Text 7741, 51 rader
Skriven 2005-01-20 16:33:00 av LEE LOFASO (1:123/140)
Ärende: Free Saddam
===================
Hello Everybody,

>BF>Every life should be sacred.

>LL>In that case, we should free Saddam Hussein.

BF>Only from his thoughts, not from his life.

Consider for the moment that Saddam Hussein is awaiting trial.  What
are the charges pending against him?  Obviously, he is on the dock for
war crimes and crimes against humanity.  But think about it.  Is it
really in America's best interest to convict him?  Or would America be
better off simply to set him free?

Saddam Hussein is guilty of the crime of aggression.  After all,
he started four wars, including invading Kuwait.  But if charged and
convicted of the crime of aggression, that also makes the United States
guilty.  After all, it was the United States which invaded Iraq.

For those who have difficulty understanding what aggression is, in
international law it is undertood as being the use of armed force by one
state against the sovereignty, territoritorial integrity, or political
independence of another state when not in self-defense or without the
United Nations Security Council invoking Article VII of the UN Charter.

The crime of aggression was the main charge used in the Nuremburg
trials.  And we all know what happened to those charged.  Most were
convicted.  And some were executed.

Anyway, that is one of the main reasons why the United States did not
want to turn Saddam Hussein over to the International Criminal Court.
By doing that, the United States would have in effect convicted itself.

Best to let the Iraqis put Saddam on trial.

Only one problem.

Iraq still had a law on their books that prohibits aggressive war
against another Arab country.  So guess what Saddam Hussein got charged
with?

That's right.
Best to set Saddam Hussein free.
Having him convicted would be too embarrassing.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * My reality check just bounced.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)