Did Saddam deserve a trial? (1 Viewer)

[Skip]

After seeing some DP members' unAmerican opinions concerning this issue IMO, I decided to make it a poll and see how many agree with them. Did Saddam deserve a fair trial?

 

[Jerry]

After seeing some DP members' unAmerican opinions concerning this issue IMO, I decided to make it a poll and see how many agree with them. Did Saddam deserve a fair trial?

He was a citizen of Iraq and was entitled to all rights afforded under their constitution.

 

[1069]

Well, if we were going to kill him anyway, we might've saved a lot of trouble if we'd just sent an assassin in to poison his toothpaste or something; we've authorized the assassinations of other dictators in the past.

 

[DeeJayH]

Well, if we were going to kill him anyway, we might've saved a lot of trouble if we'd just sent an assassin in to poison his toothpaste or something; we've authorized the assassinations of other dictators in the past.

It is illegal for the US to assassinate these days
that's what we have Israel for though

not to mention we would have needed to have his two fine upstanding sons assassinated, Chemical Ali, and quite a few more to take down the former administration in Iraq

 

[Hoot]

It's a little late to talk about giving Saddam a fair trial, isn't it?

 

[Hatuey]

Did Saddam deserve a trial?

Didn't he get one?

Personally I think he should have been tried by an international court because he did commit crimes against humanity but eh w/e thats just me.

 

[Billo_Really]

No matter who you are, or what you have done, everyone deserves due process of law.

 

[Hatuey]

No matter who you are, or what you have done, everyone deserves due process of law.

Yeah. Being tried by the same people you tortured is pretty stupid. It's like a mass murdered being tried by the families of his victims. Obviously their opinions are biased so fairness is not ensured. Since all Iraqis were victims of Saddams terror it's obviously a trial that has an Iraqi judge will have some bias. If some criminal in America was tried by a judge related to one of his victims the ACLU would blow it's friggin brains out.

 

[DeeJayH]

Yeah. Being tried by the same people you tortured is pretty stupid. It's like a mass murdered being tried by the families of his victims. Obviously their opinions are biased so fairness is not ensured. Since all Iraqis were victims of Saddams terror it's obviously a trial that has an Iraqi judge will have some bias. If some criminal in America was tried by a judge related to one of his victims the ACLU would blow it's friggin brains out.

while your logic is reasonable
I just cant get behind sending another Head of State to the Hague so he/she can die before completion of the trial
but hey, thats just me

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

The purpose of a fair trial is to make certain that the accused gets whatever he or she deserves-- an acquittal and apology if innocent and conviction and sentence if guilty. Logically, everyone deserves a fair trial, and people who are opposed to fair trials are either taking shortcuts-- because of their anger-- or worried about what kind of facts will be revealed in a "fair trial".

I won't speculate on the motives of other posters here. At least, not on this topic.

I find it vaguely amusing that anyone believes that Saddam got-- or even could have gotten-- a fair trial. Presidents do not get fair trials, either from their loyalists or from the opposition-- and there was never any doubt as to what either the verdict or the sentence of the court would be.

You cannot overthrow a government and leave the former leaders of that government alive, if you intend on accomplishing anything in the country.

 

[dragonslayer]

After seeing some DP members' unAmerican opinions concerning this issue IMO, I decided to make it a poll and see how many agree with them. Did Saddam deserve a fair trial?

Of course Sadam deserved a fair trial. So does George W Bush.

 

[Alastor]

No, Saddam did not deserve a fair trial.

We deserved for Saddam to have a fair trial.

In this case, it's not something you do for the bastard you know is going to die. It's for us, our standards, our ethics, and to make sure we stand by the oaths we made.

We do it for us; not him.

 

[jamesrage]

After seeing some DP members' unAmerican opinions concerning this issue IMO, I decided to make it a poll and see how many agree with them. Did Saddam deserve a fair trial?

The only thing Saddam deserved was a bullet to his head,cremation and then his ashed pissed on and mixed in with some pig ****.

 

[Hatuey]

The only thing Saddam deserved was a bullet to his head,cremation and then his ashed pissed on and mixed in with some pig ****.

This is from the same people who are trying to stop Hamas, Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda from doing the same thing to the people of Israel.

 

[jamesrage]

This is from the same people who are trying to stop Hamas, Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda from doing the same thing to the people of Israel.

So your saying the Jews and everyone else deserve what Hamas,Hezbollah, and
AlQeada are doing?

 

[Hatuey]

So your saying the Jews and everyone else deserve what Hamas,Hezbollah, and
AlQeada are doing?

