|
Why the Need to Hang Saddam?
Politics with a Liberal Bias |
 Blog For Free! Archives Home 2007 June 2007 May 2007 January 2006 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June My Links Candidates on the Issues Young Democrats of America MoveOn.org Alan Colmes DNC.org Air America The New York Times Reuters 9/11 Conspiracy Theory tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog
by The JavaScript Source
|
posted by: (reply) post date: 12.29.06 (8:40 pm) I've got mixed emotions about the whole thing. posted by: KatiesPinkShoes (reply) post date: 12.29.06 (9:11 pm) I agree with you. I do not believe in the death penalty; I believe that it is for God to judge, not humans. I also can't believe there are still places where people are hung! How barbaric. I actually hadn't heard this news until reading your blog. Your blog is a pleasant surprise to me as I am not a liberal. Good to know we can agree on some things:) posted by: commontater (reply) post date: 12.29.06 (11:58 pm) I'm against the death penalty, too. In SoDamnInsane's case, I believe he was hung to shut him up on the things he knows about the Bush/Bin Laden business partnership. SoDamn knew too much, so he was silenced, IMHO. A more severe punishment would be a life sentence w/o parole which would keep SoDamn on his toes and nerves frayed from thinking someone was going to snuff him out in prison. But that's just my opinion :> PuC posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 12.30.06 (8:25 am) Reply to: KatiesPinkShoes I can't believe that still here in America we put to death people for what the did. At least we do it with the least pain possible in most states with the lethal injection. I still think it is very wrong and that no human should have the right to decide if someone should live or die. posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 12.30.06 (8:28 am) Reply to: commontater I never thought of it that way Tator. You are probably on to something there. I'm pretty sure he knew things that no one especially the US wanted him to know. If word got out about some of this stuff it could have probably caused a lot of chaos. He still should not have been executed regardless of what he did and regardless of anyone's reasons. posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 12.30.06 (8:30 am) Reply to: LadyG We probably are the minority on this one and it's a shame. Most people put aside their morals on this and just wanted to see him pay for what he did. What I don't understand is how is the fact that he was executed allow him to pay for what he did to humanity? It doesn't! It is unjust and doesn't help out man kind in the least. posted by: fairmoon (reply) post date: 12.30.06 (9:58 am) until yesterday I thought that i believed in the death penalty. And yet after watching the news about this evil man being hung, i had a complete change in heart. It bothers me that I could feel bad that he was killed, there's a part of me that should be happy, he was a horrible man and I thought i believed that if ANYONE should be killed it would be him. I also question why the sentance was carried out before the trial of his crimes against the kurdish people was completed. I don't understand why he wasn't kept alive to take part in that trial. Shouldn't also be held responsible for the deaths of some 100,000 (perhaps even 200,000) people as well as the 148 in Dujail? It bothers me that his responsibilty in that event will no longer be held to account. FM posted by: commontater (reply) post date: 12.30.06 (5:21 pm) Reply to: tfruge1 I love your guests, Fruge, because they pose the right questions, IMHO. I don't think anyone can pull the wool over their eyes :) This is just an aside about death by hanging, Fruge. If done right and noose knotted right, death should be instantaneous due to the severence of the spinal cord. Alot of the twitching and samesuch is really the nervous system reacting. So, based on some of our botched death-by-injection, hanging may actually be the more humane of the two methods. Just my opinion, tho. :) Yours is a rather poignant response, fairmoon. It's always a good thing to hear someone denounce the death penalty after having whole-heartedly defended it in the past. To be fair tho, I can understand the opposing view on this, as the Bible states putting to death even what I consider minor offenses, so I imagine the death penalty stance for people who adhere to the Bible may be difficult to reconcile. That is, for people who adhere to the Old Testament only. Also you make an excellent point, fairmoon, about why did he have to be executed NOW, instead of after the next trial on his crimes against the Kurds? This alone makes me think that he may have revealed more about his "operative" relationship with the CIA and where he got the "weapons" to kill those Kurds. Hmmmmmm...? PuC Thanks for the good mental aerobics session. posted by: 69whisper (reply) post date: 12.31.06 (12:27 pm) Happy New Year :) posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 01.02.07 (12:47 pm) Fruge, hypothetical followed by a question. My life is being threatened by another person. By "threatened" I mean "in imminent danger of ending." I, being one of those "right-wing nutjobs" that carries a firearm for the purpose of self-defense, make the decision to use lethal force to defend myself. Since you don't believe that "anyone including a government should be allowed to 'legally execute' another human being," do you think I would be in the wrong? Afterall, "No one deserves to be put to death based on what they did in their life by another human