More barbarity in the Middle east

Saddam Could Be Executed After First Trial

 

I am bummed they didn't shoot the coward while he was hiding in his hole in the ground (hey - I thought I saw a gun - bang - oops!)

Personally the only real justice I have seen is what the Italians did to MUSSOLINI after WWII - shot him and hang his body upside down in a public square - allowing anyone to take potshots. In Saddam's case, letting his lifeless body hang in the main square in Mosel (Kurdish region) would be real justice.

 

Were you going for cartoonish?

 

Were you....

He'll probably have a much fairer trial than the 100's of thousands he had executed.

 

Re: Were you....

Well... as long as we're fairer about our barbarity...

 

Re: Re: Were you....

Well, if you call a fair trial followed by an execution barbarity, maybe you are right. Frankly, the death penalty is only barbarous when there is reasonable doubt. This isn't even close to one of those cases......

 

Re: Re: Were you....

...and we are. Until the next 911 incident, after which it will be open season on Islam - Carl's prediction.

I'm just sad that it is going to take a lot more deaths and suffering of our OWN people before the West wakes up and realizes that it is in a fight to the death with a hostile, perverse, and violent religion - not just insurgents, but the whole damn thing.....

 

Re: Re: Re: Were you....

More specifically, I call barbaric the killing of captive human beings, when those persons pose no immediate danger to society.

It's very Saddam-like, but with more little rationalizing flourishes like a "fair trial".

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Were you....

Ok, maybe you mean like that guy whose wife helped him escape, killing a guard in the process? I am sure his family agrees with you that he was no longer a threat to society....

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Were you....

Should we have killed him too?

 

If we had....

If we had there would be one less fatherless family today.

No matter how you shake it out the argument that there is never a good reason to take a human life is morally bankrupt. Simply put, if someone had shot Hitler early on the world would have suffered the agony of WW2.....

 

Re: If we had....

Are you saying you advocate the killing of captive robbers to prevent possible fatherless families in the future?

Would you be willing to do the killing yourself?

And no matter how you shake it out the argument that frogs have wings is fallacious. Neither argument was advanced in this thread, however.

And if someone had captured Hitler early on?

 

Re: Re: If we had....

Where did I say I advocated the execution of captive robbers? Don't make up stuff to back your point. The man was in jail for ARMED robbery and other violent crimes and I never said he should have already been executed. He could have been in jail for murder when he escaped and murdered someone else. The point is that someone who is in jail can escape and murder again. It has happened many, many times.

Frogs and wings has no bearing on the topic being discussed and is just camouflage for the weakness of your argument.

Someone did capture Hitler early on. He wrote Mein Kampf while in prison for treason. Treason is often a capital offense. If he had been executed for it things would have probably worked out much differently.

Yes, if I had a murder in my gun sights and letting him go risked further murders I would gladly pull the trigger. If I missed, I would pursue him to get a better shot. The rights and welfare of the innocent take precedent of a murderers right to practice further evil.....

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Were you....

DTechBA: People in general are free agents who choose their own jobs. Those who choose jobs where there is risk to life and limb are generally aware of those risks going in. Moreover, usually those jobs entailing risk to life and limb carry greater compensation than jobs of similar educational requirements that do not entail risk to life or limb. This is because many people who do meet the educational requirements for said jobs won't do said jobs because they're afraid of getting shot at (not necessarily a bad reason for declining a job position). That said, the fact of so many otherwise qualified persons declining such jobs tends to constrict the supply of labor for said jobs, which means that, assuming that demand for labor for said jobs remains the same, the price of labor (wages or salary) for said jobs goes up quite substantially. The guard probably knew what he was getting into and if he didn't know what he was getting into, but took the job anyway, then he's an idiot. Sorry, but I just can't work up any pity for the guy.

Regardless of whether we kill the guard or the escapee, we've got one more fatherless family.

[By the way - I have no kids. Does that mean that killing me is less bad than, say, killing my brother, who does have two kids? Just wondering.]

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Were you....

Wow, since the guy chose to do a job which is a necessary part of civilized society (jailers are necessary, DCV says we should use more of them rather than execution to contain our evildoers) you have no consideration for him? I am, frankly, astonished at how morally bankrupt that statement is!!!

The moral void demonstrated by that comment demonstrates more clearly than anything you have ever said on this board just where you stand morally. It isn't a pretty picture actually.

Maybe you should get a little more education so you understand just what it takes to make a society operate. Somebody has to do the "dirty work" and just because they choose to do it doesn't make their life less meaningful. We should never consider the rights of a murderer over those of a law abiding citizen, NEVER!

It is readily apparent that you two have some real morallity issues so I guess I'll just beg off as common sense probably will not reach you.

BTW, in case you missed it we all have families. Your stretch about the value of the childless is a straw man argument meant to hide just how bad your real argument is.......

 

Here something for you....

I make for more as a computer geek than I ever did as a soldier or a cop. Working conditions are a lot better too. So much for the people taking risky jobs just because they pay well....

 

Re: Re: Re: If we had....

Oh...you're "that kind" or arguer.

I'll leave you to your weaselings and your moral superiority.

 

Ha Ha

No, you are that kind of arguer. I never said that I advocated the execution of the guy who escaped from jail in Tennessee. I responded to your point that people in jail were no longer a threat to society, Remember this comment, "when those persons pose no immediate danger to society"? I simply used him as an example of how people in jail are not necessarily no longer a threat to society. You simply made up the rest to buttress your outstandingly weak argument. Get your story about what I said straight.

