The Execution of Saddam Hussein: Good Timing or Bad Timing?

[NightBird]

I have mixed feelings about Saddam Hussein being executed at the time it was done. Leaving aside all issues of whether a death penalty should be inflicted by a government, what do all of you think about the timing? Does it seem more likely to make things better or worse in terms of the current deterioration of the situation in Iraq?

[HairyHeretic]

Well, to be honest I doubt it will make much difference on a day to day basis. Those intent on causing mayhem already have reason enough to be doing it, and executing Saddam isn't going to change that. I also believe it was done on a muslim religious holiday, which probably isn't going to win any brownie points with the more moderate muslims either.

I don't see the situation in Iraq getting better for years to come yet. Take a look at Northern Ireland. The violence there was nowhere near as extreme as in Iraq, and that's taken decades to get back to something approaching normality.

[Elvi]

I also believe it was done on a muslim religious holiday, which probably isn't going to win any brownie points with the more moderate muslims either.

It was done before the 'holiday' itself began.
EID, as with other religious festivities, of that type, begin at a certain time of day.

This is why his execution had to take place, before a certain time that morning, or it would have had to be left until after the religious period

[HairyHeretic]

My mistake then. I saw reference to it elsewhere today.

[Zakharra]

 It won't make much difference in Iraq, except in one very important way. Saddam cannot be freed and out back into power. This permanently removes him from the equasion(sp) and weakens the former Baath party. He was tried and executed by Iraqis.

Personally I'm glad he's dead. Good riddance to an evil man.

[Elvi]

This permanently removes him from the equasion(sp) and weakens the former Baath party.

Only now he is seen as a martyr.

[Zakharra]

This permanently removes him from the equasion(sp) and weakens the former Baath party.

Only now he is seen as a martyr.

He'd be seen as one anyways, wether alive or dead. besides, he wasnm't that well loved. Even by the Sunnis, so his death will have little effectivness for the terrorist/insurgents to exploite.

[Elven Sex Goddess]

Actually Eid for Sunni's started on Saturday and Sunday for Shiite.

[Elvi]

Yes it did, however, as I have said, EID does not start at midnight, the time that it begins depends where you are in the world and upon the moon and which phase it is in.

EID is the celebration that follows Rammadan, (Or Ramzan depending which country you are in), which is the Muslim 30 day fast.

Hussein was hung just before the EID celebration was due to begin, sort of like hanging him at five to midnight Christmas eve.....

[National Acrobat]

This permanently removes him from the equasion(sp) and weakens the former Baath party.

Only now he is seen as a martyr.

He's only seen as a martyr by the Sunni Minority whom he kept propped in power. For the Shiite Majority that he oppressed, they are simply glad that justice was done.

[NightBird]

Some of the 'talking heads' were saying that there was some concern about the groups who'd not had a chance to be part of the accusations, but I heard today that the trials of various co-defendants are going to continue. I keep leaning between concern that his becoming a martyr might further the alienation between the Sunnis and all the rest of the sectarian and ethnic groups in Iraq, but then I wonder if they really could get much worse than they already are.

The victorious Allies after WWI set up an impossible situation in the Middle East, drawing out boundaries for nation states that jumbled groups together into a single nation who'd pretty much always been bitter enemies. The concept of the nation state isn't necessarily the ideal way to structure a polity, but with the way they did it, and the spoils given to warlords who supported the Allies, there wasn't even the natural process of accretion that took place over time to make the nation state a workable structure in Europe. After reading A Peace to End All Peace, arguably still one of the best books on the subject, I think the problems in the region were inevitable. If that's the case, though... what can we, or anyone, do to resolve it? In the similar situation of the Balkans, splintering continues. Can the underlying crisis be resolved without returning these areas to what amounts to tribal governance?

[GoldenChild]

The execution of Saddam has nothing to do of timing. The death penalty shouldn't have been used at all in the first place because what did it solved? Nothing, now he is dead and can't be held trail against everything else he has done.

A better punishment would to give him life in prisonment as that stings a bit more then death.

[Elvi]

Whether we agree with the death penalty or not, it is that country's form of punishment.
However, I do agree that there should have been other charges put forward first.

As I have said above, whether he should have been hung or when that was done, is that country's affair, but I am concerned about the way in which it was done.
That, more than the fact this man is dead, is going to enrage people.....I know it has disgusted me.

[Zakharra]

 If he had been tried for all of his crimes, the man would have died of old age before getting thru them all. Now he has been punished and it is done. His death will not neccessarily mean more violence. As far as I know, there has been no noticable increase of violence in Iraq.

