Saddam sentenced to death

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Forum' started by MIG-31, Nov 5, 2006.

  1. Zelig

    Zelig Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,185
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Then either edit it yourself, or find some credible sources contradicting it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2006
  2. Just Learnin'

    Just Learnin' New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,414
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
  3. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    :bleh:
     
  4. merry

    merry gargouille

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    962
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    28
    wikipedia is as good a source of accurate information as any, actually a *better* source than most, specifically because anybody can edit. There is a mechanism for controlling dispute among editors, and "reliable sources" is always a good argument. The article in question is a "featured article", meaning it "was identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia comunity", as you can read in it's Discussion page.

    As far as Saddam is concerned, without any sympathy for that malefactor, I still don't approve of the death penalty in this or any other circumstance.

    Life enprisonment seems a good punishment for someone who saw himself as almighty and disposed of the lifes of anybody in his reach.
     
  5. TheBlackCat

    TheBlackCat New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Strawman. No one is suggesting that. First of all we didn't do anything to Hitler, he was dead by the time we reached him. The question is whether we should lock Saddam away for life or kill him. Some people oppose the death penalty. I am personally more concerned with negative backlash in the Middle East.

    First of all, we are not talking about disease here. War is a poor method of population control For instance, the 1918 spanish flu caused nearly as many deaths in one flu season as World War I and World War II killed combined over a total of 10 years.

    Second, the argument that human would wipe themselves out like that has no real basis in reality. They keep making predictions regarding the "maximum" human population the world can support, and we keep passing it as technology improves. It appears as though the world population will actually stabilize relatively soon, perhaps even by mid-century. We are probably never going to make people immortal, but extending peoples' lives and trying to reduce human suffering is not a worthless goal.

    I oppose human suffering. I think things that cause human suffering with no benefit are bad. People dieing of cancer is not a good thing. Murder is not a good thing. War is not a good thing. People will die sooner or later, I think it is a very worthwhile goal to try to extend their useful lifespan as much as possible.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2006
    Just Learnin' likes this.
  6. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Not Saddam's..



    I think it would send a clear message to the other evil dictators around the world that believe they are invincible.
     
  7. Teme

    Teme Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,496
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Can you say that US didn't give chemical weapons or material what is needed to make chemical weapons to Saddam in the 80's?

    Yeah US supplied weapons to them and didn't react when Saddam did some cleaning like Stalin did....
     
  8. Vikingod

    Vikingod Int'l Fish Liaison

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    16,226
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    88
    haven't read everything, but I see where this is going. This is an extremely complex set of issues. To focus on the one at hand, Saddam's guilty verdict. He was convicted by a jury of people, who hear whatever evidence was available, not unlike the jusry system in the USA and other First world countries. While this system does have its faults, its so far the best thing people can agree on at the present time. I'm not going to state an opinion on the war, or the US's place in the country, i have my own views. The question i ask of everyone is this...

    Should someone resposible for genocide be held accountable?

    Do you think he was a good, just man who was looking out for the best interests of the people he ruled?

    Furthermore, would you want Saddam Hussein as the ruler of your country?

    While much can be said about the US and its politics and its own ruler, that is not the point, they are not the ones on trial, and really shoul dbe left out of the debate.
     
  9. merry

    merry gargouille

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    962
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Who selected those people? Was it a jury of his peers? Would it have worked?

    When dictators fall, they either find asylum or get killed. I'm not defending them (my personal one was shot, but a bit too fast so his "peers" got hold of power for another ten years or so).

    However this particular death sentence comes terribly handy for reps in the US...
    don't you think?
     
  10. SFOSOK

    SFOSOK 939 Goin Strong

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    7,005
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First and foremost I wasn't specifically talking about Hitler so please stop try to put words in my mouth.

    And also lets clarify something, technology would be no where near it is now without war. I wonder if there is any sites out there that could count the number of people there would be now if there no plagues back in the midevil times. No shortages of food and depression in the 1900's. No WW2. No disease, no genocide. No such thing as cancer. No restrictions on child birth.

    Since there are no sites on the web let say Joe here could have died in WW2, or from cancer, or even a heart attack. But he doesn't. Ok so he starts a new family with 1 to 2 children. Lets say there are about 1 billion joes out there in the world for every year we live in this utopia. so 1.5 kids per each 1 billion Joes in the entire world starting from hmm... lets say the early 1900's? (we could go earlier but that seems like a nice place to start). Well I would love to calculate that number I'm not goin to waste my time as I know its a lot and it exponentially gets larger and larger with each passing year.

    So while your idea of "everyone play nice" would be just FANTASTIC!

    It will never happen.
     
  11. Yousaif

    Yousaif Allergic to WiFi

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not to be picky, but your statements above about Joe and his 1.5 kids would actually result in a declining world population over time. 2 people (don't forget it takes 2 to tango) averaging 1.5 kids wouldn't replace them both when they died.

    I feel sorry for Europe if another tyrant like Hitler rises up there. It'll be appeasement and pandering to the very end. I often wonder what would happen if something like that were to happen. I mean would you be so blind to what was happening that you just would say something like "live and let live." ?? Or would you finally realize that in some situations yhou actually need to stand up to the tyrants and remove them physically from their position and sometimes their existence as well?

    God help us if that ever happens and we actually need to find out.

    Please exclude any Brits from the above statement as we all know from history that they wouldn't stand for it.
     
  12. SFOSOK

    SFOSOK 939 Goin Strong

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    7,005
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm talking about adding onto the current population of the time and I was being very general and leaving loads of room to show how rediculous it would be with actual data. I fear I have just confused most people though...
     

Share This Page

visited