web analytics

SHOULD SADDAM BE EXECUTED?

By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006

saddamhusseinglares.jpgI have been invited onto the BBC’s "Nolan Show" tomorrow morning – around 9.15 – to discuss whether Saddam got a fair trial and whether the death penalty is warranted. To quote Dick Cheney, "It’s a no-brainer" that the tyrannical genocidal dictator, Saddam Hussein, should be executed.  It’s also Iraqi law.

You can tune in and listen live tomorrow morning or else use the "listen again" later on tomorrow. I will be debating the point with the unoffical leader of the Londonderry Fedayeen, Eamon McCann. Eamon is a likeable character from the school of the marxist hard-left – he opposed the liberation of Iraq, he has criticised ongoing military operations in Iraq, and he opposes the death penalty for Saddam, believing he did not get a fair trial.  So he is consistent. Consistently wrong.

65 Responses to “SHOULD SADDAM BE EXECUTED?”

  1. Eamon McCann also challenged the assumptions underpinning the Good Friday Agreement. So he’s wrong in more ways than you realise, David.

    As I said on "Let Him Dangle", While it’s difficult to feel sympathy for a mass murderer like Saddam, we must not forget that he was to a great extent a child of the West, including France and the US, and was given most moral backing by these states precisely at the time when he was carrying out his worst deeds, incl. the ones that brought him the death penalty.

    http://www.treasoninc.com/SaddamRumsfeld.jpg

    This picture was taken just shortly after Saddam first used the blister agent of mustard gas, an event widely known at the time.

  2. I’ve had my say on the issue of capital punishment before and even for an evil dictator like Saddam, I still hold to it. Although if I was going to waver hearing his defence council warning of all hell being let loose if he is hung,would be the thing to do it.Not because I relish all hell being let loose but not seeking to appease those who threaten it.

    The world has far worse of for the existance of this man. I can’t help feeling sorry for people in dire straits, including the lose of his sons (what chance did they have of becoming decent human beings) even if they have deserved that and worse, if they regret what they did (and not just because of the impact on them). However as it is I feel more sympathy for him for being a twisted human being than for his fate.

    I go back to first principles. I don’t beleive that you should take life if you don’t have to. He has been captured. He doesn’t need to be dead.

  3. I have always had a soft spot for McCann. That might be because I haven’t seen or heard that much from him. However what I have seen and heard, I find quite endearing.

  4. Aileen,

    I understand your view but I believe we must respect the legal wishes of the Iraq people. Saddam should hang – just as Hitler’s elite swung.

  5. David

    I’m not planning to spring him ;o)

    I’ve been through the Hitler scenario in my head too. Same holds. Apart from the rights and wrongs of it. I beleive that Hitler and the others, would have been showen up as very pathetic characters if kept in prison.

    (Re the NAZIs, even if I agreed with the death penalty, I wouldn’t have hung Shauckel or Streicher.)

  6. Execution is not a punishment. For all intents and purposes it is over instantly. Imprisonment in wretched conditions for the remainder of his life would be more appropriate. Also on his death I fear Pandora’s box will be opened. Remember the US, France and UK armed Saddam to the teeth in the 70’s and 80’s. We didn’t seem to give a toss about the Kurds etc. then did we? This is the problem on sites where people have extreme views (whether they be way to the left or way to the right) everything gets painted black or white. In the views of billions Saddam is a genocidal monster, in the view of billions George W. Bush is a war criminal. So when is Bush going to "swing"?

  7. In the view of the Iraqi Court, Saddam has been convicted of war crimes. He will pay for his crimes against humanity with his life. Good.

    To then slur President Bush is inane.

  8. Aileen

    "I beleive that Hitler and the others, would have been showen up as very pathetic characters if kept in prison"

    I totally agree, when Hess finally died in Spandau prison I’ll wager he was a throughly broken man who no one feared. I’m not scared of an imprisoned Saddam but I am scared of what his maniac followers will probably do when he’s executed.

  9. DV

    I didn’t slur Bush I’m just drawing your attention to what a vast number of people think.

  10. SBK,

    I know. But a lot of people think Elvis is still alive – won’t bring him back!

  11. Elvis was a figment of everybodies imagination caused by chemicals the government put in the water in the 50’s and 60’s. Now if you’ll excuse me I need to go put on my tin foil hat as I’m starting to pick up alien radio transmissions on my fillings again…

  12. LOL! And a full moon….!

  13. The evils committed by Hussein are common knowledge, as was Hitler’s. There is only one solution – execution!

    To keep the man in prison for the rest of his life, in the hope that he will ‘be a broken man’, is not revenge, or punishment, but pure sadism by the State, i.e. on our communal behalf.