Politically, Saddam is still a threat to stability regardless of whether or not he is in jail or out. That fact is irrefutable. The fact that he murdered thousands of people removes any sympathy for his plight. His execution is justice, pure and simple.


Full disclosure, I represented politically a man who suspended the death penalty in Illinois. He is a Republican and that meant he faced wholesale condemnation from a very large part of his constincuency. Almost any time I represented him at an event I would face almost hysterical animosity from the farthest right elements of our party. Many of my peers simply begged off with that they didn't agree with his policy but they agreed it was his to make. On the other hand, (after witnessing 13 people be released from death row for deficiencies in their trials) I wholeheartedly support his stand and said so. (Of course, now I am not a "real" Republican but screw them anyway.) Does this mean I no longer believe in the death penalty? No, but it does mean I do not believe in executing one innocent person to ensure we execute another guilty person. Someone once told me that he was willing to take the risk but when I challenged him to be the next executed innocent he declined, go figure. Our system is not perfect and when we are talking the death penalty it has to be. So no, I guess I no longer support the death penalty as we have it here today.

Moral superiority? Let's see, on this thread are two people who think the rights of the murderer trump anything else. One even considers the loss of a prison guard to be beyond sympathy. Frankly, I am morally superior to those beliefs and I am dang proud of it.

Weaselly? Actually, of all the things I have ever been accused of being that was never one. Usually, criticism of my actions centered on my willingness to speak my mind. That is not exactly weasely. If you think it is, so be it.....

 

DTechBA: My arguement is not morally bankrupt. It is a simple truth. People decide their own jobs. If they're smart, they go in with their eyes open, knowing the risks. Soldiers, cops, guards, bankers, fast food workers, and convenience store workers risk getting shot at. Steelworkers risk getting crushed by a big heavy I-beam. Farmers risk losing their crops to drought or flood or maybe getting crushed by heavy machinery. Fishermen risk getting tossed overboard in a storm (or maybe getting caught in the nets and getting tossed overboard that way). And the list goes on. All I said was essentially that people take their risks and live their lives. It's that simple. And, by the way, your original post about the guy who escaped with his wife's help did not indicate whether he was a real criminal who was given due process or whether he was one of Saddam Hussein's political prisoners.

Your argument about making more money in computers than you ever did as a soldier doesn't hold up. Note that the argument was that, by taking a dangerous job, one generally makes more than one might otherwise have in another job with similar educational requirements. Clearly, to be a soldier (or at least take a crack at boot camp, if you want to) you need to be a warm body, have a high school diploma, and volunteer yourself (or get drafted). To be a computer consultant, one needs certainly at least knowledge and probably a series of certifications and degrees. In short, the minimum requirements for being a computer consultant are much higher than to be a soldier.

No, my question about the killing of a childless person being less bad was not a straw man or a red herring, as you say. Your reason for saying that the prison guard's death was a bad thing was that it left a fatherless family behind. If I were killed, I leave behind no widow or orphans. Is killing me not a crime for that reason?

 

Your argument don't add up....

Yes, your argument is one of the most morally bankrupt posts ever made on this board. I am saddened you do not see that for yourself.

As a programmer/network administrator I make more than a Captain and some Major's in the Army and they have to have degrees. My job only required 20 semester hours of computer classes. My wife qualified for it by taking a one year Cleveland Institute of Electronics programming certificate which cost her maybe $500 (how's that for ROI). I had far more education than that as a soldier so put away your ideas about respective skills required to be a soldier and a computer geek. Being a computer programmer or network technician isn't all that difficult. It is mind numbingly dull though.

Glad you brought up those minimum wage convenience store workers that support our urge for round the clock service. I guess their lives are meaningless as well. Let me ask you this, since you know that these people are serving in high risk jobs have you ever felt the need to protest their hours by refusing to shop at one of these stations at night? They are only filling a need that the rest of us have demonstrated by our shopping habits. If we stopped the need would go away and these peoples lives would not be put at risk. If you shopped there you are demonstrating that need yourself.

Here are some facts, in any society there are some jobs which are dangerous and require people to do them. Not all of them are high paying. For example, an office assistant at the state where I work makes only slightly less than a prison guard at starting. Fact is, if no one steps forward to do the job voluntarily they will require a draft to fill them and the people will definately be paid less for that. If it comes to that we will have an unwilling force doing a second class job which puts society as a whole at risk. You might even be doing it if they had a draft which I am sure you would not like. Instead of condemning those people you should be thanking them. Instead of saying they knew the risks you should be condemning the ones who caused the risk in the first place.

My post did not really need to specify who the guy was. It was all over the news and most anyone should have been aware of whom I was speaking. DCV did (the target of my comment) since he immediately responded with the robbery comment (the guy had been in jail for armed robbery and assault). Either way it made the point I was trying to make.

Yes, wours was in fact a red herring argument. I did not say that the reason his death is bad is because he left a family behind. What I said was that his family would probably disagree that the guy had not been a threat to society (as DCV alleged jailed criminals were). I said in another post that if that person had never existed or had been executed for a crime that there would be one less fatherless family. You made the leap to it being a comment that fatherless guys are not valuable. You made it up, not me so I do not feel any great need to respond to it. However, to head of any more insanity, "Yes, a childless person has just as much of a right to life as the parent".

I really hate having to respond to things I never said. People really need to be more meticulous in reading my posts....