Do you understand the statement? It's not about wether they "deserve" it or not. It's about putting ourselves one moral level above the barbarians we're trying so hard to defeat. There's no point in fighting terrorism if we're willing to do the same thing we're trying to stop the terrorists from doing.

 

[jamesrage]

Do you understand the statement? It's not about wether they "deserve" it or not. It's about putting ourselves one moral level above the barbarians we're trying so hard to defeat..

I perfectly understand the statement.It seems anytime some liberal tries to make a comparison to terrorist it is usually about the type of punishment not if the individual deserved that punishment.Anti-death penalty ******s try to make the same bull **** comparison when ever they argue against the death penalty.

There's no point in fighting terrorism if we're willing to do the same thing we're trying to stop the terrorists from doing

It seems that you think Americans punishing dictators and terrorist with their own medicine is the same as running around butchering innocent people.Saddam is not innocent and and has committed crimes far worse than any American.For us to be like the terrorist we would have to be running around butchering innocent people and administering the death penalty for small crimes like shoplifting or a woman wearing a skirt in public.The anti-death penalty ******s seem to think the death penalty was abolished when the 8th amendment was written,considering the fact that people were executed by hanging,burning at the stake,firing squad for crimes for something as measly as stealing that would prove those ******s wrong.

 

[Iriemon]

Saddam was a bad guy because he killed people without giving them a fair trial. Therefore, we needn't have given him a fair trial.

If our goal is to be like Saddam.

 

[jamesrage]

Saddam was a bad guy because he killed people without giving them a fair trial. Therefore, we needn't have given him a fair trial.

If our goal is to be like Saddam.

Trials are for proving guilt or innocent.We know Saddam is guilty.The trial is just formality so that his punishment may begin.

 

[Kandahar]

Trials are for proving guilt or innocent.We know Saddam is guilty.The trial is just formality so that his punishment may begin.

That doesn't mean you can bypass it. Until he was convicted in a court of law, your subjective opinion that we "know" he was guilty was just that...a subjective opinion. I'm sure that there have been instances where everyone has "known" that some innocent person is guilty, which is why everyone is entitled to a fair trial regardless of what they've done. Now no one can realistically say that Saddam didn't have a fair chance to prove his innocence.

 

[jamesrage]

That doesn't mean you can bypass it. Until he was convicted in a court of law, your subjective opinion that we "know" he was guilty was just that...a subjective opinion. I'm sure that there have been instances where everyone has "known" that some innocent person is guilty, which is why everyone is entitled to a fair trial regardless of what they've done. Now no one can realistically say that Saddam didn't have a fair chance to prove his innocence.

So if it just opinion that Saddam is guilty before he was found guilty then who could have gassed the Kurds and committed a other atrocities?

 

[Iriemon]

So if it just opinion that Saddam is guilty before he was found guilty then who could have gassed the Kurds and committed a other atrocities?

Could have been one of his lieutenants acting without authority. I could have been the US CIA trying to make Hussein look bad. It could the story is as accurate as Hussein having hundreds of tons of WMDs and posing an urgent threat to the US in 2003.

 

[Napoleon's Nightingale]

So if it just opinion that Saddam is guilty before he was found guilty then who could have gassed the Kurds and committed a other atrocities?

Our intelligence buereaus have been waffling back and forth for decades between blaming Iraq and blaming Iran for the gassing of the Kurds. In anycase, the Kurdish villages were legtimate military targets due to the fact that Iranian troops were stationed there alongside their Kurdish guerilla supporters. In terms of the other attroctities, it's interesting to note that NONE of the witnesses presented at the trial on the part of the prosecution acused Saddam of anything. Instead, ALL of them pointed the finger at Barzan Ibrahim. Most of the doccuments presented at the trial by the prosecution also showed that Barzan Ibrahim disobeyed direct orders from Saddam to release prisoners and, instead, murdered them and ordered Mukhabarat agents to bury the bodies in the desert so Saddam wouldn't find out. One witness even stated that Barzan Ibrahim personally took part in torturing her. There was absolutley NO evidence or testimony presented at the trial which warranted a guilty verdict for Saddam.

 

[Kandahar]

So if it just opinion that Saddam is guilty before he was found guilty then who could have gassed the Kurds and committed a other atrocities?

That's the purpose of a trial. To prove that it COULDN'T have been anyone else.

 

[nort_12345]

of course he deserved a trial. he wouldn't win, but he still deserves a trial. anyone that is charged w/ a crime deserves to defend themselves.

'innocent until proven guilty'. not 'guilty' and then punished