Ok, so we got him, and he'll likely be found guilty of crimes against humanity in some big military tribunal.
WHat should the punishment be?
WHat should the punishment be?
What to do with Saddam...
- Thread starter BurlyShirley
- Start date
I think they ought to let victims and relatives of those brutalized by him stone him to death in the courtyard of one of his palaces. And televise it to the rest of the World.
all of the above!!!!
Dang, we can get rid of MJ and Saddam by shipping MJ out to Iraq and leaving them together in one of Saddam's "spider holes"! :devil:
creative...
death almost seems to easy, esp. for all the pain and suffering he caused... maybe some of that braveheart style stuff... :devil:
He'll probably get similar treatment to that Serbian dictator who's being "tried" in the Hauge for war crimes...
I say we get Osama too and just publicly release both of them in the streets of New York.
Go ahead, but I'm not cleaning up after NYers rip them to bits...
screw that, i say we release them to the hippies that support them so much.
Huh?... I'm confused. You want to release them to people that support Osama and Sadam?
I was thinking along the lines of all the people of New York turning them into a pile of mush...if there was any misunderstanding in my statement.
OHH! OHH! Or we would tie their legs and arms to horses, and send them running in opposite directions. Than while they're in pain, we can force them to drink their own oil, and ignite it in their mouths. Than when they puke it up they'll ignite themselves even more.
Ung, for some reason that sounded cruel when i thought about it.
What the hell am i talking about?
...or even removed from power for that matter.Originally posted by beckah
any of those sound appropriate ....too bad half of the evil dictators removed from power are never tried for their crimes
survey says: he will probably get assasinated before he gets on trial, or getting to the trial, just outside the courthouse; killed by his own peopLe.
He should be tried in an Iraqi court or in international court, but why the hell in American court. What in the world do have to jump in and take the justice from the Iraqi people. May be you could put in Cuba like all those supposed terrorists, awaiting a kangaroo court. With the FBI not allowing lawyers representing suspected terrorist to make public comment in the USA. What ever happen to free speech, liberty and the presumption of innocents before trial. These are some of the most important things in western democracy and America seems to be forgetting them of late.
So what if he does not get the death penalty, it is someone's else country respect that and their legal system. It is not up to you to decide Sadams Fate, yet alone America, ESP after supporting him for many years. In my mind it should be up to only one country.
Really the only logical thing to do with Saddam is to give him his own reality show. We could do a Joe Shmoe deal with him, get CNN and Fox news in on it and we could make him beleive that he got elected as President of the US. It would be the finest moment in television when the shows producers tell him it was all a joke, the greatest prank of all time.
There is no reason he should see the United States. He's an Iraqi. Let him be tried there.
If we are serious about Iraqi self-determination, Saddam must be tried in an Iraqi court made up of Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni Iraqis. That way, he can be judged, sentanced and executed by his peers. If we send him to the Hague, he'll just end up in a comfy jail cell. Islamic nations tend to take a no-nonsense approach to crime and punishment that make even Singapore seem mollycoddling by comparison.
If it were up to me, he'd be sent scuba-diving in a ladderless shark tank with canisters of VX and oxygen to feed his regulator.
If it were up to me, he'd be sent scuba-diving in a ladderless shark tank with canisters of VX and oxygen to feed his regulator.
I thought the idea was to punish him. The last thing we need is another reality show.
He will probably not see any court outside Iraq. And definitely not the Hague. They are intersted in only crimes after 2001. And Saddam needs to be punished for the crimes he has been committing against his own people long before that. The only right thing as I see it, is to let the Iraqi people judge him and do with him whatever they want to. Something tells me, he's probably as comfortable as he is likely to be. From here, it's all downhill for Saddam.
howsa bout strapping him to a gurney & make him eat all the remains found in the mass graves. Pick the freshest stuff, so he gets real bad assrot. Keep a bunsen burner by his exhaust so his sac gets good & molten. also, hook him up to a device called the "talkman", as defined at the end of this piece from last summer: http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0402/042302db.htm, where you can find more nifty ideas for the answer to this thread's question.
oh, i 'spose we could ask him a few questions along the way, just to be on the up-and-up. make sure this is all done in egypt, where they don't recognize the geneva convention.
oh, i 'spose we could ask him a few questions along the way, just to be on the up-and-up. make sure this is all done in egypt, where they don't recognize the geneva convention.