    As the ‘liberal’ West likes to adopt the superior stance on these matters, to resort to such sadism, would reduce us to the same level as Hussein.

    While the death penalty is itself barbaric, it is the only logical punishment in these cases.

    How the libs decry inhumane interrogation as sadistic, etc. etc, but when it comes to a choice between a quick clean execution and a long drawn-out sadistic prison term, they change their tune and are quite happy to be equally as sadistic as the man himself, perhaps even more so.

    Perhaps they feel that hanging is too quick for him, and the longer he suffers, the better their feelings of revenge, and the bonus! – they get to feel oh so smug about it.

    As in many capital cases, there is perhaps some small chance that death is too severe a penalty, and that the criminal, by being imprisoned for life, may have a chance to repent his sins, and perhaps be ‘reformed’, though to what purpose, has always been a puzzle to me.

    In the case of Saddam, that is never going to happen.

    As for the expected aftermath, there may well be a small outburst, but like most threats, they are more bark than bite.

  14. It didn’t take the left long to herald their new cause celebre.

  15. Opposing the death penalty is not the equivalent of sadism.

    The real reformation of a murderer needs not purpose it is an end in itself.

  16. Since the majority of those polled in the UK continue to support the return of the death penalty for certain crimes, such as mass murderers/child murderers, WHY do our political elite refuse to reflect the view of the people.

    Further, the death penalty is Biblical.

    Third, why are liberals so upset now that Iraqis get to make their OWN decisions? Upset that the UN can’t make it for them?

    Hang him high.

  17. Aileen,

    As usual, the unthinking woman’s point of view.

    Opposing the death penalty in itself is not sadism, but suggesting life imprisonment as an alternative, in the hope that they "would have been showen up as very pathetic characters if kept in prison." is certainly very much sadism…

    In this case, there is no hope or meaning to ‘redemption’, the man has his place reserved in hell, and he should be sped on his way…

  18. Saddam should be executed.

    To those who bring up the fact that the US sent aid to him-yes, that is true, and no, it was not wrong.

    The Americans and Brits sent aid to Stalin during WW2 if you recall, and that was also not wrong.

    We aided Stalin, a man worse than Saddam, because he was locked in mortal combat with Nazi Germany and the Nazi alternative was, quite correcty, seen as the worse of the two.

    The US aided Hussein because he was in a war with Khomeini’s Iran, and the Islamic Republic of Iran,was, quite correctly, seen as the worse of the two.

    I would have voted to send arms to both Stalin and Saddam.

    None of that is inconsistent with voting the death penalty for Saddam.

    Thumbs down it is. I would ask the Iraqi government to discreetly invite some young and not so young men of Halabja to come down to Baghdad, so that they may tie the noose, and open the trap door.

    The Phantom
    Hilton on Park Lane, London

  19. Ernest

    As usual the unthinking Ernest’s point of view. And that isn’t all Ernest’s just you.

    Do you think you could stick with addressing the point instead if getting personnal and patronising. I can and will throw it back but I’d rather not have to bother.

    "Opposing the death penalty in itself is not sadism, but suggesting life imprisonment as an alternative, in the hope that they "would have been showen up as very pathetic characters if kept in prison." is certainly very much sadism.."

    Er no actually it isn’t. being shown up as pathetic characters is about how other’s view them and their ideology and it is important that evil idologogies and those who lead them are shown up as inadequates. It is not about making them suffer.

    In addition that is what I beleived would have been the byproduct of keeping them in prison but is not why I oppose the death penalty.

    .

  20. >>The real reformation of a murderer needs not purpose it is an end in itself.<<

    Very well said, Aileen.

    Ernest,

    >>In this case, there is no hope or meaning to ‘redemption’,<<

    i.e. the unthinking man’s point of view.

    Either this unthinking man accepts the teachings of Christianity or he doesn’t. If he does (his references to "hell" etc), he must also be aware of the most central teaching of Christianity – to wit that redemption and salvation are open to all.

  21. Hope you are enjoying the fireworks Phantom, noisy innit! Great comment.

  22. I’m not sure how fair the trial was. They didn’t try Sadaam at the Internatonal Court of Justice at The Hague (as Milocoveic was) because the USA doesn’t recognise that court.

    But natural justice demands that this genocidal bastard should be hanged from the highest pole in Baghdad.

  23. Alison, Cunningham,

    Typical liberal claptrap! Always so quick to see the enemy’s point of view.

