Saddam has been executed

[SlowwHand]

See? Plenty of regret to go around, outside of Saddam.

[TCO]

I defy you all to try to shame me. GET YER HATE ON! Party-time!

[Aeson]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Tell me his half brother's name, and the judge's name that also hung.
Being a staunch human rights person, surely you can do that.

Like I said, all you have are strawmen and ad hominems.

I was talking about responsibility for our actions, and your own lack of reading comprehension, not human rights. But since you want to change the subject, obviously because you don't have a leg to stand on our previous topics of discussion, have at it.

First of all, it's inane to suggest that being able to name all those who receive (or don't receive) the DP is a pre-requisite for holding a view on the human right's issues involved with the DP. If you continue to disagree on that point, please name everyone who has ever received the DP and then you may offer your own opinion on the subject. As for everyone else with a modicum of rationality, we can discuss our views on the DP without having to digress into irrellevent (and virtually endless) name recollection.

I am opposed to the DP. Contrary to your baseless speculation on the point, it is not a human rights issue to me, though I realize it is to many people. For me it is a utilitarian issue first and foremost, with sociological implications. ("Human rights" in general are only as important to me as they are utilitarian. Though admittedly they do tend to be beneficial, as working together we can generally outperform working independantly or against one another.) In the US the DP is more costly than life imprisonment. Also, the DP destroys a human life, which may still hold potential for value. Especially given that most who face the DP are mentally or emotionally unstable, and would make excellent subjects for studying how those issues, at the extremes where they lead to such anti-social behavior, can be treated, spotted before the damage is done, and thus the tragedies avoided in the first place. Finally, the DP promotes the rationale that morality and justice give a person or group the right to take life, and worse, that retribution is an acceptable motivation to base justice off of, and it is that sort of rationale that leads to most of the attrocities that are committed in this world. We are in an ideological war, and we can't win by conforming to or promoting the opposition's point of view.

In Saddam's case specifically, his importance to various groups may have resulted in his life being a bargaining chip for or against us. By "taking him off the table" we have admitted that we are not able to manipulate his continued existence better than those who oppose us. (In general, you'd only take points off the board if you think you can't win them.) That was shortsighted on our part, as we had him in custody, that situation having come about due to having neutralized most of his (and his supporters) ability to keep him from us. In essense we had already shown our ability to dominate in that regard. It is possible that Saddam would have been able to act somehow to cause further damage, as it is possible that by killing him we will promote further damage. They are unknowns. But for all intents and purposes he was neutralized already.

[Q Classic]

I can understand how people dont want the DP on moral grounds, but torturing forever I dont think that is right etheir. I also dont take enjoyment from the execution of criminals.

I dunno, the sense of moral justice you get is coming across as a form of enjoyment. "He got his due! Thank God! Good Riddens! He deserved it!" and the like.

The only difference between your enjoyment and Sloww's is at least Sloww has the balls to admit that he's deriving some pleasure out of it.

As far as the rest of the bible stuff goes, I quite clearly make the point that I'm just doing a selective reading of it, no different from what any other major religious leader has done in the 2,000 years since the guy's death. I realize it's a sneaky thing to do, quite dishonorable, but then again, so is half the **** the religionistas claim.

WRT torture, I can justify it because I never said anything about giving convicted criminals a high quality of life. Being anti-death, however, prohibits me from accepting the death penalty in any form.

but if the dp was enforced farily and quickly, it would serve to protect us all from murders.

Bull-****ing-****. The death penalty will not prevent crimes of passion, nor will they stop psychopaths. What's more, they won't stop people who feel they have nothing left to lose.

Bingo. Prize goes to Kitty, who understands this is about politics, not about justice. And rightly so.

If anything in my posts in this thread, it's hopefully rather clear that my arguments are all based in theory, with absolutely no connection to reality.

At least KH can do a search. The rest of you moan about him solely.
The one least deserving of your sympathy.

Don't be ridiculous. Nowhere do I give him any sympathy. Indeed, if anything, my comments are more akin to one who feels... cheated.

[SlowwHand]

Aeson, you can throw all the latest buzz words around that you want, and it changes nothing.

