Saddam to die...but at whose hands and at what cost?

It's an ongoing debate, the D.P.

(And I don't mean Double Penetration.)

You bring up mainly one point in the debate.

Just Kidding!! I agree...and THAT is all I'll say about THAT!

(I'm still looking for the bottom half of my legs from someone cutting them off at the knees the other night. I'm going to stay out of these from now on!)

Good job Chris...I gave it a 10!

I want to hear more about this double penetration....

I didn't vote on your article simply because I wasn't sure how I felt about it. It did make me think though. Although I respect your beliefs and your opinion, I feel very strongly that he should die for what he has done. What will this serve you ask? Well, I believe in an eye for an eye and although he does not have enough "eyes" to offer for those he has taken, his two will do. Our prisons are filled with murderers and rapists and pedophiles who can never be rehabilitated to fit back into a civilized society. Why should we continue to offer them a place to lay their heads and three meals a day until they decide to up and die on their own? As a taxpayer, I don't feel very happy knowing that money I work hard to earn honestly everyday goes to support the health and wellbeing of such animals. And the prisons grow larger everyday. So what should we do about this increasing problem? Where should we put them as space runs out in the prison system? If we follow a no kill philosophy, we will be overrun with criminals who would just as soon murder you and me in our beds. Sure, I agree that it lowers us all to their mentality for that moment but their is a difference. They kill for sick fun. They have NO respect for life at all. Our courts and sometimes you and me, kill because it becomes a necessary fight for survival of not only myself or yourself but for the safety of those around us. Could I live with myself if I were the one to pull the lever and drop Saddam to his death? yes, I could. Without guilt? No. It is still a life. The difference my friend, is that I would live with regret and would spend the rest of my life making up for it by helping others and avoiding that situation again. It would not be something that I enjoyed as opposed to Saddam and his sons and friends who got great pleasure from the torture and murder of others and lived to do it again and again until stopped cold by someone like me. I would consider it a necessary evil that I personally would have to live with but would know that I helped save someone else in the process. This is just my opinion and belief system of course. I don't ask that you agree with it. It is someone who thinks like myself that allows me and even you to live without having to fall into the hands of someone like him. If you found yourself in one of his torture chambers and had one chance to escape excruciating pain or to save the life of your friend who is captured with you, would you allow that person who is torturing and killing to kill you both or would you kill him first to save yourself and your friend? It's a kill or be killed situation. It's a fair question and I am just curious. Again, I respect your thoughts and your beliefs. I just hope I would not have to depend on your belief in a life or death situation. Human nature is as such to fight to survive. Which would rule the day in that case? Belief system? Or Human nature?

And for the record, life IS a neverending cycle of life, death, life. That's just the way it is. And If I had my way Chris, I would wish for everyone to think like you. The problem is that there is truly evil in the hearts of some men and with that said, there could never be the kind of peaceful existence that you desire in this world. Therefore, killing, never the first option, becomes sometimes necessary.

I take back my first line. I am going to go back and vote a ten for making me think this much! Good Job Chris!
Michele

Alright I addressed some stuff in your post. Now I shall address the rest :) I also respect the beliefs and opinions of others but you stated that you wished the whole world believed as I do. The power of negative thought compels you! You want to believe like I do but you have lost faith in humanity. I still believe that humanity can be enlightened. That even though there is evil in the hearts of men there is reason in their minds and that reason can overpower evil if given enough positive energy.

You stated that you would pull the lever and then try to help others the rest of your life. But I say to you that if you do not pull the lever then you should still help others the rest of your life. You make it sounds like you are atoning for having done something wrong. But would it not be better to not do that wrong thing and then help others of your own free will instead of feeling you are obligated to do so?

Your hypothetical situation:
It is not my place to say who lives and dies. If it is my time to die then so be it. I do not fear death for it is inevitable and I have long dreamt of my impending doom to the point where I expect it any day now. If you were that friend who was captured with me then I would help you to escape but I would not kill for you. I would not kill for anyone and cannot even imagine myself attempting to kill someone. Killing is never necessary, that is a fallacy which you cling to in hopes that you will feel justified when you rejoice in someone else's death I think.