    The man can seek his redemption in Hell – and he will have all of eternity to work on it.

    "shown up as pathetic characters is about how other’s view them and their ideology"

    That is for the benefit of ‘the others’, but who really cares, we already think the worst of the man, what possible point, apart from your sadistic gratification, is there in keeping him locked up?

    Cunningham,

    You interpret your religion as you see fit, – didn’t you say a while back that you were an atheist? – and I’ll interpret mine as I see it.

  24. >>Alison, Cunningham,<<

    So not only unthinking, but also unseeing!

    >>You interpret your religion as you see fit, – didn’t you say a while back that you were an atheist? <<

    I never said this, or any, was my religion. I also never said I was an atheist.

    But do you deny that the notion that Christ died for the sins of ALL and that accordingly redemption and salvation are open to all is a central tenet of Christianity?

  25. Cunningham,

    Yes, and so is ‘An eye for an eye’, You pick the bits that suit your argument, and I’ll pick the bits that suit mine.

    I’m into Hellfire and and Damnation at the moment, and I totally despise the ‘Redemption and Salvation’ attitude which liberals promote when it suits their purpose.

    By the BBC’s reckoning, Saddam was resonsible for well in excess of 1.5 million people during the final ten years of his regime, and that was without the Iraqui losses in the Iraq/Iran conflict.

    Isn’t there a passage somewhere that says ‘Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord!" – and just who do you, and Aileen think you are to wish to deny him his pleasure..

  26. Oh dear! the out pouring of pretensious pity on poor old Saddams shabby trial. http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1239754,00.html?f=rss. I wonder will the SEA’s Eamon remember what the hard done by deposed ex-President did. Here’s a clue, it wasn’t for stealing sweets from the corner shop.

  27. "Alison, Cunningham,

    Typical liberal claptrap! Always so quick to see the enemy’s point of view."

    That is really really funny and I don’t mean you maligning Alison when you clearly intend to malign me. Just out of interest how has anything I have said point to seeing the enemy’s point of view in this case? I would appear to have managed a strange paradox. I am seeing his point of view and wanting sadistic satisfaction from his suffering.

    ""shown up as pathetic characters is about how other’s view them and their ideology"

    That is for the benefit of ‘the others’, "

    Yes. so what’s wrong with benefits for others?

    "but who really cares, we already think the worst of the man, what possible point, apart from your sadistic gratification, is there in keeping him locked up?"

    the point, and as I sad it is a by product is that those who don’t necessarily think the worst of him, get the chance to see him as pathetic.

    I get no sadistic gratification from it or anyone suffering. The advantage in keeping him locked up is that I don’t believe in killing people when you don’t need to.

  28. Phantom,

    Enjoy London – and great comment. I agree fully.

  29. I seem to have become a liberal!! When did that happen?

    Phantom how long are you in London for?

  30. Aileen,

    (apologies to Alison…a simple mistake, no offence meant!)

    "I get no sadistic gratification from it or anyone suffering."

    Oh yes you do! you just don’t see it in quite that way, and you have the added bonus of having that lovely warm glow from thinking that you are ever so slightly superior to us bloosthirsty types.

    From the title of another blog, The Mudville Gazette, – "Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

  31. >>Yes, and so is ‘An eye for an eye’,<<

    Nonsense. You are confusing your Testaments just as you confused your unthinking women. That stupid idea has nothing to do with Christianity!

    The quote is from one of the oldest books in the Old Testament (the part that also says women should be put to death for wearing a garment of two fibres). When Jesus considered the question, he rejected it unequivocally and by name (Matthew 5:38-39)

    >>Isn’t there a passage somewhere that says ‘Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord!" – and just who do you, and Aileen think you are to wish to deny him his pleasure..<<

    Again, a total ignorance of Christian theology.
    The passage, if anything, is a statement against the death penalty! ("Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." – Romans 12:19-21)

    Who do you think you are to preempt God’s judgement, when He has a whole arsenal of thunderbolts, etc. to use if he so wishes!

  32. "I get no sadistic gratification from it or anyone suffering."

    Oh yes you do!"

    How would you know? Are you into mind reading?

    I know me, you don’t.

  33. So why didn’t he use them against the Nazis in 1933-1945?

  34. An eye for an eye would dictate that saddams daughters be raped in front of him before he was put through a paper schredder. (My apologies to the ladies). As we say here, "hangin’s too good fer’em!"

    (Your’d have to hear my Texas twang to get the full gist)

  35. Aileen

    Unfortunately this is a short stay. Fly back on Tuesday morning, after a full day of meetings near Liverpool Street tomorrow.

