Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

I think you'll find I'd be likely to bore you anywhere, not just the pub - bus, library, train, etc....:D

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Hang on, I had the decency to answer your questions, how about you actually answer mine.

1. If a dictator is torturing and murdering his population, and the majority of the UN decide no action should be taken, then should a nation take action on it's own and oust the dictator?
2. If a dictator is torturing and murdering his population, and the majority of the UN decide action should be taken, then should a nation with the backing of the UN oust the dictator?
3. If your answers are 1. No, 2. Yes, then are you putting international approval above the actions of the dictator and the suffering of his population?

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Or may be you are just adhering to international law, something that Sadam finds himself at odds with to. It also helps if when you invade a country you have an internationally recognised mandate before you go in because then the people look at you as liberators not occupiers.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

i'm reminded of an old song. there are more questions than answers.

however i cant reconcile the more i found out the less i know :-)

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Sorry for the delay, had to go pick up my lad.

1. No
2. Yes

As well as torturing and murdering his population, you forgot to mention cruelty to cute puppies and kittens and lickle babbies (just in case your question wasn't emotive enough). ;)

"then are you putting international approval above the actions of the dictator and the suffering of his population?" Nice slanted black/white statement - my answer would be (again) that I am putting International Law above meddling in the internal affairs of a country (but as you've stated, you don't need no steenkin' international law). Or should we invade Zimbabwe and North Korea as well, then pick on China when we are finished?

re some of your "answers" -

"We didn't need to for the action to be legal." - who is this "we" you refer to (or is it the Royal we)?

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

It was actually a question, do you believe that with the answers to 1 and 2 that you have given, that you have put international approval above the actions of the dictator and the suffering of his population?
Afterall, with your answer to 2, you believe that international law relies on the approval of the majority of the UN.

We as in members of the international coalition who agreed on the action being taken.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

wasn't much of a coalition to be fair.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Hey did you all hear? They're going to hang Saddam. :p:

Ah, Global Vigilanteism. As for that list of current dictators, when ARE "We" going to do something about them? Is there a date scheduled or even pencilled in? I wonder why not.

With reference to the topic (remember that?) I'm against it. Latest estimates say he'll be dead by February. Seems a bit of an easy way out to me.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

You only need 2 for a coalition.

With regards to the topic, I'd put a fiver on the appeal commuting the sentance to life in prison.

---------- Post added at 23:17 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Perhaps because there isn't a UN resolution giving permission for action to be taken.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Well then, if a dictator is torturing and murdering his population, and the majority of the UN hasn't got it's finger out and decided action should be taken, then should a nation take action on it's own and oust the dictator?

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

If it is in a position to do so and its the only way to stop him, yes.
If the UN is unable to protect the people of a nation from it's leaders then why shouldn't another nation take action to do so?

Sure, in the real world nations don't intervene for a number of reasons; no personal gain, too much risk, lack of support at home etc.

Put it like this, if TB somehow manouvered himself into absolute power, tortured and murdered Britains, would you rather another nation came in and ousted New Labour, or would you prefer TB remained in power while the UN took their time and perhaps decided to do nothing because of TB's influence and promises to other nations?

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

And how does that nation decide which dictator to oust first? Easy, you just base it on how many barrels of oil a day you can get from said dictator's country when you occupy it for the next x number of years.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

Under the new "Iraqi" legislative constitution there is no legal mechanism for commuting the sentences of any defendant convicted on charges which carry the death penalty.

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

But I don't see any nation doing anything like that in any other case. Why aren't they?

Oh, that's why. :rolleyes: If the reason for not going in is there's nothing in it for us, they have big guns too or we'd lose the next election then it kinda tarnishes the whole altruism angle.

In that scenario, I'd love for some other nation to ride in and save the day. Would it be too much to expect that they might have a post-conflict strategy and be able to keep their pilfering fingers off my natural resources?

And given that the UK doesn't really have a goldmine of natural resources under its soil, how long might I reasonably be expected to wait for such a knight in shining armour?

It's the hypocracy of it all that really twists my melon. I know you're championing the "Protector of the downtrodden" argument but that's not really got anything to do with it, in the real world of course. ;)

Re: Saddam To Be Hanged
 

indeed. it was a coalition. but not much of one.