|
|
Post by unojuno on Dec 15, 2003 18:14:51 GMT -5
They cant possibly kill him right off the bat. Even with the common knowledge of "he's killed thousands of his own people." Here's why.
If you kill him, the world will hate the US more than it already has and does. They would say the trial was unjust (no matter where it takes place...unless that place happens to be france...fat chance.) and unfair.
If you take him to trail in Iraq or any other ME country, the US will do so so he is put to death. It it takes place in the US, you cant possibly give him the death penalty because of the reasons above. So they'd put him in a maximum security prison (which they cant do in another country b/c the prison might not be as weel protected as ours) and he'd have to be in solitary confinement or he'll be killed in 2 hours by all the Pro-Americans in prison. Yeah, he'd be more than killed...
Anywho. that's that. Now, of course, Bush doesnt have to care about the rest of the world and go against what i just said....
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Dec 15, 2003 22:28:09 GMT -5
well, going back to the original question, i think that they are going to kill him after his trial right on sockrocker. theyre gonna wait until a legimate, constitutionally backed government is formed (may be about july) and about the first thing they do is have a token trial to convict him, then theyll cut his head off. thats the culture. thats if they can hold back the mases, one iraqi lady on the radio today said that she thinks theyll hang him in a soccer field. to answer your statements uno, the U.S. realizes that they cannot hold him trial, which is why theyll wait for iraq's government to form, condemn, and execute him. and no, killing saddam would not anger the world. no one really cares for him except for terrorists, and theyre even pissed at him for not killing himself already and allowing himself to be captured. and how could this trial be deemed "unjust," it's very cut and dry |
|
|
|
Post by xenocide7375 on Dec 16, 2003 9:22:19 GMT -5
I agree that saddam needs to be tried by the iraqis but it is a bit confusing how they are going to do it becasue the iraqi tribunal which is going to be iraqs new goverment is not evan in control of thier country yet. also, they dont evan have a legal system put in yet because during saddams regime he obliteratered all legal systems.  |
|
DarkNightmare
X-Treme Gulp
Well, I dreamed that the world was comin' down, We sat on my back porch, and watched it...
Posts: 475
|
Post by DarkNightmare on Dec 16, 2003 12:44:07 GMT -5
I think it's ironic that the day the media reports back about this whole thing was on the 3rd sunday of advent, and out of all four, the 3rd is the ONLY joyous celebration...
Then, I passed the road test, my mom decided to give me a cell phone as an early Xmas gift... What the Hell happened last Sunday!?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wilshire on Dec 16, 2003 14:39:24 GMT -5
They probably wont kill him if the U.S. tries him. But if, and probably when, the Iraqi government (the new one) tries him, they can put him to death. He could be tried for war crimes, which is punishible by death i believe.
If we get him (he is our prisoner), he will go to a maximum security military prison most likely. And he wont ever see the light of day again.
|
|
DarkNightmare
X-Treme Gulp
Well, I dreamed that the world was comin' down, We sat on my back porch, and watched it...
Posts: 475
|
Post by DarkNightmare on Dec 16, 2003 15:57:53 GMT -5
Yeah, I have to agree with Wilshire here, he's right, and here's why. Killing him would be a terrible mistake. It would make him a symbol, a martyr for a cause, and any would-be supporters would continue to fight for his cause, whatever that may be. If we let him rot in a prison cell, everyone will see how weak he truly is, and he will be utterly defeated. For the same reason, Bush will probably never see him again. That would be accreditting him with too much attention. He needs to be belittled, so as to completely conquer the problem of his loyals.
|
|
|
|
Post by SockRocker on Dec 16, 2003 16:10:17 GMT -5
yeah but if we kept him in a US prison, itd be under such high security, it would cost a lot of tax dollars, and people dont want to pay that especially when they want him dead anyways
|
|
|
|
Post by unojuno on Dec 16, 2003 17:11:36 GMT -5
I know he's responsible for tons of deaths (uncountable), but i dont know if we should set up a new government over there that has the potential of spiraling backwards.
