News Snipet 'Blog

Do Something!
Find Elected Officials
Enter ZIP Code:

or Search by State

See Issues & Action
Select An Issue Area:

Contact The Media
Enter ZIP Code:

or Search by State

Other things
Find Affordable Care!"
Other things
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Weigh in with your thoughts. Should he or shouldn't he? Reuters AlertNet - EU president Finland says Saddam should not hang: "EU president Finland says Saddam should not hang"
posted by Jack Mercer @ 11/05/2006 08:09:00 PM  
  • At 11/05/2006 11:09:00 PM, Blogger Helen Losse said…

    I'm a pacifist. No one should hang. I vote for life imprisonment.

  • At 11/06/2006 07:40:00 PM, Blogger chickenhawk said…

    This is all just a metaphor for the state of the world as being a giant paradox, as far as I am concerned.

    I am against the death penalty. But I am not so sure many folks in the Middle East are. They chop off hands in Saudi Arabia for stealing and Ive seen tapes of public executions, Iran is loving this right now (maybe that is a way to improve relations with them?) and Kuwait, obviously, supports the decision. I think life imprisonment would have been the right choice- but where do you imprison Saddam for life? The man is an icon- and I by no means mean that in a positive way- for the past 20 years when you hear Iraq, the first thing you think about is Saddam Hussein.

    Look at how savage he behaved over the years. Some argue that, given different religious groups and philosophies over there, the most effective government was Saddam Hussein's tyranny- maintained order, kept the people in line. And if you dissented, you got it good. So, be a good devoted citizen and you will be fine. Nonsense though. Their soccer team had been threatened, imprisoned and tortured by Saddam's son for losing games. Friends could be turned on by one of them at any given moment for no reason. They are all sick people. So maybe we did some good.

    But at the same time, it is not our country, I cannot comprehend how we become so immersed in other country's affairs and not take a look at our own. We have thrown billions of dollars at a war on poverty, a war on drugs- and both are overwhelming failures. And here we are now throwing billions of dollars at a war on terror- declaring war against nouns is not my idea of a war. I approve, reluctantly, of some of the measures we have taken- because some have been necessary.

    Ive always been bias for the anti-war in Iraq argument- because killing is wrong, plain and simple. But the country was a waste anyway. How much longer did these people have to live with these brutal sanctions, how many children had to starve to death? We have tried to save people from themselves who, in turn, fight back against our occupation because they just dont want us there. We are trying to clean up a mess, much of which our governments' past actions under Bush I and Clinton, have caused. And in doing so, things have become more chaotic. It is not black/white, us/them- it seems like there are about 5 different groups fighting over there- none of which are on the same side.

    The White House says this is an example of Iraq being able to self-govern and they have an independent judiciary. We rebuilt the courthouses, put together the whole entire case, spent millions upon millions of dollars to exhume mass graves and gather forensic evidence- essenitally did the Iraqis work for them. Meanwhile, members of Saddam's defense team get gunned down or flee the country. They should stop misleading. This trial had nothing to do with Iraq being independent, it wouldnt have happened without us conducting affairs. So where there is justice, was there any injustice that lead to it? If so, is that right?

    I wonder to myself, "what if these people had a change of heart and found Saddam not guilty?" How then, do you think our government would have responded to that? I dont think we would have stood for it for one minute. And I love the White House's timing. I would love to think it did not have anything to do with the second Tuesday in November, but come on, which White House wouldn't try to pull something like that?

    It surely is a most symbolic moment in our occupation and in Iraq's history- a long history that predates the Birth of Christ. But who knows what direction things will go in, or if it will have any impact at all? Hence my back and forth questioning of all of this, juuuust when I think I am achieving some answers.

    I declare a War on Paradox.

  • At 11/06/2006 09:11:00 PM, Blogger Jack Mercer said…

    Hi Helen and CH!

    I know where both of you come from. I have to admit that I have no answers myself. The Old Testament taught "eye-for-an-eye", but only in relationship to the Jews and their law. The New Testament teaches grace, and forgiveness--something none of us deserve and yet are given freely.

    My feelings of capital punishment are not completely typical of "conservatives". I am a supporter only in a system of equal justice--execute Ted Kennedy for his murder just as quickly as "Willie Johnson" for his. But since this doesn't exist in this nation, I can't advocate capital punishment as a remedy for society's ills.


Post a Comment
<< Home
About Me

Name: Jack Mercer
About Me:
See my complete profile

"Snipet" (pronounced: snipe - it) is not a word.It is a derivative of two words: "Snipe" and "Snippet".

Miriam Webster defines Snipe as: to aim a carping or snide attack, or: to shoot at exposed individuals (as of an enemy's forces) from a usually concealed point of vantage.

Miriam Webster defines Snippet as: : a small part, piece, or thing; especially : a brief quotable passage.

In short, "Snipets" are brief, snide shots at exposed situations from a concealed vantage point.

WARNING! With due reverence to the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment there is NO comment policy on the News Snipet.

Other things
Template by

Free Blogger Templates


free hit counter