Finding an Impartial Judge for Saddam, is going to be like finding one for Hitler.

Great Debates
1

I know I woke up this morning to more of a thought experiment than I usually get on Sunday mornings. I was immediately thinking of Hitler, and what would coalition forces done with him if captured alive? The trial of a century right? Or would he have succumb to a mysterious “heart-attack” or “stroke”?
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know this is a major turning point for the middle east. What is all of this going to mean for the US occupation of Iraq?

How on earth is an impartial judge(s) going to be found for the impending trial?
What does the Geneva convention say about putting to death a head of state? Can it be done with Saddam, and what would be the method?

2

ARE we going to turn him over to the Iraqis?

Theoretically we should. Then again, we’ve been crapping on them, their elected government, their economy, and so forth ever since we got there.

Plainly, we’re going to hang onto him awhile, if only to interrogate him about stuff we wanna know about.

…but what then? Somehow, considering the hamhanded way we’ve handled these folks, I just can’t see us blithely handing him over to the Iraqis. Someone is likely to get paranoid that they’ll try to put him back into power, or let him escape, or shoot him without a trial, or shoot him WITH a trial, or some damn thing…

Somehow, I’m not sure that finding an impartial judge for the guy is the biggest problem.

3

It has become pretty well–accepted in international law that being head of state confers no immunity from war crimes and crimes against humanity.

I’m also pretty sure that the Iraqis do have first dibs on him as an international court is really for when there is a failure to prosecute crimes like these.

4

If Saddam is tried under Iraqi authority, an impartial judge is not required. Iraq has no constitution to guarantee the rights of the accused. They can put him before a council of Shiite mullahs who can declare him guilty and execute him without any trial whatsoever. There is no guarantee of due process in Iraq. You are looking at this through an American lens, as though our constitution is somehow applicable halfway around the world. It is not, and the Iraqis should be allowed to handle it however they see fit.

5

I say we provide the security & let the Iraqis handle the trial & sentencing, but before that, ESPECIALLY, the interrogations!

heh heh heh

6

I asked a similar question in another Saddam thread, but what would the Allies have gained by murdering Hitler in this manner? Absolutely nothing. I think it would’ve been much better to have had him alive and answering questions, learning as much as possible about his regime in the process. So I don’t think it would have happened.

I’m not a rocket scientist, but even if I was one, I doubt I’d see your point. Are all the corrupt kingdoms and dictatorships going to see the light and become pro-Western democracies now? Of course not. So I’m not sure it’s a turning point - maybe for Iraq, but not for the region.

Perhaps it means it’ll end sooner. I don’t think they’d have stayed longer if Saddam hadn’t been found, but they’ll be there for years anyway to some extent.

I think the Nuremberg panel did OK. I don’t know if that qualifies as at all impartial, but I think that went as well as can be expected.

Are you joking? Do you really think anybody is going to start paying attention to the Geneva Convention NOW? If anyone did care, this war wouldn’t have gone like it did.

Given that, almost anything. I imagine the US will suggest that if Saddam is executed, it be in a non-torturous manner, but beyond that I couldn’t even guess. It definitely CAN happen, and though I personally oppose it I imagine it will.

7

I don’t see a problem. What’s the difference between this situation and Milosevic?

8

I’m not sure that impartiality is even called for in this case. It is not as if a trial would be an attempt to discover Saddam’s evil deeds, since he was actually celebrated by a large faction in his country for those deeds. Is there the slightest doubt in anyone’s mind that Saddam ordered the torture of thousands and the gassing of perhaps hundreds of thousands, and that he personally murdered people who opposed him? It seems to me that the only thing for which a trial is needed is the enumeration of his crimes for the record . . . before they lop his ugly head off.

9

Given what the Russians supposedly did to his corpse to ensure that he would never inspire a cult after he was dead I think that the chances of him seeing trial if captured by the Russians was slim. The Soviets had good reason to fear him being able to exert any further influence and a trial would have been the perfect platform for a great orator like Hitler.

10

Does anyone else think that Saddam Hussein isn’t even in the same league as Hitler?

Trial of the century? A bold claim to make in 2003…
Cheers.

