Saddam Hussein given death penalty by hanging

not sure I would go so far as a round of applause for someone being hung
 
Fair point, I've downgraded it to a (y)

I'm not normally an advocator of the death penalty TBH (used to be, think I've mellowed in my old age....and since I stopped reading The Sun :D)
 
Well Saddam's dished out enough death sentences in his time. Its only fair that its come back to bite him in the ass.

His statement after receiving the sentence made me smile; "Long live Iraq! Long live the Iraqi people! Down with the traitors!"

The judge could have said exactly the same thing.
 
I do have a feeling that this is gonna cause problems. He's now been made a martyr in the eyes of his supporters.
 
I cannot support the cold-blooded execution of anyone...

8 lashes from a cat-o-nine tails however...
 
Is it on Pay Per View ?. If not why not ?.

Id spend a $ on it. :LOL:
 
I wont be shedding any tears for Saddam. At least he got a trial which is more than the thousands he butchered got.

It's ludicrous that on the one hand we're urging Iraq to become democratic and independent, yet the UN is already interfering in the judicial process and urging clemency for Saddam. :wacky:
 
I think they should commute the sentence to natural life and hold him in your standard Iraq type jail till he dies of old age.
 
I'm with Steep. Killing causes more deaths than the one you take away whatever the justification.

What's the bets he does himself in before the execution?
 
Nah, like all bullies he's a coward at heart, if he believes it at all he's hoping the arab world will step in to save a fellow 'muslim' which I expect is why he's been holding on to the koran recently, to show how really really devout he is.
 
That butcher should have been strung up months ago..:bat:

As quoted above.. He has sentenced thousands to death with no trial.:nono:

Its his turn now..(y)

party%20smileys.gif
party%20smileys.gif
party%20smileys.gif
 
Well I wont be shedding a tear, shame nobody got the b*****d 20+ years ago IMHO.
 
That's where our governments must take the blame, 20 years ago he was a 'good guy' because it suited them.
 
Death sentences create martyrs. Also, it's an easier option than languishing in prison for the rest of his life.
 
Depends how long it takes Abdul the fairy queen to get to him ;)
 
Iraq (or eyrak as Bush more bombs than braincells used to call it) is so Bipolar Shia vs Sunni muslims that I dont see how stretching sadam is going to help.
It'll just unballance things even more.

Not that I dont thing he had something comming his way. If he's only done 10% of what's alledged he's definately not a nice bloke.

Life is nasty like that.
 
Thinking about it, they should let him live. Or tie him to a post and let people throw stones at hime, $5 per stone. They'd earn a fortune!
 
I'm a bit concerned about it, to be honest. Like the fundamentalists need an excuse to unleash more threats and actions on the west? You can bet yer ass that is how some will justify any actions they may take...
 
The americans had the chance to get rid of him quietly when they found him hidden in his hole.

They should have chucked in a couple of hand grenades to save everyone the trouble.

Who would have known?
 
Not Good.
What he did, although totally horrendous wasn't against the law when he did it in Iraq...
His removal by force was an illegal act under international law, so by what authority was he tried and by what authority has he been sentenced?
He is still legally the ruler of that country.
 
He will never ben killed, his lawyers will appeal and that will take forever, and then something will happen before the day to stop it. It will be an easy way out, he does not have to suffer like thousands of others. Problem with sticking him in jail is people we get him out, but that is where he should spend his life.
 
can't say I'm not surprised at the verdict...tough one this, kill him and we're no better than he is, let him live and everyone's p*ssed off. I guess this is where an assasin should step in and take it off everyone's hands ? indeed this is probably quite likely since tehre will be an appeal (takes ages) followed by another trial, maybe another appeal - and so on until he ends up dead anyway of old age!
 
Arkady said:
Not Good.
What he did, although totally horrendous wasn't against the law when he did it in Iraq...
His removal by force was an illegal act under international law, so by what authority was he tried and by what authority has he been sentenced?
He is still legally the ruler of that country.
Click to expand...

Why wasn't it against the law at the time? Not challenging, just interested.
 
sue said:
He will never ben killed, his lawyers will appeal and that will take forever, .
Click to expand...
Only what I've heard in radio broadcasts but the appeals process there is nothing like it is here or US, appeal could be over and sentence carried out in less than a month.
 
Yep it'll be all over in a month one way or the other.

Under international law the UN nor any of it's members can invade another country unless there's a threat to world peace, which is why we don't interfere in the genocide which takes place in Africa and other countries - oil aside of course. ;) It was Saddam's alleged possession of nuclear weapons which justified the invasion, and we all know what a can of worms that is!

I'm not saying it's wrong that we're there necessarily, but it's looking increasingly likely that we're not going to resolve anything, and at some stage will withdraw. If democracy doesn't succeed out there, then it's only a matter of time before another strong man dictator emerges to take power and control the various factions at each other's throats. Benevolent dictators are pretty rare animals, so the wheel will probably go full circle.
 
He deserves it... an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth - getting his neck stretched is a reasonably quick and painless way to go - he should be dipped in acid, tied to a poll and his victims allowed to have ago - then chopped up and fed to the dogs! - keep him in jail for the rest of his natural!!! - why the hell should people have to pay for that????

He will probably take his own life like Herman Guring did - Coward
 
CT said:
Yep it'll be all over in a month one way or the other.

Under international law the UN nor any of it's members can't invade another country unless there's a threat to world peace, which is why we don't interfere in the genocide which takes place in Africa and other countries
Click to expand...