He's dead, which is a good thing. The man deserved to be executed. No chance of an innocent being killed this time. It was carried out in a timely fashion by Iraq, in according to their laws. I find any sympathy for him to be odd since the man was a monster to his own people. He now cannot be freed from prison and come back into power or try to take power back.

I'm glad he's dead.

[Elvi]

So Zakharra, you believe that a state execution should be filmed by mobile phone and that the person who is to be executed should be heckled and harranged?

There was also a hell of a lot more for him to answer for, that will now remain unanswered and the truth will not be found, nor other peoples involvement in those actions publicised.

Dance on his grave if you wish, I have no sympathy for Sadam Hussein, but I also have no sympathy for those who put him in power, gave him the training, the equipment, backing and the freedom to do what he did either.

[Mistiq]

I just learn a helluva lot just now, for that I am glad. I don't think timing really matter ethier. All I have to say is that life in prison would have been expensive would it not? Or is that just the case in US?

{Think that the US needs to take a lesson for Iraq about the Death Penalty, though I don't support it, giving people maybe forty days to appeal then proceeding with it would make it a lot less expensive for this already debted country.}

[GoldenChild]

Considering the number of innocent people your country sentence to death I'm glad you don't use those rules.

[PhoenixBlaze]

This a touchy subject, do I think it was wrong to film it with a phone? Yes. Do I think he should have died? Yes and no, one death was an easy way out for him, life would have been better I think, yet he orchestrated many other peoples deaths so it seemes to fit somehow. I watched the vidoe that was taken, and they did taunt and torment him with words beforehand and during, which I agree with elvi wasn't right no matter what he did. Afterall we are not in school anymore and shouldn't act like kids. I am also glad he is deadd, and for the people he harassed and tortured it should be a morale boost I think. Either way what's done is done, and yet despite the fact he is gone things are still bad will continue to be, saddam hussein was just a big monkey who was finally taken off of iraq's back.

[Sugarman (hal)]

Dance on his grave if you wish, I have no sympathy for Sadam Hussein, but I also have no sympathy for those who put him in power, gave him the training, the equipment, backing and the freedom to do what he did either.

Gee I wonder who they were?  ;D

[Zakharra]

So Zakharra, you believe that a state execution should be filmed by mobile phone and that the person who is to be executed should be heckled and harranged?

There was also a hell of a lot more for him to answer for, that will now remain unanswered and the truth will not be found, nor other peoples involvement in those actions publicised.

Dance on his grave if you wish, I have no sympathy for Sadam Hussein, but I also have no sympathy for those who put him in power, gave him the training, the equipment, backing and the freedom to do what he did either.

I'll answer these; It should not have been filmed by a mobile phone. The person that did it snuck the phone in. It was filmed by the Iraqis, the phone was a screw up. Not enough of a search of the people watching it. The person who did it was stupid as hell. He (or she) knew that they were not supposed to do that, yet did it anyways.

At the time (early 1980's) he was the best choice in a bad situation. The lesser of two evils. You cannot always make a good choice when what you have to chooose from is limited. Which it was then.

There will be alot more information coming out on what he did. There's a ton of it out now. He deserved to die.

As to him being heckled, I expected something like that. The man had ruled over and murdered the peoiple who heckled him. What do you expect them to do when they finally see the man who's caused their people hundreds of thousands of dead about to be hanged? Be silent? Hell, if I was in the same situation, facing the murderer of my people (or family), I'd tell him  a thing or two myself. It's a natural reaction what they did.

I just learn a helluva lot just now, for that I am glad. I don't think timing really matter ethier. All I have to say is that life in prison would have been expensive would it not? Or is that just the case in US?

{Think that the US needs to take a lesson for Iraq about the Death Penalty, though I don't support it, giving people maybe forty days to appeal then proceeding with it would make it a lot less expensive for this already debted country.}

It costs about $30-35,000 per year per prisoner to keep inmates. Death row inmates after awhile tend to cost alot. Especially when they sit on death row for 25,30,40 years before finally being executed or dying of old age.

[Mistiq]

Considering the number of innocent people your country sentence to death I'm glad you don't use those rules.

Yes I know but i speak from a purely monetary stand point, evil as that may be. Broke as we are they should get fancy with executions should be quick and painless or quick and painful all I am saying is they should happen faster so people aren't waiting die for a quarter of century and shit.*

*I even disagree with part of what I just said, but stepped out of me for that one.

