{"id":260,"date":"2007-01-01T15:49:14","date_gmt":"2007-01-01T15:49:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scientopia.org\/blogs\/goodmath\/2007\/01\/01\/law-vs-thuggery-the-execution-of-saddam\/"},"modified":"2007-01-01T15:49:14","modified_gmt":"2007-01-01T15:49:14","slug":"law-vs-thuggery-the-execution-of-saddam","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/2007\/01\/01\/law-vs-thuggery-the-execution-of-saddam\/","title":{"rendered":"Law vs. Thuggery: The Execution of Saddam"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The big news over the last couple of days has been the execution of Saddam Hussein. I<br \/>\nwant to put in my own two cents about it. It&#8217;s not math, but it does at least involve a bit of logic.<br \/>\nI wish I could remember who first said this, but I really don&#8217;t know. But the important thing,<br \/>\nin a moral sense, about the whole mess with Saddam is that he was a thug. A vicious,<br \/>\nbloodthirsty, sadistic, evil thug who believed that *power* justified itself. *He* was the<br \/>\nstrongest thug in Iraq; therefore, according to his own worldview, he got to do whatever he<br \/>\nwanted until someone stronger came along. Rape, torture, murder were all perfectly acceptable<br \/>\nto him &#8211; he had the power to do it, therefore he was *allowed* to do it.<br \/>\nWe, Americans, claim to not believe in that calculus of power. We claim to believe in<br \/>\nthe idea of *law*: a set of fundamental rules that transcend the individual humans who are in positions of power, that limit them and their actions. No matter who you are, no matter how strong you are, no matter how many guns or bombs or soldiers you have, there are some things<br \/>\nthat you simple *are not* allowed to do.<br \/>\nAnd that&#8217;s where the problem with the execution of Saddam comes in.<br \/>\nDid he get what any objective observer would call a fair trial? No. The justification<br \/>\nwe keep hearing is *&#8221;we know he was guilty&#8221;*. But that&#8217;s not the point: if we really believe in the rule of law, then *even if the accused is obviously, undeniably, unquestionably guilty*, we have to give them a full and fair trial, with the right to hear the evidence against them, confront their accusers, and present their own defense. Not because they *deserve* it &#8211; but because **we** require it. The laws, the fundamental rules that<br \/>\nmake us different from thugs like Saddam, say that we must do it; if we ignore our laws,<br \/>\neven in the case of an outrageously evil person like Saddam, then we *validate* the things he did, the way he acted.<br \/>\nAfter the trial is over, and a sentence is selected, the way that the sentence is carried<br \/>\nout is also dictated by laws. Even in the case of a death sentence, there are rules that<br \/>\nmust be followed about how the condemned criminal is treated, and about how and when his<br \/>\nexecution must be performed.<br \/>\nUnder pressure from the American government, the Iraqi government executed Saddam *in violation of their laws concerning executions*. In the execution chamber, being led to his death, the guards spit at him and cursed at him. Witnesses were allowed to bring in cellphone video cameras and tape his execution, and take souvenir photos of his dead body. His execution<br \/>\nwas illegal under the law of the land, and it was carried out with the same kind of<br \/>\nspectacle as the executions that he commanded when he was in charge.<br \/>\nSaddam himself summed it up well. On the way to his execution, he said &#8220;I am a militant and I have no fear for myself. I have spent my life in jihad and fighting aggression. Anyone who takes this route should not be afraid.&#8221; He spent his life as a thug ruling because he had the power to do it. Now we came along, and we were stronger than him. So by his own standards, his own rules, he did nothing wrong. He wasn&#8217;t being *punished*; he was simply being killed<br \/>\nbecause his opponents were stronger than he was. He knew it; everyone who sees the<br \/>\nvideo of reads the news reports about his execution will know it. He was killed by<br \/>\na mob of thugs.<br \/>\nWe *could* have done something different. We could have given him a fair and open trial,<br \/>\nwith all of the charges against him clearly set out, enumerated, and presented with evidence. We could have allowed him to try to defend himself and justify his actions. We could have seen a genuine, fair conviction of him on the basis of public, open evidence. If (as one would expect), the fair trial ended with the sentence of death, we could have executed him in accordance with the law, with the dignity that he denied to his victims, but which is *required* by law.<br \/>\nWe could have shown that we were different from him. But we didn&#8217;t. In the end, we and the Iraqi government we created acted as a gang of thugs. We allowed Saddam Hussein to die secure in the knowledge that his view of power was correct, and that he was justified in doing<br \/>\nall of the evil things that he did in his life. We *betrayed* everything we claim to stand for, everything we claim to believe, and everything we claimed that this war was meant to bring to the people of Iraq.<br \/>\nIt&#8217;s a crime. Literally.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The big news over the last couple of days has been the execution of Saddam Hussein. I want to put in my own two cents about it. It&#8217;s not math, but it does at least involve a bit of logic. I wish I could remember who first said this, but I really don&#8217;t know. But [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[51],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-260","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4lzZS-4c","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=260"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.goodmath.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}