I should have been clearer CT, wasn't that bit I was querying. Rob said Saddam's (or the administration to avoid singling out an individual) acts weren't against the Law in Iraq which I find strange but given that I know nothing about Iraqi law quite possible.
 
Because he was in charge and head of the government perhaps?
Prior to that country's regime change, the judiciary were appointed by him and the ba'ath party: the majority of his actions were legitimate under that authority alone.
This is why only sample charges were brought against him. The killing of the Kurds in itself wasn't an illegal act under Iraqi law designed to suppress revolt and insurrection, however the charges were for acts of genocide - his defence is that it wasn't an act of genocide in that not all Kurds were targetted, only the ones fomenting revolt.

The UK/US invasion is now accepted as an illegal act under international law (even by us - though we also accept that now we're there, we're stuck with it) governing regime change by outside authority (at the time we invaded there was no overt threat to other countries, merely a percieved threat based on erronious and misleading intelligence information, now widely accepted as having been 'sexed up').
Saddam Hussein is still, under laws in existence in his country before the regime change, the legitimate ruler of Iraq and exempt from trial other than by a court convened under ba'ath party rules.

Since he was charged with offences under International Law, he should have been tried under International Law in the Hague, not by an Iraqi court where he could not (and has not) recieved a fair trial.
I don't like the guy - far from it, but this all reeks of a Kangaroo Court whose verdict was never in any doubt - for all the posturing they may as well have stood him against a wall and emptied an AK into him as was done with Ceaucescu and his wife in Romania after the fall of the Communist regime there - at least they were honest about it.
This is a black day for the rule of Law.
 
Arkady said:
Because he was in charge and head of the government perhaps?
Prior to that country's regime change, the judiciary were appointed by him and the ba'ath party: the majority of his actions were legitimate under that authority alone.
This is why only sample charges were brought against him. The killing of the Kurds in itself wasn't an illegal act under Iraqi law designed to suppress revolt and insurrection, however the charges were for acts of genocide - his defence is that it wasn't an act of genocide in that not all Kurds were targetted, only the ones fomenting revolt.

The UK/US invasion is now accepted as an illegal act under international law (even by us - though we also accept that now we're there, we're stuck with it) governing regime change by outside authority (at the time we invaded there was no overt threat to other countries, merely a percieved threat based on erronious and misleading intelligence information, now widely accepted as having been 'sexed up').
Saddam Hussein is still, under laws in existence in his country before the regime change, the legitimate ruler of Iraq and exempt from trial other than by a court convened under ba'ath party rules.

Since he was charged with offences under International Law, he should have been tried under International Law in the Hague, not by an Iraqi court where he could not (and has not) recieved a fair trial.
I don't like the guy - far from it, but this all reeks of a Kangaroo Court whose verdict was never in any doubt - for all the posturing they may as well have stood him against a wall and emptied an AK into him as was done with Ceaucescu and his wife in Romania after the fall of the Communist regime there - at least they were honest about it.
This is a black day for the rule of Law.
Click to expand...

Here Here!
 
I'd just like to say that I in no way condone the killing of innocent people, but I am loathe to be part of this society that follows the murdoch mentality and says

'Yeah, hang 'im good and proper, he killed innocent people, and whilst your about it, get some birds with their tits out to hang around the gallows, sorted!'

How come the Iraeli Cabinet are not being prosecuted for what is ostensibly genocide against the Palestinians and the killing of civillians in Lebanon?

How come no-one has taken bush and blair to task over an illegal and unnecessary war?

There is so much wrong with the world at the moment hanging one dictator is not goingto solve matters, only escalate them further as has been mentioned above.

It's about time we all grew up, realised that we're living in a society controlled by the use of fear and prejudice and did something about it! FFS! 150,000 dead iraqi's are probably thanking their lucky stars that we turned up and saved them from a life of fear, violence and death, aren't they?

War doesn't decide who is right, is decides who is left.
 
Gandhi said:
'Yeah, hang 'im good and proper, he killed innocent people,
Click to expand...

Correct..;)

Gandhi said:
and whilst your about it, get some birds with their tits out to hang around the gallows, sorted!'
Click to expand...

Stupid remark if ever I heard one.:wacky:


Gandhi said:
How come no-one has taken bush and blair to task over an illegal and unnecessary war?
Click to expand...

Unnecessery judged by many but not all, They come on our turf causing mass destruction Sept 11th remember!! Make your comments to the poor buggers who lost their loved ones in the massacre on that day.:|


Gandhi said:
There is so much wrong with the world at the moment hanging one dictator is not goingto solve matters, only escalate them further as has been mentioned above.
Click to expand...

But why keep the murdering butcher at a very costly sum to the tax payer.:shrug:


Gandhi said:
It's about time we all grew up, realised that we're living in a society controlled by the use of fear and prejudice and did something about it!
Click to expand...

We have.. He gets hanged later with any luck..:clap:


Gandhi said:
War doesn't decide who is right, is decides who is left.
Click to expand...

But if you don't defend your rights the blood thirsty sods will take over the world and then imagine the place..:puke:

Sooner the murderer is dead the better IMO.. Its one less and yes there is plenty more to take his place but sitting back and letting them have there their own way solves nothing..:bang:

Rant over..:razz:
 
dod said:
Why wasn't it against the law at the time? Not challenging, just interested.
Click to expand...

What he did was against Intenational law, and was inhuman in his treatment of his own people. It about time, he has been sentenced by his own people. Good ridance. :clap:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top