Saddam Hussein sentenced to death

[Darkslash]

How do you want that we react, then?

"Dang, Saddam's been sentenced to death. Wish the old chap could've been left to live."

[Pnt]

There's a good distance between cruelty and indifference, I'm sure we can find a place to form an opinion between the two.

[Darkslash]

What type of death, then, do you prefer for Saddam? What's your definition of cruel?

[Only-now]

I think it is perfectly alright to cheer someone's condemnation. Just like people have a right to be very upset when a guilty man goes free...people have the right to be happy when justice is served.

In a death penalty situation...you don't just have two dead people. You have a victim..that died for no justifiable reason (thus against the law) and you have a man who broke societies law (and sometimes a man who is very cruel and evil himself) and died because that is what justice dictates should happen. The death penalty..nor any punishment is meant to make anyone feel better. Those are the punishments for crimes..and that punishment is how justice is served. I think that many victim's family have some closure from knowing that justice was served...but in the end it was not meant to cure their grief. As for the criminal's family...well that is unfortunate they have to suffer..but so does the victim's family and for no reason whatsoever. The criminal made a choice...and he paid the price for it. His family will always know that..and although they are not the ones being punished..that type of thing is something the criminal should consider before going through with his crime.

Cruelty is not a good thing..but it can come from different places. That is obviously a way of expressing anger...only with words instead of actions. Some people would react by actually carrying out those things...but speaking them is different. Until you have gone through the type of treatment that those Iraqi's did...I don't think you can say that you wouldn't be angry enough to express yourself that way (not that anyone here has undergone that treatment). I have no problem with people being angry....and there are plenty of things to hate this man for. There are plenty of things I can think of that would lead me to say I hope someone a painful death. Obviously that is just speech...so it really isn't a big deal. I don't think that it is an improper way to deal with emotion because they are only words. The people making the decision obviously didn't sentence him to any type of torture or a cruel death. Justice is on their side..and he is paying the price for his crimes.

~Kiva

[Pnt]

@Darkslash: It's not my place to play God, I don't think I should be deciding that one's life should be taken in the name of "Justice." However, since I know that he's condemned, hanging or lethal injection would be my choice because both are relatively painless if done correctly.

Originally posted by Only-now
I think it is perfectly alright to cheer someone's condemnation. Just like people have a right to be very upset when a guilty man goes free...people have the right to be happy when justice is served.

In a death penalty situation...you don't just have two dead people. You have a victim..that died for no justifiable reason (thus against the law) and you have a man who broke societies law (and sometimes a man who is very cruel and evil himself) and died because that is what justice dictates should happen. The death penalty..nor any punishment is meant to make anyone feel better. Those are the punishments for crimes..and that punishment is how justice is served. I think that many victim's family have some closure from knowing that justice was served...but in the end it was not meant to cure their grief. As for the criminal's family...well that is unfortunate they have to suffer..but so does the victim's family and for no reason whatsoever. The criminal made a choice...and he paid the price for it. His family will always know that..and although they are not the ones being punished..that type of thing is something the criminal should consider before going through with his crime.

Cruelty is not a good thing..but it can come from different places. That is obviously a way of expressing anger...only with words instead of actions. Some people would react by actually carrying out those things...but speaking them is different. Until you have gone through the type of treatment that those Iraqi's did...I don't think you can say that you wouldn't be angry enough to express yourself that way (not that anyone here has undergone that treatment). I have no problem with people being angry....and there are plenty of things to hate this man for. There are plenty of things I can think of that would lead me to say I hope someone a painful death. Obviously that is just speech...so it really isn't a big deal. I don't think that it is an improper way to deal with emotion because they are only words. The people making the decision obviously didn't sentence him to any type of torture or a cruel death. Justice is on their side..and he is paying the price for his crimes.

~Kiva

If anyone can think of anything more powerful that didn't first result in "Speech" and "Words", I'd love to hear it. What you say is a big deal, or there'd be no reason to protect your right to say it. I hope you keep that in mind.

I guess my opinion on the matter of the death penalty is the same with war and non-defensive violence, I just don't see what is gained.

