Saddam's Guilty Verdict
Today Saddam Hussein was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. I am not the least bit saddened by this, since he was a vicious dictator who deserves to be held account for his atrocities. Still there are a few things that should have been done differently. The scheduling of the verdict two days before US midterm elections as well as using a Kangaroo court greatly reduces the legitimacy of the trial. My view is that it should be up to the Iraqi people, not the Americans to decide Saddam's punishment and therefore the trial should have only commenced once the United States and all of its allies pulled out of Iraq.
This also does not change my position on the death penalty or war in Iraq. I oppose the death penalty not because it is cruel and inhumane to sadistic murders, but because one can never be 100% sure and if you accidently kill an innocent person, you cannot bring them back, whereas you can release a wrongly convicted person from jail. I also still oppose the Iraq War since while getting rid of Saddam Hussein is a good thing, the costs involved in it far outweighed the benefits. Consider, likely over 100,000 innocent Iraqis have died because of the war and close to 3,000 allied soldiers have been killed. Infrastructure has been destroyed and the country is in virtual chaos all just to get one bad man. Clearly it wasn't worth it in my view. It would be nice if we weren't faced with a horrible choice between leaving a brutal sadistic dictator kill who kills his own citizens, versus a bloody war which would kill even more people, but since we are faced with such a choice, we should take the one that causes the least harm. In addition I oppose the principle of pre-emptive strikes and regime change since such policy sets a dangerous precedent that could easily be abused and lead to constant wars and the law of the jungle like we had before World War II. I don't wish to return to such type a world. The way to rid the world of brutal dictators is to work towards raising the standards of living of people globally and as people's standards of living rise, they will demand more freedom and eventually overthrow their governments much like what happened in Eastern Europe in the late 80s and 90s. That is the best way to see regime change, not how it was done in Iraq.
This also does not change my position on the death penalty or war in Iraq. I oppose the death penalty not because it is cruel and inhumane to sadistic murders, but because one can never be 100% sure and if you accidently kill an innocent person, you cannot bring them back, whereas you can release a wrongly convicted person from jail. I also still oppose the Iraq War since while getting rid of Saddam Hussein is a good thing, the costs involved in it far outweighed the benefits. Consider, likely over 100,000 innocent Iraqis have died because of the war and close to 3,000 allied soldiers have been killed. Infrastructure has been destroyed and the country is in virtual chaos all just to get one bad man. Clearly it wasn't worth it in my view. It would be nice if we weren't faced with a horrible choice between leaving a brutal sadistic dictator kill who kills his own citizens, versus a bloody war which would kill even more people, but since we are faced with such a choice, we should take the one that causes the least harm. In addition I oppose the principle of pre-emptive strikes and regime change since such policy sets a dangerous precedent that could easily be abused and lead to constant wars and the law of the jungle like we had before World War II. I don't wish to return to such type a world. The way to rid the world of brutal dictators is to work towards raising the standards of living of people globally and as people's standards of living rise, they will demand more freedom and eventually overthrow their governments much like what happened in Eastern Europe in the late 80s and 90s. That is the best way to see regime change, not how it was done in Iraq.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 10:58 AM
6 Comments:
Saddam was a sadistic, brutal man it was absolutely wonderful to see him brought to justice. With that said, I echo the sentiments of Jarrett and others in saying that I am on the fence about the use of hanging in his sentence. In my opinion, making Saddam suffer for less than 10 seconds by hanging him does not quite compensate for the years of suffering those brutalized under his regime endured.
BC Tory - I don't subscribe to the idea of an eye for an eye tooth for a tooth. I fully agree with the EU's position which is they are pleased with the conviction, but do not support the death penalty. I also too worry this will lead to more violence and divisions. This is such a complex part of the world that we are best to stand aside and let the Iraqis sort out their own problems and determine their own future.
man, I haven't heard of the death by hanging penalty being used in years
Hanging is still used in some US states and was the only form used for the death penalty in Canada until the last execution in 1962, although it wasn't formally abolished until 1976. Although if a place must use the death penalty, which I would prefer they didn't, lethal injection is probably the least inhumane method of execution.
In the words of one of the most celebrated Western journalists of Middle Eastern affairs, Robert Fisk, from today's Independent:
So America's one-time ally has been sentenced to death for war crimes he committed when he was Washington's best friend in the Arab world. America knew all about his atrocities and even supplied the gas - along with the British, of course - yet there we were yesterday declaring it to be, in the White House's words, another "great day for Iraq".
Link
This is, in my opinion, just more mock reality courtesy of the Red, White and Blue that we have come to know so well. In a trial riddled with murdered witnesses, a judge who resigned because of the impartial pressure he received from the government to find Saddam guilty and another judge who was removed by the government for not having a harsh enough opinion of the defendent, calling this anything but a complete joke seems to be intentionally ignoring the facts.
Miles, as you've said in the past, probably the best way to remove Saddam would have been to empower the people living in Iraq, rather than starve and deny them medicine for a decade. I don't think that the choices being presented in your post "It would be nice if we weren't faced with a horrible choice between leaving a brutal sadistic dictator kill who kills his own citizens, versus a bloody war which would kill even more people, but since we are faced with such a choice, we should take the one that causes the least harm." are the only way things could have gone.
Mike - At the moment, there is no desirable solution. And even we followed the solution I suggested, Saddam's bloodshed would last for a time, but at least the transition from dictatorship to democracy would occur peacefully as it did in Eastern Europe, not violently as it is in Iraq now.
And certainly I don't excuse the United States for helping Saddam Hussein. Had they apologized for this, they might have a little more credibility, but the fact they haven't really says this war was about advancing US interests not liberating the Iraqi people.
Post a Comment
<< Home