There is really one thing that we should change. And that's the violence. If he were to be killed in Iraq, it would be a show, barbaric one in fact. We should end all the killing by not killing at least him. It could be a statement to Iraq, America, and the world.
That or you could just kill him and get it over with. But i think that the US has lost too much respect already.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wilshire on Dec 16, 2003 20:40:04 GMT -5
We don't need any respect from anybody! The pathetic UN countries already showed their diehard dedication to spreading democracy (or serious lack thereof). Now they want to take part in rebuilding Iraq. Screw them! We don't want, and we don't need their respect. Its worth absolutely nothing. We can make them happy by offering to let them in, but that just encourages them to be weak and stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by SockRocker on Dec 16, 2003 20:42:50 GMT -5
thats true....besides, i think it would make us lose respect if we kill other criminals in the US for one or two murders, but yet let saddam live even though hes comminted about 100 times that....
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Dec 16, 2003 22:47:39 GMT -5
saddam will not be held in a true U.S. prison. because then he'd get constitutional protections (right to speedy trial) and he'd probaly have to be tried in america, which our government really does not want. they want saddam tried in iraq, by the iraqis and their system (which will allow for him to be executed). this is not going to happen for a long time, like july maybe. and yes wilshire, who cares if france and some other countries dont respect us. and to answer your earlier question, the death penalty is outlawed in international trials. another reason to keep it in iraq
|
|
|
|
Post by OrangeLax22 on Dec 17, 2003 12:22:09 GMT -5
tHat bastard should be brought 2 america and put on public display, hiding in a small hole what a dumbass TEXT  |
|
DarkNightmare
X-Treme Gulp
Well, I dreamed that the world was comin' down, We sat on my back porch, and watched it...
Posts: 475
|
Post by DarkNightmare on Dec 17, 2003 12:35:58 GMT -5
^ dumbass just wanted to keep himself on the board, he won't be back for months....
Personally, we have to play the strategy game. It'd be strategically retarded to kill Sadam at this point, he'd become a martyr to his followers and all that crap.
I'm willing to spend the Tax money, and I'm broke. I'll go into debt if need be.
Do you really want to give Sadam death? The quick and easy way? No, let the bastard suffer. Keep him quietly locked up somewhere outside the continental US and never mention his sorry ass again. Keep him in barely legal living conditions, and prolong his life as much as possible.
After all, Mr. Hill said today to me after morality class: Euthanasia is different between humans and animals because an animal pains, and a human suffers. Suffering can bring out a consequential good. So there.
I'm definitely against a mercy killing for the greatest mass-murder of all time. Death Penalty? Let's be more creative than that...
>: )
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Dec 17, 2003 13:22:58 GMT -5
First off, the U.S. doesn't get to decide what happens to him, at least, not yet. Its the Iraqis decision. This means that he will probably just get some death penalty. However, I've heard that he might be put on an International trial. I don't think that much less could happen because of this, however.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Dec 17, 2003 16:58:06 GMT -5
First off, the U.S. doesn't get to decide what happens to him, at least, not yet. Its the Iraqis decision. This means that he will probably just get some death penalty. However, I've heard that he might be put on an International trial. I don't think that much less could happen because of this, however. thank you for realizing that it isnt our choice. the iraqis (and us) do not want him in an international court because he cant get the death penalty which is what they want. and to answer your extremely retarded post, orangelax, if we brought him here, then he'd be subject to constitutional protections (in this case against cruel and unusual punishment). and nightmare, the problem with holding him in prison is that then his followers (if he still has any true ones after pissing them off), could hijack a plane or kidnap a bunch of people and then demand his release in exchange. thus it could come back to bite us in the ass. also, like me and stevieburns said, its up to the iraqis and the typical punishment in their culture is death |
|