If you are displeased with how your tax dollars are put to work in the penal system then perhaps helping to find a better solution might be a good path in this life for you. Then you would be helping not only yourself but everyone else as well, just as you stated you would want to do. Only the solution cannot involve killing because killing is never a solution. No matter how much Ozzy might have said so in the past ;)

It's true. I've seen more than most people should in this life and life itself has been a struggle to survive for me since day one. I will say that my first choice would not be to kill. Certainly, if another solution exists, then I would look for it. But if the time alotted me did not give me that chance and I had to either defend myself or others, then the person threatening my life or the life of those I loved would have to be the one forfeited if that is what it came down to. We are all human which brings us back to human nature and the fact that our deepest instinct is to survive. I would hate for it to be a him or me situation but if so, then I choose me!
And as for atoning the rest of my life if I should be the one to pull that lever, then I would consider it my duty to those around me and the only possible way to even slightly asuage my guilt in that kind of situation. I would pray daily for God to forgive me for such an action and would accept it if He didn't.
I'm afraid that my solution for overcrowded prisons would not please anyone. I believe rapists, abusers and pedophiles should be castrated and never allowed back into polite society. I believe murderers, proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have comitted the crime, should be executed within 30 days of sentencing, allowing enough time for them to become at peace with themselves and with whatever God they believe in. I disagree with the criminals who have been allowed to live for years on death row. Most other criminals could at least have an opportunity to be rehabilitated, taught basic skills and allowed another chance.
The loss of my faith in mankind can be explained every time you turn on the news. Despite your wonderful heart, Chris, the problem is larger than any one solution. There will always be men who choose evil over good and therefore, will always exist crimes of a nature that no one should ever have to experience and then a need to punish the offender for that crime. If I had my way, there would be a technological way to punish criminals by implanting the whole experience they visited upon the victim into their own minds so they would have to live the experience. Perhaps it would make that criminal think twice or at least live to regret what they did. (something like one of the scenes in "The Green Mile" where that smartass guard was made to see what Wild Bill had done to those two little girls and the thought so tormented him that he ended up killing Wild Bill and then himself.)
I still wouldn't let him live freely in society again but maybe that same technology could detect criminal intent at an early age and work on changing that persons path towards a better one. I don't know, just thinking out loud here. Any way, I just don't think a Utopia will ever exist unless human nature can be changed.

Michele

both bushes and clinton should also die for the thousands of lives they've taken. woman and children have been (and continue to be) murdered by these war criminals. hang em high, eh? oh no, to the victor go the spoils, and that includes putting the losers to death.

Makes you wish there were more people who think like Chris in the world huh? So you think that the ones who order the troops into battle should be hanged as well? Interesting.

Add-on---I was also thinking Chris....If you have ever eaten anything in your life whether it be vegetable, fruit or meat, then you have advocated killing on some level. You have to end the life of all things in order to eat them. Now, If I had to kill my own supper then I would probably turn vegetarian because watching that cow or pig die would kill something inside of me. Which brings me to the need for someone else with the guts to perform the necessary kill. Someone has to do it. As humans, I think there are only three reasons for killing to be necessary: Food, Protection and a humane killing such as that for a sick animal. Saddam falls under my category of "Protection". His death will protect the lives of countless others. Now, I know you said you don't advocate killing of any kind but I put it to you...have you ever swatted and killed a mosquito that bit you? Any kind of bug? What about plant life that you ended to either weed a garden or pick a fruit to eat? Throughout your life, you have killed things in order to either eat them or protect yourself. You can't say you haven't or, with my previous comments, say that killing is never necessary because that would indeed be a naive comment.
My other comment about Saddam being like a rabid dog...do you know what the difference is between Saddam and a rabid dog? The rabid dog did not choose to be rabid. Saddam chose his path and now there are consequences to his actions.
Michele

I cannot hope to enlighten a stone. Nor can I hope to enlighten the trees in the forest or the flowers in the fields. I seek only to refrain from what is evil, to cultivate what is good and to completely purify my mind. That is the teaching of Buddha.

Now I never said I was a good Buddhist, because I need much work at it. I am not a vegetarian but I could not kill an animal to eat it even if I were on the verge of death myself. In Buddha's teachings we will all come back in one of six forms, to end the life of someone in any of those forms is to stop them from achieving the goal of that path.

Since I began following the Middle Path I have refrained from swatting even the smallest of insects, instead preferring to relocate them to some other place. For example I live in an old building from 1900. There are all sorts of insects and spiders crawling around in it. When they make their way into my immediate area I normally just ignore them because they have as much right to be there as I do. I do not own the air I breathe nor the land beneath my feet no one does. But if there is one (insect or spider) that looks potentially troublesome I will simply scoop it up with some paper and give it a new home on the balcony or window ledge.

