Saddam Hussein Executed

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Damien, don't get me wrong - I think Saddam was an evil tyrant, but if the people we replace him with act in the way they have, how does that reflect on the UK and the US.

I am not sure but it would not reflect well if we blocked the Iraqi Justice system when we are trying to let them self-govern and increase the crediblity of the Iraqi government.

It was important that this trail especially suffered as little interference from outside Iraqi, I do not agree with the death penality but I dont think we should have stopped them.

Also with Saddam, its hardly a great loss

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Did he?
How?

Was he the one praying, or one of the hecklers, was he the one hooded, the whole execution looked more like a lynching than a state execution, even down to the fact the gallows were to small, how can Iraqi's respect their new laws when the first time they witness it they see that sham, it would of been better for the government if they had just released him to the mob, so they could extract the revenge and if the government are happy with the way it went why are they holding investigations and enquiry's

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Was he the one praying, or one of the hecklers, was he the one hooded, the whole execution looked more like a lynching than a state execution, even down to the fact the gallows were to small, how can Iraqi's respect their new laws when the first time they witness it they see that sham, it would of been better for the government if they had just released him to the mob, so they could extract the revenge and if the government are happy with the way it went why are they holding investigations and enquiry's

Were they the ones giving him a relatively quick death, or were they the ones beating him to death, or shooting him in the back of the head infront of his family before dropping him in a mass grave, or were they the ones ordering gassing of hundreds, or were they the ones dropping people into wood chippers?

I'm having a hard time understanding how Saddam can come across better than people who simply taunted him before hanging him.

[punky]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Damien, don't get me wrong - I think Saddam was an evil tyrant, but if the people we replace him with act in the way they have, how does that reflect on the UK and the US.

Not even half as badly as it reflects on the Iraqis, surely.

The execution was very much an Iraqi affair. The crux of it, the death warrant, was signed by a democratically-elected Iraqi al-Malaki.

[BBKing]

It was important that this trail especially suffered as little interference from outside Iraqi

Er, we did interfere. Rather a lot. Saddam, up until just before he swung, was in US military custody at a US base, not Iraqi custody (for good reasons, if Shias had been holding him, he'd be on the end of a rope in minutes, ditto for Kurds, if Sunnis, he'd have been sprung sooner or later). The court was set up outside the Iraqi court system (it's a 'special tribunal'). Prosecution lawyers and witnesses were given protection by US-led forces, the defence wasn't, resulting in three murders and finally US advisors were installed to advise the judges, who of course got replaced a few times by direct political appointment from the Iraqi government that depends on us for its survival and included at least one who was directly connected to Saddam's victims, which would disqualify him in a proper legal system. It wouldn't have been any more of a kangaroo court if Skippy had been doing the shorthand.

Fair trial? Nope. Iraqi court? Nope. Justice? Nope. Anyone would think that we had something in our past connections to Hussein we wanted to keep out of the public eye.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Were they the ones giving him a relatively quick death, or were they the ones beating him to death, or shooting him in the back of the head infront of his family before dropping him in a mass grave, or were they the ones ordering gassing of hundreds, or were they the ones dropping people into wood chippers?

I'm having a hard time understanding how Saddam can come across better than people who simply taunted him before hanging him.

He didn't come across better than them - unfortunately, they didn't come across much better than him, by not allowing him to finish his prayer, and executing him on the first day of Eid.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

He didn't come across better than them - unfortunately, they didn't come across much better than him, by not allowing him to finish his prayer, and executing him on the first day of Eid.

His embracing of religion was simply to get anti-western support from neighbouring countries.
No muslim would have a koran written in human blood for starters.
I don't recal anything in the koran saying punishments can't be given out on certain days either.

I suspect that secretly the entire Middle East are quite happy that Saddam is dead.However they will use the manner of his death in any way they can to smack the collective western democracies , irrespective of whether it was an entirely Iraqi affair or not.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

His embracing of religion was simply to get anti-western support from neighbouring countries.
No muslim would have a koran written in human blood for starters.
I don't recal anything in the koran saying punishments can't be given out on certain days either.

Whether he embraced religion in fear of dying or to ge anti western support is your opinion as you have no evidence of what his motives were for doing so. Only he will know himself. You are right in what you say about the lack of dignity saddam offered his captives and the inhuman manner in which they were killed. He was also pretty unislamic in the manner in which he ruled his country.

However he was killed in the month of Hajj which is one of the holiest months in the Islamic calender. Forget about him being killed before the day of Eid ul Adha, the 9 days leading up to this day are extremely religious and virtuous. There are certain things we as muslims are forbidden from doing in these days and traditionally in many islamic countries its a month when prisoners are pardoned and forgiven (not saying that this should have happened to sadam). Additionally for one muslim to prevent another from taking his shadah (Oath to Allah) at time of his death is one of the worst things that can be done.

Like Ive said before Im not looking for excuses for Saddam, and I totally agree that if hanging is the punishemnet imposed for his crimes then thats fair enough. From a muslim perspective and from talking to many muslims personally (who are all anti saddam) although Saddam deserved to die, it his his captives that lost dignity and credibility in this whole execution process. I think its hard for non muslims to easily see why many muslims feel this way. I would say, judging by the reaction from the other Islamic states in the middle east, most would share these sentiments.

As for what BBKIing posted earlier about american - allied influence he is spot on. Anyone that says that this was Iraqi justice without external influence is, in my opinion, pretty niave. I also agree that executing him for the death of 148 shiites has the added bonus that it prevents disclosure of embarrasing information in further trials in regards with everything else he was accused of doing.

[Xaccers]

Are all prisoners pardoned during that month?
Its tradition, but is it religious law?
What does the koran tell you about blood?
How can someone have a koran written in human blood and be a muslim?