[lion_roog]

Originally posted by Only-now


Cruelty is not a good thing..but it can come from different places. That is obviously a way of expressing anger...only with words instead of actions. Some people would react by actually carrying out those things...but speaking them is different. Until you have gone through the type of treatment that those Iraqi's did...I don't think you can say that you wouldn't be angry enough to express yourself that way (not that anyone here has undergone that treatment). I have no problem with people being angry....and there are plenty of things to hate this man for. There are plenty of things I can think of that would lead me to say I hope someone a painful death. Obviously that is just speech...so it really isn't a big deal. I don't think that it is an improper way to deal with emotion because they are only words. The people making the decision obviously didn't sentence him to any type of torture or a cruel death. Justice is on their side..and he is paying the price for his crimes.

~Kiva

But what a man thinks is what a man is. And isn't expressing yourself in a particular way a reflection of yourself and your thoughts? I can understand the feelings of anger that people may have towards someone, but it is healthy to learn to forgive and not go overboard in the name of revenge. I think there is a line between justice (ie. the death penalty in this particular case) and revenge (wanting to see him suffer under some unusual and cruel method). I would be lying if I said I never had feelings of wanting someone dead...but I knew at those times I was not in a position to take actions on my conscious thoughts and feelings. Later on I was able to think and feel more clearly and knew that revenge would not solve anything for me. I forgave those people and moved on...hoping the best for them. This case is a different matter, but I hope that people can be strong enough to control their anger and rage.

[Only-now]

There is a difference between justice and revenge. Not to mention, the people who are stating what they feel on this forum have no influence on the case or what happens to Saddam. Words are powerful..and they do need to be protected...but I don't feel that people are doing anything wrong by using those words (most likely exagerrated) to describe how they feel about this man. Not to mention, on the internet it is much harder to express one's feelings. I think those types of statements are just to show what one feels..and I feel they have plenty of reason to overstate as much as they want. I don't think it reflects on them as a person at all....nor do I think they would go through with that if they had the choice. Saddam should not be forgiven for anything he has done. He is getting a fair punishment and a quick death. I believe people here are glad he got what he deserves..but they also want to express that they dislike him to a degree in which they feel more extreme measures of punishment would fit the crime.

~Kiva

[Pnt]

Originally posted by Only-now
There is a difference between justice and revenge. Not to mention, the people who are stating what they feel on this forum have no influence on the case or what happens to Saddam. Words are powerful..and they do need to be protected...but I don't feel that people are doing anything wrong by using those words (most likely exagerrated) to describe how they feel about this man. Not to mention, on the internet it is much harder to express one's feelings. I think those types of statements are just to show what one feels..and I feel they have plenty of reason to overstate as much as they want. I don't think it reflects on them as a person at all....nor do I think they would go through with that if they had the choice. Saddam should not be forgiven for anything he has done. He is getting a fair punishment and a quick death. I believe people here are glad he got what he deserves..but they also want to express that they dislike him to a degree in which they feel more extreme measures of punishment would fit the crime.

~Kiva

Don't get me wrong, I do realize that the people on this forum have the right to say what they're saying, I'm just disagreeing with what they're saying. I do agree with Roog though, what a person says and does reflects what kind of person they are. If I call for a man to be tortured and killed, that speaks of who I am as an individual. If I didn't mean it to some extent, I shouldn't say it. Whether they'd go through with it or not is neither here nor there, as it's one of those "What if" type of situations, though I do realize the vast majority are blowing smoke. Many times I think the line between Justice and Revenge is extremely blurred, and too often I think one is mistaken for the other.

As for forgiveness, if Saddam wholeheartedly asked to be forgiven, I would forgive him. Being Christian, I ask my God to forgive me of my transgressions against Him and recieve forgiveness; I believe I am to do the same if someone asks forgiveness of me. No, I wasn't directly affected by his cruelty, though I have lost friends and family in the war against his regime, but that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to an opinion on the subject. That's my opinion from my beliefs and life experience, others are welcome to think otherwise based on their own beliefs and life experiences.

[lion_roog]

Originally posted by Only-now
nor do I think they would go through with that if they had the choice.

Then why state it in the first place to begin with? I understand what you're saying and all, but I think I'm just coming from a different perspective in respects to our different experiences in life. Maybe the internet is a good place to release anger, considering its influences on your real life are usually minimal in general cases. I still feel that what a person says says a lot about that person. It's like what Jesus said when he explained that what goes into a man's mouth doesn't make him unclean (speaking in regards to beliefs that certain foods would make you unclean) but rather what comes out of it...