[TCO]

"If anything in my posts in this thread, it's hopefully rather clear that my arguments are all based in theory, with absolutely no connection to reality."

I already knew that. It ruins the artistic effect when you explain it though.

P.s. There is video of him getting the noose put on out now. Haven't seen the actual death yet.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=38e1076b19

[Aeson]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Aeson, you can throw all the latest buzz words around that you want, and it changes nothing.

Oh, but it's good fun to see you running away from anything resembling a discussion with your tail between your legs. Given the number of statements I have made, you really can't pick out a single thing to address specifically? Do you need me to point out something incorrect or poorly qualified that I've said to help get you started?

[SlowwHand]

The guy was a ****ing mass murderer. My point is, he paid the price.
My other point is, it's a shame.
My last point is on the list of people to lament, he's dead last. No pun intended.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by TCO
"If anything in my posts in this thread, it's hopefully rather clear that my arguments are all based in theory, with absolutely no connection to reality."

I already knew that. It ruins the artistic effect when you explain it though.

Blame the reason for the explanation on the rubes who don't get it.

[TCO]

You have to remain haughtily above them, grasshopper. Such is the way to internet nirvana.

[Jack_www]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

I dunno, the sense of moral justice you get is coming across as a form of enjoyment. "He got his due! Thank God! Good Riddens! He deserved it!" and the like.

The only difference between your enjoyment and Sloww's is at least Sloww has the balls to admit that he's deriving some pleasure out of it

I have never taken any enjoyment from his death, but I am not sheding any tears for Saddam etheir. No where on apolyton have I expressed any enjoyment over his death, so why do you think I am?

As far as the rest of the bible stuff goes, I quite clearly make the point that I'm just doing a selective reading of it, no different from what any other major religious leader has done in the 2,000 years since the guy's death. I realize it's a sneaky thing to do, quite dishonorable, but then again, so is half the **** the religionistas claim.

Well I try to study the entire Bible. But yes there are a lot of people that take things selectively out of the Bible as you point out.

WRT torture, I can justify it because I never said anything about giving convicted criminals a high quality of life. Being anti-death, however, prohibits me from accepting the death penalty in any form.

Well I dont think torturing someone for years on end is any better.

Bull-****ing-****. The death penalty will not prevent crimes of passion, nor will they stop psychopaths. What's more, they won't stop people who feel they have nothing left to lose.

I dont think it would prevent people from killing, but it would prevent them from killing people in the future. If you put them to death, there is no chance they can kill again. Even in prison they could kill again.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
The guy was a ****ing mass murderer.

Not in dispute. Strawman +1

My point is, he paid the price.

Not in dispute. Strawman +1

My other point is, it's a shame.

Not in dispute. Strawman +1

My last point is on the list of people to lament, he's dead last.

No one is lamenting or sympathizing with Saddam here. Strawman +1

No pun intended.

Your acknowlegement of the pun and then subsequent action to post said pun indicates that you intended it to be included in your post, regardless of the factors that originally lead to your wording it in that manner. (Not a strawman at least!!!! WTG!!!)

--------------

You forgot to mention your other "points":

- "Some" = "All"
- That I'm blaming everything on the US.
- That I'm a jackass.
- That my arguments are just buzz words.
- To have a view on human rights you must know the names of everyone who has received or is schedualed to receive the DP.
- That no one other than KH knows how to search.
- That opposing the death penalty is sympathizing with Saddam.

Of course it's understandable that you are running away from those "points", and trying to claim your position is something else entirely. For future reference though, it would be easier just not to make the unsupportable assertions in the first place.

And I must say, it's amazing how many fallacious assertions you've been able to compress into a few short statements.

[TCO]

And you failed to make any assessment of the overall point of his argument. Evidence or analysis that is "not in dispute" is still totally relevant. You little piss-ant, cut stuff into individual sentences piss-ant. Now leave the GameLeaguer to me. He's my and Eyes's *****.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Nobody else was hung with him.

I stand corrected. He had sons, what about his wife?

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by TCO
And you failed to make any assessment of the overall point of his argument. Evidence or analysis that is "not in dispute" is still totally relevant. You little piss-ant, cut stuff into individual sentences piss-ant. Now leave the GameLeaguer to me. He's my and Eyes's *****.