The Death of Saddam
- Thread starter CK the Fat
- Start date
|
REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS |
|
- Status
1. Did Saddam deserve death? And if so, was his execution method appropriate?
Yes. He has a clear history of warcrimes that, interestingly enough, were not doubted until the US military action in Iraq.
Yes. The people of Iraq, after trying him for his crimes, executed him according to their laws.
2. Did Saddam deserve more than death for what he did to others? (torture, for example)
No. Torture is not acceptable as a punishment.
3. Do people have a right to break a law, even if they were not the original commiters, to see the execution for themselves? What does this speak about so called "civilized" humanity?
Depends on if the law is made by fallible humans or infallible Allah, and if they were allowed a voice in making the law (if made by humans).
It says that humans have a freedom to not be bound by laws imposed on them by dictators, and to set up their own system of civilization.
As for claims of Bush's warcrimes: care to name any?
Yes. He has a clear history of warcrimes that, interestingly enough, were not doubted until the US military action in Iraq.
Yes. The people of Iraq, after trying him for his crimes, executed him according to their laws.
2. Did Saddam deserve more than death for what he did to others? (torture, for example)
No. Torture is not acceptable as a punishment.
3. Do people have a right to break a law, even if they were not the original commiters, to see the execution for themselves? What does this speak about so called "civilized" humanity?
Depends on if the law is made by fallible humans or infallible Allah, and if they were allowed a voice in making the law (if made by humans).
It says that humans have a freedom to not be bound by laws imposed on them by dictators, and to set up their own system of civilization.
As for claims of Bush's warcrimes: care to name any?
How, exactly? Last I checked, torture depended on keeping the victim alive. In any case, torture in order to cause pain, FOR THE SAKE OF PAIN, is not the same as having a non-painless execution.
If that was the reason for going to war (as it was claimed for the first Gulf War), then we have failed pathetically on a simple objective twice in a row, while keeping ourselves IN the area. Why have no attempts been made, either time, to seize the oil (by America)?
Why? I said they're allowed to execute him according to their laws. As I said before, torture is NOT the same as a painful execution.
- Status