Saddam Hussein Death Sentence

Saddam Hussein on Trial WACO, Texas --

Saddam Hussein's death sentence is drawing mixed reactions around the world.The range of reactions reflects new geopolitical fault lines drawn after the U.S. decision to invade Iraq.The European Union welcomes the verdict. But the EU said Saddam should not be put to death. At the Vatican, Pope Benedict's top prelate for justice issues called the sentence a throwback to "eye for an eye" vengeance.

A respected Muslim cleric in Thailand calls the Saddam case "the problem of America and its domestic politics." He said "Maybe Bush will use this case to tell the voters that Saddam is dead and that the Americans are safe." But as he puts it, "actually the American people will be in more danger with the death of Saddam."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The US might make a martyr of Saddam Hussein
2006-11-08 18:02 Source : Moneycontrol.com

Saddam Hussein has been demonised quite a bit by the media and he does deserve it, to a fair extent. But when his trial has been such a travesty of justice, does he now deserve the death sentence? Wouldn't life imprisonment have been better, especially since the Americans have hardly got Iraq under control to begin with and their former president's death at the hands of an occupying power could so easily set the country up in flames?

Financial Times, South Asia correspondent, Jo Johnson told CNBC-TV18, "I think the verdict may be just but the sentence is wrong and a big political mistake. No one disputes that Saddam was guilty of many of the crimes for which he was tried. I think the political mistake is that countries which are behind trying him are seeking to impose the death sentence on him."

"For eg. Britain opposes the death penalty at home and normally wouldn't extradite people to countries which have the death penalty - it does seem to be extraordinary that our foreign secretary seems to be endorsing the death penalty. Britain seems to be caught in a complete political quagmire of its own making. A life imprisonment would have been much more consistent with Britain's stand on the death sentence."

But Strategic Affairs editor from Indian Express, C Rajamohan feels that to expect amnesty is futile because "we are talking about the consequences of war and it is not the first time or the last time, when victors have delivered justice. Given the conditions that exist in Iraq today, and in the broader context of the Middle East - the point is that a dictator pays for his sins and it's a reasonable outcome out there."

"You can keep questioning the process but it won't take us very far because he (Saddam Hussein) is a divisive figure in Iraq. If the Sunnis or the Iranians had got their hands on him, they would have handed out their own justice. So, we've got to see this in the right perspective rather than be troubled by whether the highest level of western jurisprudence will be applied."

National Public radio, South Asia, Philip Reeves disagrees and explains, "I feel the issue here is the moral authority of the people who are now running Iraq, be it the US or the Iraqi government. I think the task they have is to recover some moral authority, which they have lost over the last three years. And by applying the death penalty, they are missing the opportunity to show that they could have handled this differently, that they could have given him a life imprisonment and dealt with all his crimes and given the Iraqi people time for reconciliation."

Chief correspondent, South Asia, Al Arabiya, Walel Awwad feels that this sentence has made any ordinary American a target, anywhere in the world. He says, "I think counterproductive measures have been carried out by the American administration." But Reeves says that this would give rise to even more anger among the Sunnis and Saddam Hussein could become a martyr if executed.

Also there is the timing of the verdict. It's come just in time - right before the November elections in the US, and no one is surprised because it seemed like a foregone conclusion - that the judgment was delivered just in time to boost President George Bush's rating at the hustings.
So now, America seems to be caught between the devil and the deep blue sea and with no face-saving measure in sight to retreat with any amount of grace. --- Manali Rohinesh

---------------------------------------

--- Personally, I support the death penalty. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam deserves the death penalty. I would have to disagree that his execution should be carried out within thirty days. To execute him before all his trials will be a BIG mistake!

The courts in which he was convicted were an international joke. By Iraqi law, his sentence will be carried out within thirty days and he will be tried in absentia for any future trials. Seems to me the Shiite dominated court is trying to exact revenge instead of justice.

I believe to execute him so quickly can have more negative results -- turning him into a martyr for the Sunnis, increase the insurgency, lend credence to thoughts that Iraqi government is just a pawn of the USA, and a vital opportunity may be passed up.

To have the USA ask that his execution be held off, can possibly serve us well. With the threat of a rope around his neck - We can try to turn Saddam into an "asset", show that Bush did not go to war with Iraq just to "get" Saddam because of Bush Sr, and get a larger return on our investment of playing both sides during the Iran/Iraq War, to name a few.

Simply put, offer Saddam a chance to save or extend his own life. I feel his public defiance will slowly be waning now that he knows there is a rope waiting for him. Utilized the right way, he can become a very effective tool.

King