[Sadiki]

I would say putting him in death cell and keeping there till the end of his life would be way worse punishment than death.

death is just an easy way out. no matter how they do it, it wont be bringing justice.

and no I don't really belieave in death penalty, in my opinion it belongs in middle age and before even I know it have been used for the longest time. But I do have to agree that it's none of our business to deside what happens to him, Europe or United states shouldn't pick sides on whats going to happen. it's good to have an opinion but killing should be never be option.

I also can't understand how so religious USA can accept death sentence on their own land sinse even the fourth of the commitments is " don't kill ". I really have to say I find it extreamly strange how that works. also that same book says that you should be doing the same others as you wish to be treathed yourself. that have been something I have wonder for the longest time. ( and no, I'm not religious person, I don't even believe in anything, but sinse everyone has right to believe in whatever they want and claim that they do something for religion, shouldn't they live by the book then? )

[XxBlackXxParadeXx]

Originally posted by Darkslash
How do you want that we react, then?

"Dang, Saddam's been sentenced to death. Wish the old chap could've been left to live."

Actually yes, allready there has been too many deaths i dont see why we should now kill a man when he could be kept imprisoned, killing him wont solve anything, it will just make people angry I.e his suppporters, then causing more deaths

I also can't understand how so religious USA can accept death sentence on their own land sinse even the fourth of the commitments is " don't kill ". I really have to say I find it extreamly strange how that works.

Same here its allways seemed a bit Hyprocritical to me

[nathalie]

I don't know ...

A part of me thinks: let him have the same thing, what he did with those people.

Another part things: let him suffer big for the rest of live.

[Dyani]

@ Nath - Just about sums what a lot of people think..

Perhaps whoever-is-condemning-Saddam is, by condemning him, just as bad as Saddam. Death is horrible full stop.

Forgiveness wouldn't solve the problem. I wholeheartedly agree with Pnt as forgiveness would make us better people. Wanting this man to die horribly just makes us sound as bad as him. Ever read the end of Orwell's *Animal Farm*? During a poker match, an argument breaks out between Napoleon (the revolutionary leader, a pig) and Mr. Pilkington when they both play an Ace of Spades, and the animals realize that theycannot tell the difference between the pigs and the humans.

Again on the Death penalty.. who has read *Dead Man Walking*? Gives an idea from the councellors point of view of the prisoner and prison life. Waiting for Death.

[Only-now]

It is a bad punishment to live in a cell until you die..but as I stated earlier...you are still alive...you still eat, and think. All of those are something his INNOCENT victims will never get to do again. THAT is why I feel the death penalty is another choice.

God says that we shall not kill, but he also endorses wars. There are exceptions to the rule. We will never no what a God may be thinking. Even when we supposedly have his words (the Bible) people interpret it different ways. You know what is funny about your statement though..(not that you meant it like this), but you said that the "Religious USA" can kill when the religion says not to. So..now you have to be religious for killing to be wrong? It is justified in the rest of the world? There has to be some reason why you think it is wrong in general...and that would be moral beliefs...and that all comes from religion etc. Im going to confuse myself if I keep going though.

I understand everyone's concerns with the death penalty..and I have given it thought as well. At the moment I find that it is a good punishment with some good results (in certain circumstances). I feel that a man like Saddam deserves no less than death...and justice has been served.

~Kiva

[Dyani]

Originally posted by Only-now
It is a bad punishment to live in a cell until you die..but as I stated earlier...you are still alive...you still eat, and think. All of those are something his INNOCENT victims will never get to do again. THAT is why I feel the death penalty is another choice.

God says that we shall not kill, but he also endorses wars. There are exceptions to the rule. We will never no what a God may be thinking. Even when we supposedly have his words (the Bible) people interpret it different ways. You know what is funny about your statement though..(not that you meant it like this), but you said that the "Religious USA" can kill when the religion says not to. So..now you have to be religious for killing to be wrong? It is justified in the rest of the world? There has to be some reason why you think it is wrong in general...and that would be moral beliefs...and that all comes from religion etc. Im going to confuse myself if I keep going though.