    Had a pleasant lunch out in Sevenoaks at a comfortable country place called The Chaser Inn, that I wouldn’t mind going back to.

    I could hear the fireworks, but only from a distance. Had to tell my Ohio-based dinner companions who Guy Fawkes was.

  36. Since the death penalty is provided for in Christian theology (We can debate it whenever you all want) hanging this mass murderer is obeying God’s will. Simple.

    I would refer readers to the Old Testament, in which it is clearly mandated. (Exodus 21)

    Then the Sermon on the Mount, Romans 13 and finally John 19.

    My friend Peter Glover has summed this up most excellently – The State is mandated to execute those who conduct premeditated murder.

    Saddam must die. He will then face judegment.

  37. David, you’re wife would probably have to be put to death every day if you were to go by the Old Testament, so forget that.

    And you really must be in a bad way for a bit of help from the Bible if you have to go to Romans 13 or John 19 for support.

    And where in the Sermon on the Mount is there anything supporting the death penalty?

    There is simply no way the sayings of Jesus can be interpreted to suggest he was more in favour of state executions than against them.

  38. Cunningham,

    MMM.

    Let’s see.

    Christ said…speaking of the OT

    "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy -but to fulfil."

    Read the rest. I don’t "forget it"

    Christ was content to cede to Pilate (The State) the right of jurisdiction over his life.

    There is NO conflict between the OT and NT – God’s word is clear – it’s Liberals who are fuzzy.

  39. David

    Surely if an unrepentant tyrant is put to death you ar
    are are reducing his chamces of redemption. (That arguemnt is courtesy of my Dad)

    As Cunningham says there are many biblical quotes which could be said to cancel each other out to a large degree.

    I respect your view and understnd it, even though I don’t share it and at least you don’t assume to malighn my motivations.

  40. ‘as you confused your unthinking women’

    LOL. what a way to put something.

  41. Aileen,

    And I respect the view held by your Dad and yourself. In the final analysis, the people of Iraq have spoken and we all can think as we wish.

  42. >>Christ was content to cede to Pilate (The State) the right of jurisdiction over his life.<<

    David, that’s absurd. If you interpret the passage like that, it also means everyone in authority, from Hitler to, ironically, Saddam, had a right to execute whoever they thought should die. In fact, the passage in Roman you quote would mean that nobody had a right to put Saddam (or Hitler) out of office, that state authority had to be accepted, and that it is the Allies who deserve the death penalty for ururping Saddam’s ruling authority.

    And you can’t say it’s different because Saddam was a tryrant and undemocratic, etc. Pilate was also a tyrant and, as we all know from the Life of Brian, a very undemocratic one.

    But in any case the passage doesnt mean that, and is obviously only interpreted as such by those desprately seeking support for the death penalty in the New Testament.
    The passage (John 19) seems to be saying that nobody has any power, even the power to get up in the morning, other than that given by God.

    >>"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy -but to fulfil."<<

    That certainly does not mean Jesus accepted everying in the old Mosaic law. And in fact on many occasions he pointedly rejected it. Specifically, when it came to the death penalty he clearly spoke out against the old law.

    Executions satisfy a basic (and rather base) craving for blood. I think the ridiculous attempts to find support in Jesus are merely evidence of a ahaky conscience in
    those calling for the hangman.

  43. Cunningham,

    No. The State is mandated to carry out God’s Laws and the despots you mention did not do so. The right to take life is NOT given to the individual but to the State. Christ DID amend the Mosaic Law but that did not include the death penalty for unpremedidated murder. The Bible is clear. Murderers must die –

  44. >>The State is mandated to carry out God’s Laws and the despots you mention did not do so.<<

    Neither did the despots governing Judea at the time of Jesus’ death (were the Slaughter of the Innocents a few decades earlier and the destruction of the temple a few decades afterwards also part of God’s law), so your interpretation of John 19 doesn’t stand up.

    Nobody has a right to kill anyone who is under their control, as Aileen said (except perhaps in very rare circumstances when they are conducting operations from captivity, as in the case of the Ceausescus. If there was reason to believe that Saddam’s death would directly lead to an end to car bombings, etc. in Iraq, I could probably be swayed).

    Goodnight.

  45. his execution is touted as only being good for iraq. its also good for the west, who extinguish another part of their past they wish to be forgotten. with his death comes the liberation from guilt by association for the crimes he committed. there will be a collective sigh of relief in paris, washington, london and elsewhere when the chair is kicked from under saddams legs.

    its rare i support the death penalty, but for saddam hussein im willing to make an exception. if only for the people of Iraq.