Which of his charges would have resulted in the shortest trial?
Killing 148 shiites, or the gassing of hundreds of kurds, or the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of shiites?
If he had been tried and found guilty of the other crimes, would his sentance be any different?
Was there any benefit to Iraq in allowing him to continue ranting in the dock for the length of the other trials?
How much money would have been wasted?
How many lives would it have cost with assasinations?
Have you actually asked yourself those questions or is it simpler just to blame Bush?

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Are all prisoners pardoned during that month?
Its tradition, but is it religious law?
What does the koran tell you about blood?
How can someone have a koran written in human blood and be a muslim?

Which of his charges would have resulted in the shortest trial?
Killing 148 shiites, or the gassing of hundreds of kurds, or the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of shiites?
If he had been tried and found guilty of the other crimes, would his sentance be any different?
Was there any benefit to Iraq in allowing him to continue ranting in the dock for the length of the other trials?
How much money would have been wasted?
How many lives would it have cost with assasinations?
Have you actually asked yourself those questions or is it simpler just to blame Bush?

whoa hang on a minute.... Have i blamed bush? Have i said saddam did not deserve to die? The issue that was being discussd is dignity and perception of those that executed Saddam (i.e the govt) at the time of the execution and for its timing. From what I can see, and from muslims I speak to (who all agree that saddam was an evil man who deserved to die) that this could have been handled a lot better. Everyone Ive spoken to as said that the manner in which he wass killed is pretty unIslamic and with very little dignity. Remember this is not about saying well Saddam was worse, he didnt deserve it, its about a new govt showing to the world that they are better than Saddam.

Your questions about the Koran are all valid. The point I'm making is that in Islam, and not just Islam, you are not excluded from turning (back) to your religion jsut because youve been a bad - evil - terrible muslim up until then. The final punsihemnt or pardon in the hereafter is in the hand of God. Yes I am of the opinion that a lot of saddams crimes were overlooked by the allies and the US govt because its better the devil you know then the one you dont, but Im not disputing that saddam did not deserve to die.

As for this being done by an Iraqi govt/iraqi justice, you come across as an intelligent man Xaccers. Do you belive that the americans - allies in no way influenced the trial and the outcome and timing of the execution?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

As for this being done by an Iraqi govt/iraqi justice, you come across as an intelligent man Xaccers. Do you belive that the americans - allies in no way influenced the trial and the outcome and timing of the execution?

To be brutally honest, I don't care whether they did or didn't.
There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam committed dispicable acts which resulted in him being hanged.
I can see no benefit in having kept him alive longer to answer further charges which had the high likelyhood of being found guilty of and resulting in another death sentence.
You can only die once, so what would be the point in sentencing him multiple times?
The only people to benefit from a trial which would bring in representatives of America and Britain, are those poeple who get some sick pleasure from pointing a finger and going nyah nyah, while the international image of the UK and USA was damaged further.
Reagan is dead, so what would be the point in bringing in and cross examining members of the current administration other than to score cheap political points?

[Gareth]

Xaccers, notwithstanding the question of Saddam facing further trials, do you think that performing the execution on the day it happened was reasonable, considering 97% of the Iraqi population are Muslim? Also, in your opinion, was there anything morally wrong with executing him before he had finished his prayers?

I appreciate that Saddam was responsible for the deaths of many people during religious periods, and that these victims undoubtedly didn't have the occaision to say prayers before meeting their makers, but I'm interested in knowing your thoughts on the execution not on the murders Saddam was convicted for.

ps - anyone else seen the cover of this week's Private Eye?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Gareth

Xaccers, notwithstanding the question of Saddam facing further trials, do you think that performing the execution on the day it happened was reasonable, considering 97% of the Iraqi population are Muslim? Also, in your opinion, was there anything morally wrong with executing him before he had finished his prayers?

I appreciate that Saddam was responsible for the deaths of many people during religious periods, and that these victims undoubtedly didn't have the occaision to say prayers before meeting their makers, but I'm interested in knowing your thoughts on the execution not on the murders Saddam was convicted for.

ps - anyone else seen the cover of this week's Private Eye?

As I said, its a tradition in some muslim countries to not do it during this period, is that a tradition in Iraq? I doubt it.
To be honest, I don't remember a period in my 5 years in Saudi when chop square was shut down.
As for being hung before he finished his prayers, perhaps you're asking the wrong person
If there is a deity such as Allah, are words really needed for that deity to understand?
Remember, those who performed the execution did so knowing better than any of us over here what Saddam did to the Iraqi people, and if they don't think he deserved any longer, so be it.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Reagan is dead, so what would be the point in bringing in and cross examining members of the current administration other than to score cheap political points?

There are many from his administration who are very much alive and who were involved directly in the supply of the weapons which were used against the Kurds (who are entitled to justice) contrary to trade embargo restrictions unilaterally in place at the time of the Iraq Iran war. Are we suggesting that they should not be called because Regan's dead? I don't think "cheap political points" holds much muster when compared to "truth", one of the tenets of true justice.

I would assume that Saddam's proposed defence, not necessarily calling on anyone from the current Bush administration bar Rumsfeld, now conveniently not part of that administration, would have intended proving the hypocracy of several of the coalition partners in their attempts at Pontious Pilate type moral grandstanding.

What Saddam was hung for was probably the least of the atrocities he was responsible for and the most convenient for the purposes of a quick sentencing and execution. He should have faced trial for the gassings, torture and mass murders to afford the victims of his brutality the peace of mind of his being convicted and true justice having been served whereas now his sentence has been cheapened and undermined by the flawed rush, for whatever reason, to hang him and afford a small minority of his victims "closure".

As BBKing has said, it's all rather convenient, not to mention predictable.