When was killing Saddam about the moral high ground?
Printable View
When was it not? The idea behind making him swing was that he was this deadly cancer plaguing the world that had to be destroyed, and only the valiant US had the will to see it through. Naturally, it hasn't played out that way. One man is dead, the war continues.
Come on, did anyone actually buy that? really?
We got a long way to go if we really are play world police.
death was probably too good for saddam, he should've been made to work, every day, at tbe construction of a wall/monument, that upon each of the bricks would be enscribed the known names of the people he had murdered. To let him wallow in his own shittyness.
I understand having a problem watching it; it is a human being's death after all. But to say that he didn't deserve it is a bit silly dude, he killed over a million people. I've seen him executing innocent women and children in far more gruesome fashion in various documentaries, I'm not going to let myself get down about him getting what he had coming to him for a long time. Are you anti-death penalty in all instances?
You don't get to say 'well, this guy is a monster..he kills people' and then turn right around and kill him for it. That's about as far from justice as possible. There's nothing that Saddam's stretched neck serves that him rotting for the rest of his life in a cell wouldn't.
There's a difference between justice and revenge. I'm not lionizing it, it is what it is.
Exactly, and 'eye for an eye' isn't justice. It's vengeance.