If You Were the Judge at Saddam's Trial...................

That's a tough one, phoenix.

But I think I would ask them to pronounce their own sentence, such as it would have been given in a Saddam-ruled court.

Or let Udai have it the same way a lot of his own victims got it...

A decison can only be made after a trial. As there has not been a trial yet I cannot answer this question.

This is a tough one !!

Since they are on trial, I will assume that the law will be followed (which, given the current circumstances, is a very far fetched assumption)

So let us look at the charges :

1. Torturing/abusing human rights of his own people

I am sure that the defense lawyers will provide several names of people who did similar sort of things to their own people and are still scott free. They will also dredge up names from the recent history (General Dyer of UK comes to mind immediately) who slaughtered hundreds of innocent civilians and got away scot free.

2. Flouting UN resolutions

Once again, charge falls flat. Several other countries do the same thing and get away with it.

3. Developing weapons of mass destruction

What WMD ? And what abt thousands of tonnes of chemical and biological weapons which the so called "liberators" or Iraq poccess, not to mention the biggest WMD of all - nukes ?

I also will have to take into account that before the UN sanctions were imposed, Iraq was a prosperous, vibrant, secular country - which could have been developed as a role model for the other middle eastern countries.

I might be coming across as Pro- Saddam, but since I have donned the judge's wig, I have to convict him on proof and precedence.

Well, Phoenix, what would be the law, I'm supposed to apply?

The Nuremberg code? Something similar to it?

US-American military law?

Iraquian law?

'Normal' US-American or British or Australian law? The "best mixture" of it?


When Germany was unified, the crimes done until 1990 in the former GDR were ruled under GDR laws by ["West"] German judges.
So I think, this should work here as well, and thus I agree with bigdice.

Just these this, no need for a jury - To the dungeon forever and ever.

Wow, provocative question...I would probably be a bad judge, as I have already made up my mind that Saddam and his porno freak sons are guilty, maybe not of everything they have been accused of, but definitely a lot of bad stuff (I could not be impartial, anyway). If it were only a matter of sentencing though, I would suggest tying them to chairs, Clockwork Orange style, and force them to watch an endless loop of Fox reality shows.

Human Rights:

Ya got a real mean streak in you, bigdice. I like that - sometimes.

Well, Nebudkanezar said in all his wisdom " A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye" in the oldest written law. This was written way before the Old Testament, and comes from Saddam's region of birth1

and everything old has to be good...

Ixnay on the Ohammed-May, bigdice... Love the avatar.

Just a post-script...I believe the concept of 'an eye for an eye' came from the Code of Hammurabi, a Mesopotamian ruler, and was not authored by good ole Neb...check out paragraphs 196 and 200 on the link below:

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM

I also think the code was the inspiration for Aku on 'Samurai Jack"...at least it reads that way...

Sure hope you know that wasn't criticism, biddice. It wasn't.

Not sulking yet, my history 101 was really bad, actually... lol

I would extradite Saddam to Iraq. Or I would send him to the ICC.

icc sounds good

Saddam, and Uday have enough crimes to go around... I say it would be easier to stand them up to individual crimes against Iraqi citizens. This would negate the necessity to bring out convoluted International law and courts.

Not sure about the curly headed chap. If he hasn't personally murdered or ordered such; he may have to stand for International crime, for his part in the regime.

I think it would be more expeditious to use Iraqi citizens and Iraqi law. And, less criticism for America if we stay out of it.

Has anyone heard discussion of how/when Saddam will be tried?

I don't see anything difficult about this one! Easy answer, execution. Why? The murder of their own citizens and years of oppression with multiple basic human rights violations.

In this country, you are equally guilty as a crime, by standing there doing nothing to prevent it or report, and continue at the crime scene. Maybe they didn't do everything by their own had, but they were the rulers of the country and had a responsibility to the people, which they ignored.