I agree, the dog did not choose to become rabid, it is the result of another organism on the dog. Saddam perhaps did not choose to become rabid either but was pushed toward it in some fashion in his life. We do not know all the facts and to summarily end his life is not only stopping short the path he must take but it ensures he will return to this world in the same form or perhaps even a lower one. In Buddhist teachings there are six modes of existence - a god, a titan, a human being, an animal, a hungry ghost and a denizen of hell. I believe Saddam Hussein to be in either the denizen of hell or hungry ghost mode because even animals would not kill just for killing. But in ending his life you stop his path before he has learned what he is supposed to from it.

I am probably in an animal mode of existence and have only in the last five years realized it and been striving to achieve the next mode of existence. I think many of the people in the world these days are in the lower three modes but believe themselves to be in the upper three. If they never come to realize the real mode they are in they will never progress to the next one. I hope that I am making progress in this path toward the next higher path.

I know it all sounds mystical but I do not see Buddhism as religion but as a study of the mind and our place in the universe. We all have a purpose to fulfill, like cogs in a machine. If one cog breaks another will take its place. But the cogs that are there must do what it is they are designed to do or the universe does not function as it ought to. In this way we are all exactly the same and no one is more important than any other. So if we are all of the same importance then none of us can decide to end the life of another because it is the equivalent of ending our own life.

very fascinating and would love to talk to you about it more.

Michele

i suppose sarcasm is generally lost over the internet. my point wasn't that i believed that bush jr and sr, and clinton, should be hanged, but that their actions have been just as murderous as saddam's, if not more. all saddam did was order people to be killed, the same way bush et al did. or am i missing something? i think it's diplorable what all parties involved have done. but i think the american government, now and in the past, has committed plenty of atrocities of which it has NEVER been held accountable for. heroshima and nagasaki were both towns filled with innocent civilians. (yet other countries, "rogue nations," shouldn't have the atomic bomb. hm, what's the only country in the world that shouldn't have one if not the one country that has actually used it against human beings?) pol pot, saddam hussein, noreiga, osama bin laden... and a host of other evil terrorist murders have all been paid large sums of money AND given tons of weapons of mass destruction by THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. this is not conspiracy, it is proven fact. (won't even go into the drugs for guns during the 80s.) so whose neck should swing from the rope here? where is the justice?

Because you are right.....sad isn't it?

Michele

yeah it really is. i think what saddam has done is sick and inhuman. i don't believe in the death penalty for a number of reasons, but i wouldn't be sad if he were to naturally die tomorrow. i doubt many people would. but nothing is really going to be changed by killing him. he's out of power and out of society. if only the same could be said for the ones who are responsible for making saddam into what he became.

Really? Saddam Hussein is now in equal standing with George Bush and Tony Blair? Chris, you can't possibly believe that. Or maybe you can. I respect that you're Buddhist, but I don't see how carrying out justice is just as evil as murdering in cold blood. There is a MAJOR difference between the two.

And mobius...your remarks are just plain ridiculous. We should hang our presidents and other world leaders for fighting wars?

are you just purposefully misconstruing what i'm saying or is your comprehension skills that low? i'm not talking about the simple act of fighting wars, where soldiers for one side kill soldiers on the other side. that's bad enough. what i AM talking about is two-fold: the amount of innocent civilians killed in this war, and the fact that saddam hussein was funding by the u.s. government who KNEW what kind of monster he was, and wanted that monster in power so long as he was fighting against our "enemies."

OUr government did support him in the beginning and with all the political intrigue and miasma of lies, we (the USA) have at one time or another funded terrorism whether directly or indirectly only as it suited whichever party was in power at that time. Mobius isn't saying kill them all...he's just saying that there's a thin lines between what we do versus what they do and of course, getting the proper tone across on messaging here is nearly impossible so i just felt I needed to add $0.02 more cents to hopefully help everyone understand everyone else. Geez, hope I understood it right! However, as far as I know or anyone knows, Saddam wasn't abused growing up so as an adult, he made his own choices and decisions about how he would proceed and treat people. I don't think there is anyone else to blame or point a finger at when he made his own choice between good and evil. He did that all by himself. Sure, it would be nicer for everyone concerned if he just let go of life and drifted off into death of his own accord. That would solve everyones guilt, wouldn't it?

Michele

Congrats on being one of the few on here who has a grasp of what capital punishment means Publius. It is undeniably not true that we are lowering ourselves to Saddam's level by putting him to death. The act of capital punishment is not one that is out of revenge, anger or even hatred. It is justice pure and simple. People who have been personally affected by Saddam may feel these things, but do not confuse these emotions with the punishment that is being given.