  46. Cunningham,

    Au contraire. Gods Law does NOT change and it is clear from Christ’s words that the State has a duty to obey God and execute murderers.

    Tripper,

    Let’s agree on your last sentence. well said.

  47. "If there was reason to believe that Saddam’s death would directly lead to an end to car bombings, etc. in Iraq, I could probably be swayed)."

    Me too, but I don’t make that connection.

  48. The Saddamites need ALL hope gone. Just like the Nazis.

  49. Red Letter Day

    Daytripper is "right" of me!

  50. BTW, Phantom,
    we’ve all stayed at the Hilton on Park Lane when visiting London, but the question is: which ROOM are you in there?

    There is a difference, you know.

  51. SBK wrote:
    "…..Remember the US, France and UK armed Saddam to the teeth in the 70’s and 80’s."

    What a pile of sh*t!! It has been established that Russia, France and China provided Saddam’s forces with their arms. I didn’t see any American or British weaponry in video footage (not even the BBC’s) when Saddam’s arsenals were taken.

  52. allan, he got his WMD technology from the west. primarily the US.

  53. Wrong again, Allan,

    http://www.sundayherald.com/31710

    But this time, really goodnight!

  54. Cunningham

    Not a fancy one. Got a quiet place to sleep, which is fine by me.

  55. Phantom

    enjoy it. Are you over often?. You seem to travel a lot.

  56. that http://www.lecb.ncifcrf.gov is back and it really slows up connection speed. what the hell is it doing?

  57. "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5:38-42, NIV)"

    Ye’d me tying the noose around his neck until ye mentioned the Bible. Now it’s clear we should rustle him up some mustard gas and send him on his merry way.

    The Bible can be used to justify quite a number of actions, but equally can be used to contradict that position. Bit like the Koran.

  58. SMCGIFF,

    The Sermon on the Mount deals with individual Christian ethics. Not social ones. God’s word is clear – take a life, and you will lose a life. Saddam took thousands. He’s gonna swing and it is both ethical, moral and in keeping with what Iraqis want.

    Isn’t it funny that those who agitated for the US to hand over power to Iraq now deny Iraqis their freely expressed will!!!

  59. Aileen

    I enjoy travel and as I do business in London a fair amount, I come here twice a year, sometimes more.

    Fine place.

  60. You’ll have to meet up with the London branch of ATW next time!

    It may be enough to put you off the place ;o)

  61. The Christian ethic about the death penalty is something that I have wrestled with for many years. There is no clear, unambiguous text, as far as I can see, where Christ either explicitly endorses, nor condemns it. In fact, Christ says very little about judicial affairs. Most of Christ’s words are concerned with personal, social morality, or with the affairs of heaven. Thus, I think that Christians are left free to wrestle with their consciences and work out for themselves the moral ins and outs of this issue. This is something about the Christian faith which you find in many issues, actually – the Bible points the way, and tells us how to use our consciences, but does not always give us clear, black-and-white answers to everything. God gave us brains and intellect, and points towards how we should use them, but He sometimes leaves it to us, as to how we should model our legal/judicial systems.
    I believe that it is possible for a Christian to be either for or against the death penalty, so long as that Christian is striving to understand and apply his/her faith as best they can. I have struggled with the issue for a long time, and I am not yet in a position to say that I have made up my mind. I feel very wary of declaring my own judgements to be right. I know some Christians who are utterly opposed to the death penalty, and I know others who are utterly in favour of it. Both groups are following their consciences before God as best they can.

  62. This Christian says, ‘Fire up ol’ Sparky!!’

  63. Quite frankly, IMO, what happens to Saddam in life is as nothing compared to the sure and just treatment he will receive after his death. I’m not in favour of the death penalty. On a practical level I suspect if he is executed it will worsen rather than improve the situation in the Middle East. Look what the justified execution of Pearse and the others led to after after 1916.

  64. The former leader of Iraq clearly deserves the death penalty. However, I would like him to undergo the additional trials first, so the totality of his crimes are exposed.

    As an aside, the Christian debate on the death penalty is ongoing. The fact remains that the most famous person ever sentenced to death was Jesus. It is an interesting debate, and not necessarily one in which people fall along party lines. My own two cents are that it is a suitable punishment, but only in extreme circumstances such as this were guilt is conclusive and the trial was just (spare me the philosophical we can never know 100%. In Saddam’s case we do).

  65. Mahons,

    Interesting points which more or less echo my own take, the death penalty is a fascinating moral issue which I want to tackle in more depth later on.