Democide researcher Professor RJ Rummell says there are "2,000,000 or more dead for which Saddam Hussein is responsible (about 1,000,000 in his invasion of Iran and takeover of Kuwait, and about 1,000,000 in democide)."Farewell Saddam. The world will be a better place without you in it.
RELATED: Politics-World, Obituary
13 comments:
You seem to be saying, albiet by omission, that the death penalty is an acceptable punishment.
It's hardly rational to espouse the "don't kill or we'll kill you" line of thinking, wouldn't you say?
Baghdad seems to continue to a bit of a butchery . . .
PC said...
[Farewell Saddam. The world will be a better place without you in it.]
In my opinion, I think that the American should put Saddam back to power & get the fuck out of Irag. They went to Irag as Good Samaritan, but now the very people that the Good Samaritan meant to help, don't want them there. The life of an American marine is too important or too precious to be wasted protecting Irag insurgent fuckers whom waging a war against the US.
The solution is very simple. Put Saddam back to power and get the hell out of there. The Iragi people only understands one thing of how to behave and that is, a brutal dictator's way rather than a check & balance western way of democracy. The Iragi's would be happy to get Saddam back to power so they themselves (population) be butchered everyday by Saddam.
In putting Saddam back to power and getting out of Irag, they (US & UK) would achieved many things at once. It satisfies the lefties who have been against the Good Samaritans (US & UK) for invading Irag. This will also satisfy, antiwar countries such as France, Russia & China. The most important of them all is that parents of the US marines would love to have their sons & daughters home and not get bogged down in an increasing insurgent resistance in Irag.
Once the US & UK got out of Irag, after putting Saddam back to power they SHOULD never ever criticize the way he rules his people.
They have given their soldiers life to free a country which had been run by a brutal dictator and if the population of Irag see the US & UK as enemies, then well give them what they want and that is put Saddam back to power.
The other good thing that will achieve by putting Saddam back to power, is that he would have learnt his lessons and that is don't fuck with the US & UK. Giving him a second chance to reform, he would become an ally of the West again in partnership to check the rising power of the mullah's in Iran. I wouldn't be surprised that we start seeing Saddam frequently appearing for a joint conference with Bush at the White House after he's been put back to power.
Anon, it is true that in general, governments should not be allowed to exercise the death penalty because of the potential for abuse and error. But in this case we have abundant evidence of Saddam's war crimes; hanging seems a humane end to his reign of terror.
Falafulu Fisi, I can't believe you really think that the majority of Iraqis really want Saddam back in power (perhaps you meant the Sunni's). You can criticise the US' handling of the invasion and occupation, and you can definitely criticise their chosen rationale, but to argue in favour of a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein seems willfully ignorant.
"You seem to be saying, albeit by omission, that the death penalty is an acceptable punishment."
Not exactly, no -- but that's a very good question, one I was hoping someone would ask. I've mentioned my own opposition to the death penalty here and here (amongst other places over the years).
But as Luke suggests, Saddam's crimes are several orders of magnitude different to your ordinary murderer.
Luke, I suspect what FF is really saying is this: that the liberation of Iraq from Saddam left them free to either succeed or to fuck up, and they seem to have embraced the latter rather than the former.
As such, and if Iraqis in general really don't want to be free of the Butcher, or even free at all, then I think FF is questioning whether any more American lives should be put at risk to protect that freedom they don't seem to value.
I suspect that's really what he's saying, not that the "the majority of Iraqis really want Saddam back in power." FF?
Here's an interesting one.
Had a discussion with a NZ'er only last Friday who is no leftie, not in any way anti-west or an apologist for madmen, etc, but who was and remains opposed to the invasion of Iraq because, as she put it, 'the ongoing mess & carnage just goes to show that freedom cannot be imposed upon people; they have to want it first'.
And based on the current situation, I had trouble disagreeing ..
I don't know why any individual who isn't some sympathiser for warmongering or murder wastes any time giving a damn about what happens to this waste of space.
Saddam should be strung up in central Baghdad - to show Kim Jong Il what might happen one day.
anonymous, with people like Suddam death IS appropriate. We need to prevent them from doing it again and death is the only way to do so. As soon as you kill an innocent you forfeit your right to live.
falafulu, you are sanctioning muder by saying that. Muderers should be killed not given power. America went into Iraq for the wrong reason (to protect the people of Iraq). They should of gone in to protect themselves. But that doesn't justify giving a murderer power. Just because people are happy to have that happen, which the toppling ofSuddam's statues prove isn't true, does not justify giving someone that should be killed power. To do that is immoral. Just because people want us to be immoral doesn't mean we should.
Also, falafulu, you are wrong that they should nebver criticise his way of ruling people. Evil should ALWAYS be criticised. To not criticise it is to sanction it. To sanction evil is just as evil as commting evil. It makes you just as bad as the evil doer.
Also they should not worry about the opinion of foreign countries or even the lefties in their own cpuntries. They should do what's right not what's popular.
Lol, fafafulu, all Suddam would learn is that he can get away with whatever he wants, that he is invincible as the US and UK won't do anything serious against him. Instead they'll do a half-hearted strip of his power, then put him back again, thus making him invincible. Even a threat that if he done it again they'd kill him next time wouldn't teach him as he would see right through that lie due to his power being restored. Besides Iraq's courts have sentanced him and the US and UK have no right to overturn that as Iraq is a sovereign nation not one subject to the rule of the US and UK.
Ultimately, Luke H is right, it is a humane end to his terror. In fact is the ONLY humane end to his terror.
Unlike PC I approve of ALL murderers getting capital punishment not just extreme ones, as it is the only reliable way to prevent them from doing it again. Once you murder you forfeit all right to life. That is the Objective fact.
PC, he may mean that, but falafulu is implictly saying the stuff I argued against in my previous few comments.
Sus, I agree that American lives shouldn't die to protect the freedom of others (even if they DO value freedom). But they should of invaded Iraq to protect their OWN freedom.
Liberty Scot, Kim Jong Il isn't going to be harmed for a long time. The West keeps trying to appease him. Unless a lot of stuff changes, which I doubt it will, he will invincible to all but natural reasons and a mass scale rebellion of his people.
Kane said...
[falafulu, you are sanctioning muder by saying that.]
No, I wasn't. I was meaning that if the Iragi population are dissatisfied with the occupation force, then one single US marine's life is more important than if the different Iragi factions shoot each other to standstill. In Bosnia, the population appreciates the US & Nato forces over there protecting them and at the same time rebuilding the country. It is worth, to stay in Bosnia by the Nato troops to rebuild the country, because the population want to do something for themselves. In Irag, it is a completely different story. The US should leave, and let the population struggle like 'Darwinism, survival of the best fittest'.
If someone doesn't appreciate another person's courtesy then, that person should be abandoned and left to his own device to struggle for survival. How many US soldiers do you expect to die to protect a population who are fully supporting & cooperating with the insurgents to kill the US forces who are there to help the population to stand on their own 2 feet when the occupiers leave. It is widely known that the kids in villages do know really well the roadside bombs planted by insurgents and not a single person can alert the US when they are patrolling around that area. What do those kids & their parents want is to see those bombs go off to maim or killed alot of US soldiers. If the population behave this way, then they deserve to be left alone, to fend for themselves, and the US soldiers can return home for a good Chrismas.
Now the United States government will have to find another dictator to sell chemical weapons to.
Post a Comment