Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

petehammer · Dec 16, 2003, 01:47 PM

Okay, here's a situation, give your opinion of it:

On his way to be tried for his crimes, a suicide bomber kills Saddam and perhaps a couple others (people in the motorcade, civilians, etc).

How would the world react? How would the Administration react? Good that Saddam was dead? Bad that Saddam was dead? Bad that civilians died?

It's just an interesting moral dilemma, I think.

Millennium · Dec 16, 2003, 04:30 PM

A terrible thing, with only the thinnest of silver linings, in that Saddam saw justice for his crimes. Nevertheless, still a terrible thing.

thunderous_funker · Dec 16, 2003, 04:50 PM

Would the world consider the innocents caught in the blast "collateral damage"?

Arkham_c · Dec 16, 2003, 04:55 PM

I personally think they should cut off his arms, poke out his eyes, cut out his tongue, and set him out on the streets of Iraq to be beaten, ridiculed, and abused by the Iraqi people every day for the rest of his miserable life.

thunderous_funker · Dec 16, 2003, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I personally think they should cut off his arms, poke out his eyes, cut out his tongue, and set him out on the streets of Iraq to be beaten, ridiculed, and abused by the Iraqi people every day for the rest of his miserable life.

Yep. Nothing helps children grow up healthy and happy like having a human torso to kick around for their amusement.

lil'babykitten · Dec 16, 2003, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I personally think they should cut off his arms, poke out his eyes, cut out his tongue, and set him out on the streets of Iraq to be beaten, ridiculed, and abused by the Iraqi people every day for the rest of his miserable life.

And that would achieve.......what?

petehammer · Dec 16, 2003, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
And that would achieve.......what?

It would bring back to life those he had killed... obviously!

lil'babykitten · Dec 16, 2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by petehammer:
It would bring back to life those he had killed... obviously!

Face Ache · Dec 16, 2003, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by petehammer:
On his way to be tried for his crimes, a suicide bomber kills Saddam and perhaps a couple others (people in the motorcade, civilians, etc).

I'm half expecting it. The West wouldn't want Saddam talking.

eklipse · Dec 16, 2003, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by Face Ache:
I'm half expecting it. The West wouldn't want Saddam talking.

I see three possible scenarios:

1. Saddam is killed one-way-or-another before trial.
2. Saddam cuts a deal with the US and goes into exile. No trial.
3. Saddam is given a mock trial and executed. His case is never put forward - or, at least, it is never opened to public scrutiny.

pooka · Dec 17, 2003, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Yep. Nothing helps children grow up healthy and happy like having a human torso to kick around for their amusement.

I turned out fine.

Spliffdaddy · Dec 17, 2003, 02:44 AM

compared to?

Millennium · Dec 17, 2003, 04:40 AM

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I personally think they should cut off his arms, poke out his eyes, cut out his tongue, and set him out on the streets of Iraq to be beaten, ridiculed, and abused by the Iraqi people every day for the rest of his miserable life.

If you were to do something like this, you might want to consider an old Norse means of punishment. They would take the convicted, and chop off the last joint of one of his toes. They'd then use fire to cauterize the wound, wait for the pain to die down, and then take off the last joint of the next toe. When they'd done the last joints of all the toes, they'd move on to the next joints in each toe. With that done, they'd they'd chop off the rest of the feet at the ankles (one by one, of course), then the legs at the knees, then the knees at the hips. Once that was done, a similar procedure was followed.

After the legs and arms had been completely removed, the convicted was given a wooden box with handles (so that he could be carried) and allowed to go free. The result of this was known as a 'heimdal' (not to be confused with Heimdall, a god from Norse mythology), and people who underwent this procedure usually committed suicide.

Now, having finished talking with my rage, I do consider it justice that Saddam Hussein should die for his crimes. Frankly, it would be justice that he suffer even worse than this, but our society has decided to forsake that form of justice, for reasons that I cannot say I disagree with. A simple, quick and painless execution is too good for him, but it will suffice.

gadster · Dec 17, 2003, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by Face Ache:
I'm half expecting it. The West wouldn't want Saddam talking.

Too right.

eg: US giving Iraq the green light on kicking Kuwait in the bum (for Kuwaiti angle-drilling into Iraqi oil-fields), Saddam (and OBL for that matter) being instruments of US foreign policy. etc, etc, etc. (Ask any Iranian about US support for Saddam Hussein, for instance).

That history is not going to stand up in court too well.

So, I guess the trial will be held 'in camera'. That's freedom for ya.

The thing the 'Dean-haters' are missing is that 20 years later, policies will come back around to bite you in the arse. Sometimes as aggressive architectural political statements.

Yeah, I know it's confusing, but there is IRAQ and then there is IRAN Even though there is only one letter difference, they are different. It's a bit like US vs UN .