It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Saddam Be Executed?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
can anyone tell me why saddam isn't being tried in international court?

then can i get any good reasons for it?

also, iraq has no real set of laws, so how are they trying him?

did they set up a legal code before a constitution?




posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
can anyone tell me why saddam isn't being tried in international court?
then can i get any good reasons for it?


Interesting question you asked there and the answer is quite simple.

As much as Saddam was an oppresor and murderer of Iraqis, his greatest crime was war with Iran. After all he used chemical weapons on them too.
We could easly tried Saddam in international court for genocide and crimes against humanity, but that would be embarising to the West, because we supported him with weapons and chemicals in Iraq-Iran conflict and evidence of such cooperation would have to be presented.

And we sure don't like that to happen, now do we?



posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   


posted by madnessinmysoul

(1) Can anyone tell me why Saddam isn't being tried in International Court [at The Hague?] Can I get any good reasons for it? (2) Iraq has no real set of laws, so how are they trying him? (3) Did they set up a legal code before a constitution?
[Edited by Don W]



(1) I believe it is because the United States which is in control of Iraq - or was when Saddam was captured - determined to put him into Iraqi custody. The US has not signed The Hague Convention relating to the International Court of Justice. One reason, it is Republican philosophy not to surrender US sovereignty to anyone. You know, "Get the US out of the UN and get the UN out of the US."

The second reason is Henry Kissinger has been charged with war crimes and if the US signs the Treaty, we would be obliged to turn him over to the authorities to stand trial for his role in the unlawful bombing and invasion of Cambodia. When Henry the K dies, and if the Dems are in power, we may sign the Treaty. I have heard the US has “forced” Iraq to forego such rights to charge any US person with a war crime. Just in case somebody gets mad at Bush or Cheney.

(2) Aside: Almost every country has a “set of laws” and you’d be surprised to know even in China, Russian and so on, the people are very much accustomed to law and order and to orderly procedures, including Iraq since time immemorial. The KGB handler of FBI spy Robert Hanssen was called back to Moscow, tried for misuse of KGB funds, but found not guilty for lack of evidence. There is a trial in North Odessa, Russia, over the Beslan school massacre, going on right now. Not to fear, Russia does not have the death penalty. Barbaric, they say. Heck fire, our own Bush has executed 154 men in his Texas tenure. Him no stranger to death. Other people's. Hmm? Iraq uses the Napoleonic Code which does not have jury trials.

(3) Yes. It pre-existed Saddam Hussein. See (2), above.



[edit on 7/3/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
What I think they should have done, is let him stand trial in his own country. The crimes he committed were from Iraq, and against his people, so true justice should be imposed by his country.



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join