being." If you think I am in the wrong, then you must justify to me why you feel I should sit idly by while my life is threatened. If you DO think that I acted correctly then you're a hypocrite. Don't play semantics and try to tell me the difference between an "execution" and self-defense, or that you meant the use of an execution as legal punishment. In the end its the same thing. One man or group of men decide that, for whatever reason, they have the right or responsibility to end the life of another human being. I have no problem with this as long as it as that "execution" is carried out through legal means. As far as him having to "pay for what he did to humanity" how exactly does sticking him in a jail cell and giving him three squares a day for the rest of his life make him "pay?" Maybe if they put him in a stockade for 20 hours a day and allowed the Iraqi citizenry to walk by punch him in the mouth. I'd be against the death penalty in that case, maybe. Why do some of you feel that we should have some sort of "closure" and that he should be made to atone for his sins? What could a man possibly do to make it up to "the rest of humanity" for the murder and torture of hundreds of thousands of people? Seriously, what do you want him to do? Build you a fucking school? Donate to charity? Tell us all how sorry he is? He is not a "human being" in any sense of the word. Put his neck in a noose or bullet in his head and be done with him. Let him answer to God or Allah or the Eternal Black Void for his sins. "The rest of humanity" is better off without him. posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 01.02.07 (1:07 pm) Reply to: heavyarms I hear what you're saying but I feel you got it all wrong. First of all, I have a loaded pistol right behind my head-board in my bedroom in order to protect me and my loved ones in case of danger. By danger I mean anyone who breaks in and threats me or my family. I would not hesitate to pull the trigger on someone who is about to end my life or one of my family members. That my friend is self-defence and it is a human right to have the will to survive. On to Saddam. Executing him is in no means a form of self defence and in no way can they be compared. First off, let me make myself clear. Saddam is in no way an innocent person in the eyes of the law or his creator. He performed many crimes in his lifetime. No one can argue against that. I just do see how he deserved to be put to death for what he did. Is humanity better off without his? Yes, definately but it is not the place of another equal human being to make that decision. There is only one being that should decide when it is time for you to leave this earth and it is the same person who created you. I would also have to disagree with you when you said that "he is not a human being in any sense of the word." I just don't see how you can say that. He was a very bad person who did awful things but that doesn't change the fact that he isn't a human being. He was created just like you, me, and everyone else in this world and should be given the same rights (right to live) just like everyone else has. Locking him away where he can't harm anyone else for the rest of his natural life does the same thing as executing him only a lot more humane. One last thing. Bush sent 3000 of our troops to Iraq to be killed no counting all the people he authorized to be killed in Iraq such as innocent civilions, etc. Some might say he could be comparable to Saddam. From an outside standpoint I don't see much of a difference. They both executed many people in their reigns of power but yet you look at Bush as a "hero" and "liberator" while Saddam is "trash". To the people in Iraq, Bush and Saddam might as well have been the same man. posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 01.03.07 (10:11 am) Reply to: tfruge1 Let's get this straight. I don't look to President Bush as a "hero." I reserve that title for men like both my grandfathers whom were asked to risk their lives in the service of out country. I see President Bush simply as President of my country. Holding that title doesn't elevate the man to the status of "hero" in my eyes. Yes, I do see Sadaam Hussein as "trash," see below. For you to compare President Bush to Hussein is asinine. Hussein murdered and tortured innocent civilians by proxy and personally. President Bush "sent our troops to die" (please don't parrot liberal talking points to me) with the full authorization of both the US House and Senate . If you equate President Bush with Hussein, you must do the same for every member of both the House and Senate (see H.J.Res. 114), including Democratic golden boys/girls, Dick Gephardt, John Murtha, Hillary, Daschle, John Edwards, and John Kerry. Hell, even that loon Diane Feinstein voted in favor of it. If you're going to hold Bush accountable for "sending our troops to die" and equate him to Hussein, you might as well do it for all of them. Can't you see the hypocrisy in your statement "There is only one being that should decide when it is time for you to leave this earth..." right after you tell me that you will use lethal force to defend the your life and the lives of your loved ones? Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing you for keeping a gun and being willing to use it. But by doing so, YOU have decided that, should another person threaten you in some way, YOU have a right to decide that it is "time for them to leave this Earth." If you don't think that the government, the organization in which you have placed some measure of responsibility for your safety, can make that decision, why should YOU be able to do so? The answer is that you have decided that your life is more valuable than the life of a person who has made the decision harm you in some way. (Again, there is nothing wrong with that). Why wouldn't you apply that same logic to your government, which you also hold responsible (in some ways) for your and your family's safety? It IS a form of self-defense, in a pre-emptive (i.e. deterrent) fashion. A criminal knows that if he breaks into my home (at least when I'm there), he is taking the chance that he will be shot and killed since it is still (for now) legal to defend your home with a firearm in our state. This serves as a deterrent. A man who has decided to illegally threaten or take the life of another must also consider that he may lose his own life as a result, either directly (self-defense) or indirectly (death penalty.) I mispoke in saying that he was not a human being if you want to use the literal definition that he was a member of the species Homo Sapiens. What I meant was he was not a productive, or at least not a harmless, member of human society. You say that you don't understand how he deserved to be put to death for what he did, but then you go on to say that humanity is better off without him. There's your answer. "Humans" who have proven themselves to be dangerous to our society (serial killers, genocidal dictators, car salesmen) should be removed like a cancer to give "humanity," or human society, a better chance to function. Look, I'll give you this. If we could punish people sentenced to life in prison CORRECTLY... End this ridiculous and failed "War on Drugs" to make room in our prisons, tell the ACLU to go to hell, quit giving prisoners free cable television and college educations. Put them in shackles and have them work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week on a chain gang cleaning litter from our highways, busting rocks, and other forms of grueling labor that was actually a "punishment" (don't give me this "cruel and unusual" punishment, punishment by its very definition is "cruel and unusual," otherwise the activity is pointless). THEN I'd certainly be in favor of abolishing the death penalty simply because imprisonment would be a better alternative and we as a society actually could BENEFIT from their labor. As it is now, execution is the most efficient manner of ridding our society of them. posted by: tfruge1 (reply) post date: 01.03.07 (10:43 am) Reply to: heavyarms I don't see how you can say it "is the most efficient manner of ridding our society of them." First of all, what harm are they doing by sitting in prison. It is just like they are completly rid from the society. Secondly, what if Saddam had vital information about some sort of govt. secrets. By executing him that info goes with him. Now don't you say that he probably wouldn't tell us anything anyway because there is no way of anyone to know if that is true or not. Another thing is he once was the leader of Iraq. Sooner or later we are going to have to try to rebuild Iraq and bring it back up to speed unlike the way it is now. Saddam probably knew what it would take to get Iraq back to being "liveable". I'm certaintly not saying put Saddam back in power but his info could be a help to the U.S. The thing about this debate is that it can go on forever. Ever since the death penality was implemented, this debate has taken place. The only difference is that we are on the opposite sides of the spectrum and neither of us will budge on our positions. My position heavily weighs on the grounds that I don't see the morality and humanity to executing another human being. I feel it is a very inhumane act and extrememly barbaric especially when there are alternatives (imprisonment). There is one thing I can agree with you on however. I agree with the whole "war on drugs" issue you mentioned. I don't see the reason of putting people in jail for their addiction to a substance. The right thing to do would be to get them help so they won't have to ruin their lives anymore. If they don't want to be helped then that should be their own decision to make. Its their life, not the govt's. posted by: heavyarms (reply) post date: 01.04.07 (6:43 am) Reply to: tfruge1 It is the most efficient manner because we no longer have to deal with him, to provide him with food and shelter, so support him. He's dead, he no longer has any direct influence on society whatsovever. I think you fail to see that the possibility of him holding "secrets" we need to know doesn't not make keeping him alive worthwhile. Unless he could tell us where the Fountain of Youth was, or that he had the cure to cancer, there's nothing he knew that would make his life worth anything. Are you seriously suggesting that we may have needed the man's advice on rebuilding Iraq? A man that forced his country to live in fear, terror, poverty? A man that allowed only a select few any sort of privilege? A man that would kill or torture his own citizens when it amused him? Are you insane? "Bring it back to speed?" Iraq is better off now than it was under Iraq. Most of Iraq (excluding Baghdad) was limited to 3-6 hours of electricity a day. In 2003, Iraq electrical capacity was back to pre-war levels, and exceeded that in 2004. Consumer goods are going through the roof. Plus there's that whole be able to walk down the street and say "the government sucks" and not having to worry about being kidnapped and having a car batter strapped to your genitals thing. That's a big plus. |
Political Party Beliefs Know Your Candidates Political Podcasts
|
