NationStates Jolt Archive

Saddam is having fun at the expense of everyone else as usual. They should just declare him guilty because everyone knows he isn't going to get out of this acquitted or not guilty.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10551695/

<snip> They should just declare him guilty because everyone knows he isn't going to get out of this acquitted or not guilty.


People said the same thing about OJ Simpson.

People said the same thing about OJ Simpson.
Yeah...THAT was a bloody shocker!

But hardly the same as Saddam's case. I mean...really.

Yeah...THAT was a bloody shocker!

But hardly the same as Saddam's case. I mean...really.
True. OJ only killed two people, allegedly.

True. OJ only killed two people, allegedly.
Actually, I think the difference is more that the US government didn't harbour personal hatred towards him, or use him as a pretext to start a war. Talk about having egg on your face if you turn around and say, "not guilty" after that, eh?

Hey...did you hear that Johnny Cochrane died?

There are some cases where 'keeping up appearances' is important, and going through the process is important even if the outcome is more or less certain.

This is one of them.

We, or they, could simply execute the former leader, sure. Can even make the case that it was inevidable. But it would not be the model for the next government you'd want to create, the message you'd want to send. The message here is, no matter how dispicable, how over the top, due process is due process and that is the practice of the land now. And that is the key difference between the government charging him and the government he held.

I am not a supporter of the war and never have been. But still...

Actually, I think the difference is more that the US government didn't harbour personal hatred towards him, or use him as a pretext to start a war. Talk about having egg on your face if you turn around and say, "not guilty" after that, eh?

Hey...did you hear that Johnny Cochrane died?
Well, the US isn't running the trial. It's supposed to be an Iraqi court, no?

Yeah, I heard. Too bad. He was a pretty interesting character.

Well, the US isn't running the trial. It's supposed to be an Iraqi court, no? But do you really think the US would tolerate a verdict of not-guilty? He'd be tried again for sure.

Yeah, I heard. Too bad. He was a pretty interesting character.
OJ better not kill anyone else...Johnny was his only 'get out of jail free' card.

True. OJ only killed two people, allegedly.

Actually, he killed two people: a jury found him responsible for their wrongful deaths.

But do you really think the US would tolerate a verdict of not-guilty? He'd be tried again for sure.


OJ better not kill anyone else...Johnny was his only 'get out of jail free' card.
It would be funny if the US decided the easiest way to get out of Iraq is just to press for Saddam to be found not guilty and give him back the country along with control of the military and all the high tech US weapons he wants.

Actually, he killed two people: a jury found him responsible for their wrongful deaths.
Another jury found him not guilty of those deaths. Who are you going to believe?

Actually, he killed two people: a jury found him responsible for their wrongful deaths.
That was in civil court. He is still not criminally responsible.

The Juice never killed anyone!

I sure hope they catch the real killers soon.

Actually, I think the difference is more that the US government didn't harbour personal hatred towards him, or use him as a pretext to start a war. Talk about having egg on your face if you turn around and say, "not guilty" after that, eh?

Hey...did you hear that Johnny Cochrane died?
Yes. It was a sad day for Wookies everywhere.

Another jury found him not guilty of those deaths. Who are you going to believe?

He was found not guilt of murder/manslaughter. He was never completely absolved of causing the deaths. So technically I can believe both. /pedant.