[Elven Sex Goddess]

Gee I wonder who they were?  ;D

I really could care less, it was wrong in how it was done.  The whole video taping, and it undermined the regime that is buffed up by us the US.   

But the true facts to all those that want to lay claim to the US having funded him and built his army up.

No we did not, never did.   We did thou at the out set of the Iran-Iraq war supply valuable satellite information on Iranian troop movement.  Now the arms that were used were Soviet/Russian,  Chinese and French military arms.  Those are the countries that supplied and maintain the arms of Iraq.   

Now American was not at fault is a lie also, for already forewarned of the megalomaniac of Saddam.  And the threat to turn the region into world war 3 by the atholyah at the time.    As the Iraqs were on the verge of winning.   We Americans supplied missiles to the Iranians.  Which were quite effective in combating the mechanized divisions of the republican guard.  Does anyone remember in history.  Me I was a little girl at the time.  But was not their the Iran contra scandal. 

But back to suppliers of Iraq military under Saddam.  Is it not amazing that the three predominately countries of Russia, China and France opposed the war.  It was not out of  humanitarian or taking the lead to peace.  No it was over the fact that the regime of Saddam was indebted to each of those countries for billions of dollars for the arms.  That continued to fund and sell them to him.

The sad part was we put in war hawks that rushed us into a foolish endeavor,  under false pretense of their being weapons of mass destructions.   Which has been proven untrue. and a lie.  Shame on us.

But then at one time he did have chemical weapons such as anthrax used on the Kurds,  the Iranians in the late eighties and early nineties.   We can thank France and China for that.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Well, one feature that seems to go unnoticed is that the United States asked the Iraqi government to hold on the execution.  They knew that a rushed execution would appear unfair and bias.  Already the United Nations trial was under scrutiny for being quick and possibly unfair and the United States was trying to avoid suspicion falling on the newly formed government.  The Iraqis did go ahead with the execution and while people may understand why they heckled him, that doesn't excuse the fact they did.  If we were sentencing a black man to death who had killed several white people and the guards started screaming white power at him just before giving him the injection, there would be mass hysteria.  That is a similiar case to what Hussein expierenced just before dying and the man was praying.  If the image of a man praying to his God while being taunted by his enemies is not the perfect image of a martyr, I don't know what is.  They may as well given him a crown of thorns and a cross to go with it, make for better television at least.

The Iraq government botched the execution, big time.  Instead of turning this into an example of putting away their past, unifying their people, and looking to the future they allowed old hatred to rear its head and split themselves even further.  Perhaps the Sunnis were looking for violence to begin with, but now they are justified and given a powerful recruiting tool.

[Zakharra]

Already the United Nations trial was under scrutiny for being quick and possibly unfair and the United States was trying to avoid suspicion falling on the newly formed government.  The Iraqis did go ahead with the execution and while people may understand why they heckled him, that doesn't excuse the fact they did.  If we were sentencing a black man to death who had killed several white people and the guards started screaming white power at him just before giving him the injection, there would be mass hysteria.

Wrong on several accounts. First, it was not a UN trial, but an Iraqi trail. It was done according to Iraqi law, which mandates a 30 day maximum time limit for the execution. Thus he could have been remanded to the hangsman noose minutes after his appeal was denied by the courts.

Also your analogy isn't suitable. Screaming racist white power remarks at the hanging of a black man is different than what happened at Saddam's hanging. It was not racially motivated heckling in this hanging but hatred for a man that had murdered hundreds of thousands of his OWN citizens.

If the Sunnis use this as an excuse, then it's their problem, since the power of their former rule is now permanently dead. Thank the Goddess for that.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Those two groups view each other as completely different racial groups.  They look at each other and can label one another by competely different phenotypes and make distinction racial seperations on them.  Their heckling drove a solid wedge between two distinct racial groups of that country.  Any act of the death penalty should be carried out with respect, detachment, and buisness like formality.  The state needs to appear unbiased and respectful for the soon to be departed.  There was no excuse for what they did, whether in private or on national television. 

Also, it's not their problem if the government incites them.  A government who is calling itself a democracy can't alienate a portion of it's population.

[Zakharra]

 Their differences are not racial, but religious. Sunni vesus Shiite, versus Kurd. Physically, they look very similar and are of the same ethnic grouping.

Also, it's not their problem if the government incites them.  A government who is calling itself a democracy can't alienate a portion of it's population.

Name one democratic government that has not alienated some segment of it's population. There are none. In every country, there will always be some group that feels discriminated against.