11

Dear kindly, Mr. Bushie
You’ve got to understand
It is my bringing uppie
That gets me out of hand
My mother dated rabbis
My father is a schmeck
Holy Moses, that’s why I’m a wreck!

Dear President Bushie, I’m really upset
I’ve never got the love that ever Shiite should get
I am not dictator, I’m misunderstood
Deep down inside me there is good! (there is good!)
There is good, there is good, there is untapped good
Deep in side, the worst of me is good!

(That’s a mighty touching story)
(I’ll tell it to the world!)
(Just tell it to the Hague!)

Dear kindly, judge, your Honor,
My soldiers are no fun.
Hid the weapons of mass panic,
I’ve only got a gun.
Though unanimously chosen,
Approval can’t be had!
Golly Cripey, that’s why I’m so bad!

Right! President Bushie, you are such a square
This kid don’t need a judge, he needs an analyst’s care.
Hey, President Bushie, haven’t you heard?
He’s psychologically disturbed! (I’m disturbed!
I’m disturbed, I’m disturbed, I am most disturbed.
Yes, I’m psychologically disturbed.)

(Hear ye, hear ye! It is the opinion of this court that Saddam here is depraved on account he ain’t got a normal home.)
(Hey, I’m depraved on account I’m deprived!)

I gassed all of the Kurdies
Most people don’t have work
I rigged my own elections
Most think that I’m a jerk
I’ve guzzled all my aid funds
Our living standard’s less
It’s no wonder that I’m such a mess

You! President Bushie, you are such a slob
This boy don’t need a shrink he needs a good honest job
Out of his palace, to work with a kick
‘Cause he’s sociologically sick! (I am sick!
I am sick, I am sick, I am sick, sick, sick
Like I’m sociologically sick)

(In my opinion this boy don’t need his head shrunk at all. He has a sociological disease)
(Hey, I have a social disease!)
(So send him to a social worker!)

Dear Mrs. Social Worker, they say go get a job
Like working for Al Quaeda, or maybe run a mob
I am not antisocial, I’m only antiwork
Holy Moses, that’s why I’m a jerk

Eek! President Bushie, you’re too soft again!
This boy don’t need a job, he needs a year in the pen!
He is a delinquent, not misunderstood
Deep down inside him, he’s no good! (I’m no good!
I’m no good, I’m no good, I’m no earthly good
Deep inside, I’m totally no good)

The problem is he’s lazy
The problem is he drinks
The problem is he’s crazy
The problem is he stinks
The problem is he’s growing
The problem is he’s grown
Bushie, I’ve got problems of my own!

Dear President Bushie, I’m down on m’knees
No country wants a leader with a with social disease
Dear President Bushie, whate’er shall I do?
Someday, President Bush, I’ll…bomb you!

12

Sort of a “Middle East Side Story” eh?

Well done, athelas! :smiley:

13

I want to know who’s going to be Saddam’s defense attorney, and what kind of hazard pay they’ll get.

I tend to agree that the concept of ‘impartial trial’ is alien to the situation at hand. So, in some sense, it’s destined to be a show trial. Even if every single accusation against him isn’t provable, surely something will stick.

All the same, it seems important that Saddam should be given a chance to refute the evidence against him. That way, future Iraqis/Arabs won’t be able to claim that he was framed.

I think the analogies to Hitler are overwrought, yes. I don’t know if Saddam’s was any less evil in intent, but he had a poorer (at least in a relative sense) and politically more divided/weak nation under him, plus one or two superpowers looking over his shoulder, moderating his foreign adventures.

14

Pardon me if I don’t shed a tear about the difficulty of finding an impartial judge. We do the best we humanly can, and then it’s just tough shit for the bugger. I guess the moral of the story is “Don’t be a Saddam Hussein.”

As for a defense attorney, I’m sure Garagos is already vying for that honor.:smiley:

15

What happens when he starts naming the names of the people who helped him out in the 80s and 90s? Again I am thinking of Milosevic, who called Clinton to testify on his behalf.

It is going to be very difficult to toe the line between bad stuff Saddam did / stuff Saddam did with the help of the Coalition and their allies.

16

The Hitler analogies are a little much, but in terms of the international law questions - which are what this thread is about, not the crimes - I think it makes sense.