Should Saddam be Executed?

The trial of ex-Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in Iraq has been viewed as a three-ring circus of sorts by observers all around the world. Part of this has to do with the prisoner himself, whose tirades have only served to solidify the notion that Saddam is brutal, volatile, hostile, and cunning. The revolving door of judges presiding over the trial attests to the manipulative maneuvers of Saddam, each intending to tip the balance of justice in his favor. Yet the trial itself, with all its shortcomings, is a testimony to the strides Iraq has made toward liberty and justice within a few short years.

There would have been no trial at all for anyone under Saddam's rule.

As the trial winds down and draws near to a close, the subject of the appropriate punishment has been discussed widely. This is assuming, of course, that Saddam will be found guilty by the court. For all intent and purposes no other verdict can be rendered given the voluminous documentation of acts of barbarism against humanity by the defendant, complete for all the world to see. This being the case, what then? What should be the terms of his punishment?

The subject of crime and punishment is not a simple matter but a highly complicated maze of complexities that boggle the mind. For example, should the Governor of Illinois have continued with the execution of those on death row when it was discovered that dozens of those very prisoners had been found guilty based upon false evidence when DNA samples were taken? The only prudent course to take in such a circumstance is the course the Governor took, which was to immediately place a moratorium on the death penalty in Illinois.

This is one of the reasons that I have sided with anti-death penalty groups in the last few years. The criminal justice system is fraught with so much fraud, human error, and political shenanigans that many of the verdicts in murder cases can be viewed with suspicion. Regrettably, before the days of DNA testing we probably put to death countless innocent citizens.

My philosophy of pro-life is another reason I am reluctant to support capital punishment. If I am to be consistent in my stance for the sacredness of human life, from conception to the grave, then I must leave the ultimate decision of life or death to God alone.

Having said that, there are notable exceptions to any philosophical argument. At times there are crimes that are so heinous, so barbaric, so brazen, and so repugnant that we MUST abide by the old legal standard of the punishment fitting the crime.

One of those exceptions is Saddam Hussein.

Hussein should receive the death penalty if found guilty in a court of law. The man is such a danger to society that to incarcerate him for life would be risky...particularly in that part of the world. The jitters and whines of those afraid that his execution would spark a volcanic outburst of terrorism like we have never seen before pale in comparison to the travesty of justice that anything less than his execution would display.

If the terrorists wish to make us pay for ridding the globe of one of the most brutal and dangerous men the world has ever known, then so be it. We will be ready for them.

In fact, this may be the chance to rid the entire globe of Islamic Jihadists once and for all.

Saddam deserves his execution.