Daganev... what are you talking about?

I am talking about Iraq having its own 3,000 year old culture which could care less about shakespeare or the greeks.

The whole idea that Iraq needs to be part of western civilization is partly what fuels the ideology of terrorism.

Currently, because of the "sectarian" violence, people in Iraq are changing thier names officially. that is, they are removing themselves from the family lines and tribal associations that defined thier society for who knows how many generations. Iraqi society, is not the same as Western society.

I'm not sure how much history people remember, but once upon a time there was the Babylonian empire, they were later conquered by the Persian empire. The Persian empire had a war of civilizations with Europe, and were stopped at the Balkans. There are still fights going on in the Balkans because of this.

Saddam Huesein, in particular called himself Nebechunezar and named all his palaces after the ancient Babylonian great cities. He had a vision of rebuilding the ancient Babylonia. So its not just "ancient history"

If they have to kill him then they ought to do it in a more humane way than hanging. Nuremberg Trials 2.0, eh wot?

Yes, and they ought to all get along and not kill eachother on a daily basis.

Death penalty hasn't done anything to deter or significantly reduce our murder rates in the U.S. in comparison to European countries without the death penalty. And it's not like everyone dies happily in prison, so maybe one should think of it as a delayed "execution".

And Daganaev... what are you talking about? I think Verithrax meant America = western civilization, not Iraq. And Sumer/Babylonia, if I recall correctly, was called the "craddle of western/civilization" (might have this wrong on the western part, been a while). Western civilization is not always about the US, although that is what it's thought of these days.

I wasn't asking you to redefine your point, but to explain how it fit into the thread of the discussion. Is it that it's presumtuous of us to expect a people with its own civilisation to fit into a moral code which you percieve to be profoundly western.. if so I accept that... but I would respond with the suggestion that imposed morals are preferable to a situation in which there are none (imposed) at all.



Agreed. If I was a Muslim in the East, seeing the excesses of the decadant and immoral west, and being told by them how I should behave, I'd be pretty hacked off about it.



That my dear Daganev, is a non-sequitor. Your first two sentences appear to have no resemblance to your third, yet you have placed them in conjunction so that it would appear that the first two are proof of the second. I don't disagree with your points (that through western influence Iraqis are losing their heritage, and 'sectarian' violence is increasing), it just irritates my grammatical sense when you abuse the paragraph.



They're not the Babylonian Empire any more though are they? Why is this relevant?



Which is a device that has been used repeatedly throughout history. Identify yourself with a popular historical figure, and your regieme with a successful one, and you've got the makings of a very successful propaganda machine.

That is accually incorrect, almost every European country has the death penalty for following crimes:

- High Treason
- Desertion in times of war (to direction of enemy on the spot, to the side of allies after 3 day)

I am accually still deciding if it's good or bad. On one side he is escaping real punishment and on another he is to dangerous to leave alive in an Iraqi prison. So if you leave him alive where are you going to keep him, Europe? the USA?

Then again his dead can cause even more civil conflict in Iraq.. hrm.

Wartime is different... but in the UK High Treason is no longer (I think) an executable offence. Not since the 19..urr..70ss. I'm not entirely sure what the law is on it, but the last official hangman died a while back, and there wasn't (and won't be) a new one appointed. We've had our share of traitors in the mean time, and they've just been jailed.

it don't know about the UK though they don't need it, they have an entire secret service that can legally kill without having to explain. However, Germany, Belgium, France, the Netherlands and Italy I am sure still have it for high treason.

That's scary...

what is, the fact that they are allowed to do it (and every secret service has agents that will kill when needed without explaining) or the fact that the uk is so open about it (and is the only country to have it in the law).

For me the latter, anyone that is so open about that is hiding something worse!

Ahh, ok..

I was saying that suggesting that western civilization is going to the dogs because Iraq wants to hang Saddam is an insulting comment, to all parties involved.

If the thread has been hijacked to just be about the death penalty in general then...

I don't think the death penalty is all about "deterance."

1. Why pay to keep somone alive and protected when they have been going around killing people?

Sollution: Exile all the murderes and thieves to some remote island that nobody is ever going to live on.... Oh wait..

In the US, with all the appeals a person gets before getting killed via the death, it's actually cheaper for a life sentence in prison.

Cheaper for who exactly though?

For example, is the money going to the lawyers and Judges or is it going towards the care of the prisoner.

Although I know, in many states, the death penalty is allready illegal, and in many others its been effectivly nullifed. So I'd also wonder if thats true for states that have an active death penalty, like texas.

I think this is a far too humane punishment for him. We should strap him in the chair and make him listen to K-Fed and Paris Hilton albums until his head explodes.

Guess I'm a true Texan in spirit when it comes to the Death Penalty. Far as I'm concerned, you kill more than 10 or 20 productive human beings and you deserve to hang, fry, lose your head, or *roll* get a shot the next morning. Screw sitting on your arse in a prison, getting free cable, getting a free education, working out, and generally not doing a damn thing to repay your debt to society for the rest of your pathetic lil life.

Anymore I'm sickened with any prison on the planet that is not self sufficient. I know a few are - where the inmates have to farm their own food and everything, but the majority are just a waste of money to harbor people that either 1) only pretend to change and go out to murder, steal, or rape some more or 2) are murdered by other inmates or die in their cell. (yeah, I know some come out and behave themselves)

And.. on the actual topic. Good! That freak and his immediate supporters deserve to wriggle n writhe on a big fat noose


And no, I'm not joking - I am really that cruel

I second that.

I'm quite sure it was a reference to James Bond. *eyeshift*

Anyway, I don't really have an opinion. He was a bad man, that killed many, many people. Watch some documentaries on his family an Iraq, etc, sometime. He was the kind of person who killed you, and your family, if you spoke out against him.

Hanging seems alright, but I think solitary confinement for life sounds much better. Or, well, worse.

I think my punishment is worse. It might even fall under the heading of cruel and unusual punishment to be honest.