I understand everyone's concerns with the death penalty..and I have given it thought as well. At the moment I find that it is a good punishment with some good results (in certain circumstances). I feel that a man like Saddam deserves no less than death...and justice has been served.

~Kiva

OK, I agree on the point that (at least in this case) the death penalty is in fact a viable punishment, particularly for the crimes he committed but that is not the point I am looking at in this post.

What wars have God or Jesus endorsed? Can you give an example? That being said the bible is considered the "word of God" and was recorded by man, and as a result it is in itself, an interpretation of what was done and said at the time. Therefore by reinterpreting the bible again it is bound to be warped out of all proportion by some.

I mean I know of wars that have been in the past deemed as "holy wars" but that?s not by any means a show of God endorsing that kind of behaviour, just as you yourself say an interpretation of what is written.

On top of that all religions have some fundamental basis on morality, not the other way round, this may just be a confusion of words but all religious texts are based on what the individual or individuals that wrote it believed to be right. Many think, myself included that much of these ancient texts could use a rewrite to be seen as relevant and applicable in an ever-progressing world.

Just so you know, this is in fact Dyani's boyfriend, may make an account of my own to respond on these threads and avoid confusion.

[Darkslash]

What wars have God or Jesus endorsed? Can you give an example?

Even though not a particularly religious person, I can tell you that when God told Joshua to take back Israel, he pretty much said to kill anyone in their path, as I understood it.

[lion_roog]

Originally posted by Darkslash
Even though not a particularly religious person, I can tell you that when God told Joshua to take back Israel, he pretty much said to kill anyone in their path, as I understood it.

I believe that's in the Old testament...From my understanding of reading the Bible, most of the violence is contained in the Old Testament.

I find the words of Jesus to be the most valuable part of the Bible. If anyone wants to read and get something from the Bible, the books of Matthew, John, Luke, and Mark are a good place to start.

[Only-now]

I wasn't talking about wars that you or I can rememeber. I was talking about actual battles and wars/death in the Bible that God deemed as alright.

Actually...the Bible is not thought to be an interpretation. Although it was written by men it is thought to be the "WORD" or God..as in...exactly what he said. Now...those who believe (because religious beliefs are a personal thing) can interpret it however they want..and people can follow or deny those ideas.

I don't believe religions are based on morality. If you simply look at us as animals (which many who don't believe in a creator do) then you have to recognize that nature would not have naturally bestowed morals upon us such as "killing is wrong" or "stealing is wrong". Those things do not benefit our survival..nor are they practiced by wild animals. So...where did those morals come from? randomly appear? One could say that religion had an effect because a God designed us with one...but going for the lesser of the two..I can say that I believe that over time religious beliefs established certain moral standards within human society...and we live by those today (regardless of whether you are religious or not).

~Kiva

[Sadiki]

I still don't see what good does killing someone do? It does make the one who choose to put that punishment upon that person just as bad. Neither it does bring those people back who have already died because of Saddam. (or anyone else who have sentenced to death penalty)

Also as said before, Killing Saddam will just increase amount of deaths in Iraq. And Saddam is bearly gonna suffer at all from hanging if you thinking of it as a fair penalty from all he have done. Waiting a death sentence might be painful and terrible, but it still is justice. It's more like a revenge from what he have done to world.

what comes to The Bible and stuff. I just brought it up sinse in every speech United President ever has he says something about God. I just find it extreamly wierd they putting it on every single speech yet they only take good sides from it. And yes it's true that The Bible talks about axcepting killing in war or at least it kind of says that. but it has nothing to do with death sentence. In that case you kill someone who is unarmed, made harmless under tight secure, locked up and so on. it has nothing to do with what The Bible says about accepting killing on war.

[Xinithian]

Originally posted by TX-101
He deserves it. I would put him on 4 parts with hummers or even biger vehicles.

edit: but after I wouzld cut all his skin off and put some salt on him.. He is one of biggest criminals living now. Becouse of him, there was so much pain on the world. He really deserves it.

Shouldn't our policies remain unchanged? I guess it's up to the Iraqi's, but if it was up to US policy, we enforce humane penalties and oppose torture. I'm also sick of everybody saying we should torture Iraqi insurgents since they torture our soldiers. We're supposed to keep to our word of humane treatment, and set the good example.