The Hanging of Saddam: RAMIFICATIONS!

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Mr. Kadenacy, Jan 3, 2007.

  1. Mr. Kadenacy

    Mr. Kadenacy Guest

    I know that this is an old conversation, but the ramifications of Saddam Hussein’s death are not as clear cut as it may seem. The first order of business is the party responsible for his hanging.
    The Shiite party was in charge of hanging him, while Saddam was a Sunni. This makes the government look secular, and the execution lopsided. In turn, this could lead to internal revolts over the religious differences of the parties in power. An uprising in the unstable Iraq could lead to a war throughout the entire region, and cause a war including all the major Middle Eastern countries.
    The ideal method would have been to have the Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish parties as soldiers at the execution, representing equally all parties. A balanced representation of the religions would promote a level of security for the government, and in turn, the region. Further executions of men accused of crimes under Saddam should include participants from all three of the major religions in the region.
    The next order of business would be the turn around time for Saddam’s death. There is no doubt in my mind that he should have been executed for his crimes. However, the immediate hanging as soon as the government received him was a severe mistake. It will lead to martyrdom, since people will say he had no chance to speak out, make a last confession, or make his final mark on the world; he simply had no time to do such. This martyrdom is most disturbing, since it could spark more terrorist attacks on bases of foreign occupation in the region.
    There is not an easy solution to this however. With the hanging already done, we face the crisis of preventing martyrdom. Step One: The execution is broadcast on the BBC, CNN, and other major networks; no, it will not be necessary to show the whole thing, but at least until he is dropped, so they can show how he refused to speak, or take the hood. This shows his stubbornness as foolish and arrogant. Second, we read off the list of crimes immediately following the release of the video, to show WHY he was executed. Lastly, we do not hurl names or speak too harshly of him on TV, in order to create a world where no bad words can be specifically manipulated so as to justify following Saddam’s beliefs in superiority.
    My last order of business is tied to the aforementioned issue of martyrdom. The USA simply needs to wash its hands of this specific hanging. Many believe America is directly responsible for the hanging of Saddam, even to the extent that we carried it out. That is not the case. America stayed out of the trial as best it could, leaving the trial to the new Iraqi government. It also did not participate in the hanging. Saddam was handed over by American troops to the Iraqi government to deal justice.
    In the TV broadcast, this point must be made abundantly clear. If America is heavily implicated, terrorism would be the least of its concerns. The entire Middle East, as well as the UN may turn on them, both for meddling in foreign affairs, and for cruel and unusual punishment, Saddam's death by hanging. This could become catastrophic on the world stage if America is forced to leave the Middle East within the next 2 years.

    Thoughts?
     

  2. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    That doesn't make sense. Sunnis and Kurds are Iraqi minorities. There aren't equal amounts of Republicans and Democrats on committees because there are different amounts of people. Sunnis and Kurds should have been present should they want to, but not in equal amounts.

    The new Iraqi government is still full of pro-US puppets, and thus is simply an avatar of American interests.

    There will be no mass Middle Eastern war. Iran could curtail them if needed, or in a pinch the Arab League. They have no interest in destabalizing their own interests, it simply makes it easier for American political infiltration.

    The biggest threat America has is the fact that most of the world, the UN, and many NGO's are blasting them for having a sham of a trial (he really should have been tried by the UN Court of Justice, or a similar organization, not a third-world nation just reformed) and the fact that there were limited appeals followed by the death penalty. It's another large dent in American popularity and international standing, and just as damaging as if they had been the ones to tie the noose.
     
  3. Mr Casey

    Mr Casey Guest

    Havent minorities in the past proven to be most caustic?

    And Saddam had a right to a trial in his own country by his own people. He killed more people at home than in any other country.

    But for that matter, why should America care about the world's opinion? I mean, Europe has no real say anymore. They're just a bunch of old fat politicians willing to talk things out over 40 or 50 years instead of DOING something. This is like a repeat of 1800's European politics.
     
  4. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    In the past forty years while the US was in Vietnam and screwing around, Europe has formed the EU. Their currency makes ours look like crap, and it makes a trillion more dollars per year. If China decided tomorrow to stop exporting products to the US, or the Swiss decided to stop providing banking services, the US would collapse. The US doesn't get exempted from behavioral and moral standards. If you believe the US to be so vastly superior, why do they not have to set any kind of example?

    So a Sunni gets to be tried by Shi'as? There's no impartiality or justice there. It was a show trial. Iraq is in no state to be dispensing justice, considering huge portions of it are too volatile to control.

    Well, duh. I didn't advocate exclusion, I advocated a proportional representation at the execution, in line with their population and influence.
     

Share This Page