When someone murders, or mass murders, that person needs to be punished. There is only one punishment that fits the crime. Of course it will not bring anyone back or make anyone feel better, but neither does prison time. Individuals who murder do not think of anything but their own selfish motivations, and no matter what the punishment there will always be those who commit this brutal act. In no way should this deter us from giving an equal punishment to fit the crime.

"Will you stand idly by as he twitches and sturggles for breath? Could you live with yourself after that?". I will sleep just fine after Saddam is executed. Saddam deserves to die.

This IS really interesting...isn't it?

What I would like to know, is where any ONE of you (us) thinks that it's up to you to decide who should live or die. It doesn't matter what anyone else chose to do while they were 'here'. What 'they' did, has nothing to do with what 'you' do. And by choosing to do what they did, you are only lowering yourself to that same level.

To say that capital punishment is not born "of revenge, or anger or even hatred" is, I'm sorry Chansen, flat-out denial. What IS it born of? Did you give him life? Did you really even give your children life? Who gave us life? Where did life come from? If we can't even answer that question, then what makes any of us, even begin to think, that we have the right to take that from someone else? And if that isn't "revenge", then I don't know what is?

Everything I read here, only further proved to me that none of us were/are endowed with the knowledge or insight to be able to make that kind of a call. NONE of us has the right to take another's life, or to destroy something that we had no hand in creating in the first place...And as soon as you start thinking that you do, you are no better than they are. That's just my opinion.

Oh Lady, come on now. We aren't talking about some guy or girl who got into a drunken rage and killed another person; later being filled with remorse for their actions. This is the SADDAM HUSSEIN. A man who sought genocide and to even take over the world, preying on the weak. In essence he is not a man at all, but only evil.

If someone strips every ounce of personal freedom from another and ends their life in brutal and savage ways... I'm sorry Lady but that person deserves death through the justice system. If it were just some rogue avenger, that would be a different matter and completely wrong. This isn't the case though is it?

is pretty wacky, sista.

So yes, Saddam Hussein, Tony Blair, George Bush and even you and I are all equal Publius. I know that might be a blow to your ego and will offend many others who think they are 'better' than these poeple. But a fact is a fact. We are all the same. We are the same in the beginning, the same in the end and of equal importance in the middle. We all have the same right to live. None of us has the right to choose who remains in this life and who dies.

What is justice? Is justice killing a person for murdering one person or for murdering one-hundred other people? Someone said the punishment should fit the crime, so then should not the perpetrator who killed one-hundred people then be killed one-hundred times? Would that not then make it more "JUST"?

Killing someone, no matter what your so called justification, is still killing someone. Murder in cold blood and execution are the same thing. It is pre-meditated killing but we call it by a different name so that those who do it can feel better about it. Killing him will not solve anything. It will not deter others from following his path and it may even make him a martyr in the eyes of his supporters. So then the error self-perpetuates and you have not only taken a life that was not yours to take but you have given impetus to a movement that you hoped to destroy.

I still agree that he should pay for his crimes. He should be imprisoned, perhaps given one of those 20 kilo balls on a short chain that he must drag around his entire life. Maybe post pictures of all the people he killed in his cell with him so that every moment of every day he sees their eyes staring back at him to remind him of what he did and that hopefully one day he will realize it was wrong.

If he is in one of the lower modes of existence he will never rise above that mode without the understanding. It is our job to enlighten him, not to kill him. If he cannot be enlightened then when he naturally ends his path he will return to it until he learns the error of his ways. Buddha and the Boddhisattva strive to enlighten all creatures and not just themselves. That is the true path to enlightenment, the direct perception of Truth, and in that momentary glimpse compassion is truly awakened.

OK, Chris...this has nothing to do with anyone's "ego." Personally,I think this whole xombyte is ridiculous. But to answer the question in the title, whether it was rhetorical or not, Saddam is to die at the hands of the population who had been oppressed by him. The people who were murdered, tortured, raped, and imprisoned for years on end for simply being a different type of muslim or disagreeing with his policies. THEY have that right according to their own laws, so I'm not going to argue about whether their laws are right or wrong. They have a justice system just as we do, and now that he's been found guilty, they will carry out that justice. Your religion disagrees with ALL killings, so there's nothing that can be said to convince you it's just. You're just going to have to deal with other people's beliefs.

