fair enough we've got our wires crossed to me properganda meens from the goverment and bias meens what you think of as properganda a quick internet search revelease that this is a common problem https://www.historians.org/projects/giroundtable/Propaganda/Propaganda8.htm
i dout we're the first people to get in a muddle over this anyways were agreed on this point infact under your defintion yes i'ed agree that 90%-99% of media is properganda under my defintion its not so as with alot of arguments the reason we disagreed we because we were useing diffrent defintions of the same word sorry it was an honist mistake
as for the horrific implications of my statment statement the implications were yours not mine the only point i was trying to make was again that the methods used by bush arn't as evil as the methods used by sadam i am in no way argueing that they are moraly vaid or should be aloud the reason i said i was horifyed was because people been kiddnaped and tourched by ether party is a horific concept to me and so was and i was horifyed by it but given the choice i know who i would rather be tourched by (not that me or anyone wants to be toruched at all ). again its the lesser of two evils
finaly why is it a weak response? the subject of all US dealings with all of the 3rd world is a big subject and it would be dishonist of me to pretend i knew enough about it all i was asking was for you to tell me some examples of the US screwing over a 3rd world contry so i could understand your point of view and maby if there is a good case there switch to it. my only other options are to read the entire history of the subject to find the examples, stuborbly wade into the argument without knowing anything about it or simply except what your saying without any seeing any of the evidence. non of those appeal to me so i would ask you to reconcider please can you show me some examples or at least point me to someware i can read about them? i dont think its an unfair request there nothing wrong with wanting to learn more.
finaly i realy would like to reach some kind of agreement between us i think your under the impresion im trying to justify bushs actions by pointing to sadam and saying hes worse im not. im simply saying nether of them are good men both have done teriable things but of the two saddam actions are more numorus and more horific i was worry that the thread was going turn into a saddams not so bad because bush is worse thread. something i think would be an afront to the people who have suffered at the hands of this violent phycopath dictator.
ps. you have to also understand i like to play devils advocate something i think needs to be done but that can rub people the wrong way from time to time
i look forward to your reply
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163165049)
ok i think i see where were geting our wires crossed im not saying bush is a nice guy or bush is absolved of guilt for anything like what im trying to say is hes the lesser of two evils or more to the point that sadam is the greater of two evils that though bush and sadam have both done things wrong sadam crimes have show more sadistic cruly and inhumanity the only reason for my original post (which started all this) was because the poier said was trying to make out that saddam wasn't as bad as bush which i dont agree with at all in my eyes thats like compaireing jack the ripper to adolf hittler there in diffrent leauges. as for wether bush deserves to be put on trial for war crimes i dont know, there is a case to be made for it sure but thats for another arguemnt.
ok fair enough we've got our wires crossed to me properganda meens from the goverment and bias meens what you think of as properganda a quick internet search revelease that this is a common problem https://www.historians.org/projects/giroundtable/Propaganda/Propaganda8.htm
i dout we're the first people to get in a muddle over this anyways were agreed on this point infact under your defintion yes i'ed agree that 90%-99% of media is properganda under my defintion its not so as with alot of arguments the reason we disagreed we because we were useing diffrent defintions of the same word sorry it was an honist mistake
as for the horrific implications of my statment statement the implications were yours not mine the only point i was trying to make was again that the methods used by bush arn't as evil as the methods used by sadam i am in no way argueing that they are moraly vaid or should be aloud the reason i said i was horifyed was because people been kiddnaped and tourched by ether party is a horific concept to me and so was and i was horifyed by it but given the choice i know who i would rather be tourched by (not that me or anyone wants to be toruched at all
). again its the lesser of two evilsfinaly why is it a weak response? the subject of all US dealings with all of the 3rd world is a big subject and it would be dishonist of me to pretend i knew enough about it all i was asking was for you to tell me some examples of the US screwing over a 3rd world contry so i could understand your point of view and maby if there is a good case there switch to it. my only other options are to read the entire history of the subject to find the examples, stuborbly wade into the argument without knowing anything about it or simply except what your saying without any seeing any of the evidence. non of those appeal to me so i would ask you to reconcider please can you show me some examples or at least point me to someware i can read about them? i dont think its an unfair request there nothing wrong with wanting to learn more.
finaly i realy would like to reach some kind of agreement between us i think your under the impresion im trying to justify bushs actions by pointing to sadam and saying hes worse im not. im simply saying nether of them are good men both have done teriable things but of the two saddam actions are more numorus and more horific i was worry that the thread was going turn into a saddams not so bad because bush is worse thread. something i think would be an afront to the people who have suffered at the hands of this violent phycopath dictator.
ps. you have to also understand i like to play devils advocate something i think needs to be done but that can rub people the wrong way from time to time
i look forward to your reply
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163165049)
My nunchucks vital statictics
weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com