McCain says no torture for Saddam
12/17/2003 10:09 AM
By: Associated Press
Former prisoner of war and U.S. Senator John McCain says he doesn't think interrogators questioning Saddam Hussein should use any tactics connected with torture.
McCain told NBC's "Today" show that information gained through torture is unreliable and that such tactics are beneath the kind of nation America is.
The Republican senator from Arizona adds he doesn't think the U.S. should make a deal to get information from Saddam.
12/17/2003 10:09 AM
By: Associated Press
Former prisoner of war and U.S. Senator John McCain says he doesn't think interrogators questioning Saddam Hussein should use any tactics connected with torture.
McCain told NBC's "Today" show that information gained through torture is unreliable and that such tactics are beneath the kind of nation America is.
The Republican senator from Arizona adds he doesn't think the U.S. should make a deal to get information from Saddam.
I say we put him up in a plane with no parachute and give him 2 options
(a) cut his own pecker off
(b) jump
I'd bet he cuts his own pecker off.
Oh and to add to the fun of it all we could get his minister of information in the plane too to reassure him that the U.S. has not yet taken him captive and that any moment Iraq will be victorious.
Seriously, firing squad with 22s and a target right over his stomach.
(a) cut his own pecker off
(b) jump
I'd bet he cuts his own pecker off.
Oh and to add to the fun of it all we could get his minister of information in the plane too to reassure him that the U.S. has not yet taken him captive and that any moment Iraq will be victorious
.Seriously, firing squad with 22s and a target right over his stomach.
When McCain called his former captors Gooks he made a huge political blunder. But I personally could not hold it against him. We can not even begin to imagine what he suffered those years in the POW camp. He was explaining how much he hated his captors and found the most extreme word to describe it. He has shown no animosity to the VietNamese people. He was being honest and payed for it, but that is why I think he needs to be POTUS. It would be nice to have an honest person in office, even if they have a potty mouth.
My uncle was a POW in the Phillipines during WWll. He never spoke of those years. He left for war weighing 190+ and came back at a svelte 105 with nary a tooth in his head. It was 30 years later before he came to grips with the hate he had developed for all Asians. In 1975 he went to Japan to face his demons. He died 3 years later. I hope he found some peace on that trip.
John McCain's mistake for using "gook" is more than understandable. I have to give him and any ex POW credit if they can find it in their hearst to forgive those who mistreated them. I really wish John was running. I'd vote for him in a New York minute. And I am not a Republican.
Really? I couldn't tell. You hide it so well.
I have been both. I was raised in what my family called a "Black Republican" household. Hardcore and unflinching in the face of the overwhelming liberal wave of the 60's and 70's. Barry Goldwater conservatives for sure. To piss em off, when I came of age, I registered as a Democrat. To his death, one of my uncles refused to acknowledge my existence. Oh, he'd mumble "Hey, how ya doin", but that was about it. It didn't bother me. As a matter of fact, he was a scary man and being ignored by him was a blessing. It meant not being cornered at some family gathering and preached to about how the country was going to Hell in a handbasket. Or hearing him go on about that new automatic weapon he just purchased.
I was not comfortable being a Democrat. So, I switched to the Republican party and tried to fit in. Didn't work either. Seems I have a problem blaming someone for the ills of the country simply based on which side of the aisle they sit on. And I got tired of both sides wasting so much time and energy assigning blame. So, now I am an Independent who leans to the left, leans to the right and sometimes doesn't lean at all.
In my book, he should be able to say that word if he damn well pleases, but only in reference to his captors... if he called the vietnamese people gooks then that would be a different story.
I also had an uncle who was a POW in the Philipines. He would never speak of it but seemed to move on. He actually became a Japanese translator for the British government, travelled to Japan regularly and made several close Japanese friends.
Then he had a 1 in a billion encounter. Through a chance encounter he met one of his old Japanese guards. He completely flipped out and tried to kill the guy. No one was really hurt but he was forced to retire.