[NightBird]

With my being at a conference in Atlanta these past few days, I haven't caught much news, but I thought I'd offer this link discussing strong reactions from Hussein's birthplace:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1980921,00.html

One can hope the statements are passion of the moment, but it seems a forlorn one to me.

Also, the Kurds are considered an ethnic group, where the Sunni and Shia are two sects of Islam that initially divided over who should be Mohammed's successor. Over time, more differences developed, but that was the origin of the split. The issues among these various groups underlines the difficulties that exist in attempting to create a nation state in areas with no historical developmental process to support it, and where the national boundaries were arbitrarily drawn by European Great Powers. It's typical Western hubris to think a viable political entity can be created in that manner and maintained by democracy.

[Elvi]

Oh bugger....the Kurds......
They are predominantly Sunni Muslims, however, they are a 'nation' in themselves.....a complicated ...infact very complicated story.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

They look similiar to you.  There are numerous cases ranging from Eastern Europe to Africa where different ethnic groups that most would consider similiar looking and probably of the same gene pool saw differences.  When you are in the ethnic group in question, the differences are real and matter to you.  For instance, I cannot tell the difference from one asian ethnicity to another.  I simply can't, nor am I good at determing the differences between hispanic groups....they can tell the differences.  These differences are very real to them.

As for naming a democracy that doesn't alienate it's people, that would be imposible.  At the same time, it's not exactly something that those democracies promote.  The United States suffered dearly for alienating its African-American population in the 60s, along with it's population of women at around the same time period.  Following that were the protests of homsexuals.  The Great Depression almost resulted in a socialist revolution in the United States, to the point of social welfare programs being put in place to find a compromise, coming from the alienation of the poor.  While no country perfectly blends its citizens together, they at least make an effort to do so.  The new Iraqi government not only didn't do this, it tore the groups apart.

Yes, the Iraqi conflict is indeed an example of hubris.  We came in wanting to bring democracy to the world, our government is obviously the supreme form and they would herald us in.  Take out the dictator and give these people what they must want, our government.  Do this also while telling the rest of the world to kiss our butts and mind their own buisness.

[Sugarman (hal)]

With my being at a conference in Atlanta these past few days, I haven't caught much news, but I thought I'd offer this link discussing strong reactions from Hussein's birthplace:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1980921,00.html

One can hope the statements are passion of the moment, but it seems a forlorn one to me.

Also, the Kurds are considered an ethnic group, where the Sunni and Shia are two sects of Islam that initially divided over who should be Mohammed's successor. Over time, more differences developed, but that was the origin of the split. The issues among these various groups underlines the difficulties that exist in attempting to create a nation state in areas with no historical developmental process to support it, and where the national boundaries were arbitrarily drawn by European Great Powers. It's typical Western hubris to think a viable political entity can be created in that manner and maintained by democracy.

"The Persians have killed him. I can't believe it. By God, we will take revenge,"

I thought this interesting... how deeply different the people of Iraq see themselves from one another. It was a big surprise to Bush I am sure. But he went in blindly as our government seems to do all to often.   

[RubySlippers]

I say we pull out and retreat to Kurdistan after we make them an independent state, let the rest of Iraq tear itself apart until one side wins then deal with the government that pops up. All that time building up our military position in Kurdistan our land rights there fixed for our support in the UN in making them a nation. After all we have the army there, a miltary force is power and they are the only group in the region of Iraq we can trust and deal with. They want a free Kurdistan so lets give that to them. And it would be a fine lever against Syria, Iran and Iraq when things settle down. And if attacked we can invoke the NATO treaty to bring in Turkey and our Eurpopean allies.

Why make this more complicated than we have to?

[Sugarman (hal)]

I say we pull out and retreat to Kurdistan after we make them an independent state, let the rest of Iraq tear itself apart until one side wins then deal with the government that pops up. All that time building up our military position in Kurdistan our land rights there fixed for our support in the UN in making them a nation. After all we have the army there, a miltary force is power and they are the only group in the region of Iraq we can trust and deal with. They want a free Kurdistan so lets give that to them. And it would be a fine lever against Syria, Iran and Iraq when things settle down. And if attacked we can invoke the NATO treaty to bring in Turkey and our Eurpopean allies.

Why make this more complicated than we have to?

Point well taken.

The cost of staying put in Iraq is staggering.

To raise 10,000 additional troops is estimated to cost 1.3 billion and will need 10 to 20 times that many troops to even stabilize the situation. Truly a nasty mess. Thanks Mr President... so much.