What is the cost? It's too early to tell, but most Iraqis were celebrating the decision last I heard. Maybe we should ask the families who had their sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, or parents tortured and murdered by him and his party. As far as him being imprisoned...it would never work. There would be a constant risk of terrorists trying to break him out or commit terrorist acts in the hope of setting him free. His death brings this to a quick end - an end that is welcomed by most and celebrated by Iraqi citizens. Other than that, this debate is nearly pointless. For the record...we are NOT all the same. That is nothing but pure ignorance. Oh, I'm sorry, you'll have to excuse my ego.

we aren't going to torture him, tho he ordered to have people tortured. we aren't going to rape him even tho he ordered people to be raped. if we don't do those things, then why would we kill him for ordering to have people killed? we as a society do not condone raping and torturing prisoners, to the point of trying to find the most humane way to execute a prisoner. if we are going out of our way to do that, then it must mean something, right? we aren't just doing it for kicks. so no, the punishment doesn't "fit" the crime, ever. get over it. we as a society do not believe in this, nor should we. it leads to barbarianism.

yes, mobius...trying a criminal in a justice system and deciding he should be put to death leads to "barbarianism." You can't be serious! Saddam has gotten a fair trial by his peers, and they decided it was best for their society for him to be executed. I cannot help you understand how justice works. Apparently you're too ignorant, or stupid, to understand how a legal system works or how justice is carried out. You seem to not understand the fundamental principles of good and evil. The punishment doesn't fit the crime...you're right about that. It's way too nice. It does not make anyone a "barbarian" or "evil" to want justice to be served. Mobius, please, get some help before it's too late.

and at this point, I think it's safe to say we will all have to agree to disagree. Each side has a point unless we continue to beat it to death (which some are opposed to! and I mean that humorously and not offensively). On one side, we have those completely opposed to killing of any kind, even in the name of justice. I applaud you for valueing life as you do. On the other hand, we have those who believe that consequences are visited on the proven guilty which sometimes include a death sentence.
If the world were filled with people on side one--valueing the life of others..there would be no need for those of us on side two--the ones who believe in a justice system which includes a death penalty.
Unfortunately, the world isn't perfect and we all have a path to walk. We all have the privilege of making a choice and some choose to take lives arbitrarily and viciously.
So we will agree to disagree and points to Chris for writing an article that caused much thinking and debate. It's all about raising awareness, sharing ideas and hopefully, we all learn something and benefit from it. After all, we are all adults here and we are not required to argue eachother into a corner trying to change each others opinions.
Personally, those of you who I have interacted with have all impressed me one way or another.
Thanks for the lively debate!

Michele

1) You are taking this way too personally

2) Your "torture" argument doesn't hold water. When someone steals a TV, do we go take theirs? No. They go to jail or get arrested, or whatever the judge sees fit. Same case here. The court sees that it is in the best interest to end Saddam's life. Our courts would probably find the same thing... only it would take 25 years to fulfill. Capital punishment is not murder, it is the only thing that can adequately define justice, and in this case it still falls short.

Oh and by the way, I noticed we are from the same area Mobius. I am not going to go into detail or specifics, but I am sure you would remember the headlines of one specific case from our area. A case that has crushed me, my wife and her family. If you ever have to deal with a family members murder in your family (which I hope you never have to) you might think a little bit different.

Like I said before, it won't bring anyone back, or make anyone feel better... but neither will letting them live.

Chris, I have more questions for you. What is the policy of a Buddhist when people are trying to kill and destroy you and your way of life? Are you supposed to defend yourself, or let them kill you? How do you protect and preserve your traditions? Does killing someone in self-defense mean that you are just the same as the person trying to kill you or your family? Is it just to let murderers kill as they please and then live the rest of their life in prison, knowing they will not meet the same fate until they die of natural causes?

I will stand idly by as Saddam twitches and struggles for breath, and again when he's flapping in the breeze. I could live with myself after that, just as I did when Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in prison. Does this make me an evil person? Does this make me just like Saddam Hussein, or Hitler, or Kim Jong Il? I'm not sure how any rational person could make such an argument. It defies the meaning of "just" and "justice."

And my vote goes to Chris. Capital punishment is spelled F-A-I-L-U-R-E. Hope this isn't tacky, but I invite you to read my post, "the Amish forgive their children's murder" on why forgiveness is better than "justice."

www.joesnare.com

Well, Joe...not only is it tacky, but your point about the Amish is irrelevant to this situation. The man who murdered those children also killed himself. How could he be punished? The Amish forgave him, yes, but there was no justice that could have been served in that case. He was already dead.

There is a Grand Canyon of difference between forgiveness and receiving due punishment. Just because you forgive someone does not mean they should walk free. It also doesn't mean that they shouldn't die for their actions.