[Elvi]

You want to give them a 'free' Kurdistan?

So.......you going to start a war with Turkey, Russia and Iran to get those parts back?

[National Acrobat]

I say we pull out and retreat to Kurdistan after we make them an independent state, let the rest of Iraq tear itself apart until one side wins then deal with the government that pops up. All that time building up our military position in Kurdistan our land rights there fixed for our support in the UN in making them a nation. After all we have the army there, a miltary force is power and they are the only group in the region of Iraq we can trust and deal with. They want a free Kurdistan so lets give that to them. And it would be a fine lever against Syria, Iran and Iraq when things settle down. And if attacked we can invoke the NATO treaty to bring in Turkey and our Eurpopean allies.

Why make this more complicated than we have to?

An Independent Kurdish state would be wiped off the map by Turkey, Iran and Russia in a heartbeat. The Turks are already barely being held in check by the US and Britain from wiping out the Kurds that live in Turkey, and on more than one occaision, they have crossed the border into Iraq intending to cause mischief in the Kurdish part of Iraq, only to be forcefully told to go home by the US.

The Kurds will not compromise on the borders of what they consider to be 'Free Kurdistan'. Such a country to them would include land currently part of Turkey, Iran and Russia, and they have explicitly stated that such land belongs to them, and any Kurdish state must include it. So you can see where this will lead. For their part, the Turks, Iranians and Russians do not want to A) give up their territory and B) want the Kurds and their influences out of their country if at all possible.

The only reason the Turks aren't overrunning the Kurdish part of Iraq is the US Military Prescence. Once we exit and the Kurds set up their autonomous state with Iraqi/Kurdish Military and Police Protection, you can bet the Turks will start to agitate them.

[Elvi]

It's one of the sticking points in having Turkey in the EU, we had a huge influx of Kurdish Turks, as refugees, after the first Gulf war.
Turkey used it as a mask to have a go at them and push them back towards the boarders and Britain has been slapping them for it ever since.

[delle]

Such a coincidence it should be mentioned that Saddam is seen as a martyr... and the time of his death compared to Christmas Eve.

I was just pondering:

According to the bible, Jesus was heckled before he died. He is seen as a martyr, and today, the holy symbol for Christianity is a naked man nailed to a cross.

Saddam Hussein was heckled before he died, and people now see him as a martyr. What if one day, the symbol for Islam is a chubby bearded man hanging by a noose?  :o

I must be going nuts.  :-\

[NightBird]

Maybe it's not nuts at all, Delle...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070104/wl_mideast_afp/libyasaddamexecute

[Zakharra]

 They are ignoring the fact that he killed Muslims at a high pace, was a secularist and was reviled by all of his neighbors.  It's like saying that Charles Dalmer(sp) is to be canonized as a saint in the Catholic Church.

[Elvi]

Zakharra,
The politics and religions of the Middle East isn't just black and white.

Have Christians killed Christians, simply because they have a different outlook upon how they practice their religion or live in a country that they are at war with?

Look at the Musslim sects in the same way as you would look at Catholics, Protestants, Born again Christians, Mormons, Penticostalists and every other type that are around and then rethink what you have just said.

[Elvi]

And this isn't going to help matters either.......

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/15012007/325/film-shows-saddam-s-brother-beheaded.html

[Zaer Darkwail]

Aye, religions and politics are not blakc and white (like world is not). After thousands of years Sadam Hussein can be saint because some lunatic wroted a bible of him where he REASONED why he had killed hundreds of fellow citizens or developed other lie cover it up.

Who can say they TRULY know what Jesus was? According one source he was bandit about 30 years (probably oldest bible) in desert before he 'found the light' but according my personall belief he simply created cult to gain power. I dont mean this as offense to any strongly Christian but logically I believe the present bible is not 100% true because same book has been rewriten many times over the thousands of years and rewriten occassionally also by corrupt priests who wanted get more power over generall populace in middle-ages (when church power was most highest factor everywhere, influencing art, politics and even warfare and if someone wanted become true politician they needed only study at Vatican to become bishop).

So, my basic point is that anyone can become saint if enough time passes and if even smallest group of people hold their image of the person as saint (andif they get enough power spread this belief wide area it's survivalbillity increases).

[Sugarman (hal)]

And this isn't going to help matters either.......

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/15012007/325/film-shows-saddam-s-brother-beheaded.html

It seems blunder after blunder happens there. Madness all around.