NationStates Jolt Archive

Saddam to face genocide charges (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4875678.stm)
Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is to be charged with genocide over a 1980s campaign against the Kurds, an Iraqi tribunal has announced.

Now, the reason Milosevic's trial came to nothing had nothing to do with the way the international court works. It had everything to do with the prosecutor, Mrs. Del Ponte, going ahead with all possible charges against Milosevic.
Probably driven by some oversensitive feeling towards 'justice', that included genocide charges.

And proving genocide is one of the hardest things to do on earth, because you:
a) Have to establish that it happened by orders of the accused.
b) Have to establish that the accused was aware at all times of what was happening.
c) Have to establish that it happened with the intent of destroying that particular populace.
And probably a few more important things that I forgot.

So proving that Saddam tried to commit genocide against the Kurds will make the trial a lot harder. It can take years and years to find and present the required evidence, witnesses and so on. We've seen that in Milosevic's case.

So two options now IMHO:
1) The trial was just prolonged by potentially years.
2) The trial really is just for show, and the genocide charges will be pushed through without concern for all the proving that would really have to be done.

Keep him in jail till he dies? Not such a bad mistake.

Keep him in jail till he dies? Not such a bad mistake.
But strictly speaking, Milosevic was never convicted of anything. In the eyes of the law, he's innocent.

But strictly speaking, Milosevic was never convicted of anything. In the eyes of the law, he's innocent.

In the eyes of humanity, he's guilty. That is all that really matters.

The trial was already a kangaroo court, but the attempt to prove genocide charges just turned it into a Barnum & Bailey show.

The trial was already a kangaroo court, but the attempt to prove genocide charges just turned it into a Barnum & Bailey show.

He is still guilty. I can only hope that the hanging is shown live on TV.

He is still guilty. I can only hope that the hanging is shown live on TV.

Why? Do you enjoy watching people die?

But strictly speaking, Milosevic was never convicted of anything. In the eyes of the law, he's innocent.

Technically that means if Charles Taylor (also facing a UN war crimes court) dies in jail he must be an innocent man too?!

Milosevic was guilty of organizing the war crime machine against Bosnia and Croatia, but then the Croatian government of the time also has a lot to answer for (such as the ethnic cleansing of the Krajina region). What Milosevic wasn’t guilty of the mass graves in Kosovo, because there wasn’t any mass graves there. It was Black Propaganda by the Clinton administration to create support at home (and you thought only the Republicans did sneaky things like that). Milosevic was guilty as hell of a lot of other things so he should have been prosecuted.

Saddam is in a Kangaroo Court, put in place by a puppet government of the US. Saddam may be guilty as hell of a lot of very, very bad things (a lot done as a puppet of the US), but it’s still going to be a Kangaroo Court.

Charles Taylor is the next big war crimes case before the UN. This guy was a US puppet in West Africa during the Cold War, to help stem the tide of Communism in Africa. After a whole lot of death and generally unacceptable behavior, once the Cold War was finished with, the US washed their hands of the psychotic dictator. He made extensive use of child soldiers. Like another noted African dictator he was also a cannibal. I don’t know what kind of whack job cult he was part of, but both he and his inner circle sacrificed and ate the hearts from babies. Good riddance to this monster, although I suspect the UN will be much more gentle with him than he deserves.

The Bruce

Saddam to face genocide charges (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4875678.stm)


Now, the reason Milosevic's trial came to nothing had nothing to do with the way the international court works. It had everything to do with the prosecutor, Mrs. Del Ponte, going ahead with all possible charges against Milosevic.
Probably driven by some oversensitive feeling towards 'justice', that included genocide charges.

And proving genocide is one of the hardest things to do on earth, because you:
a) Have to establish that it happened by orders of the accused.
b) Have to establish that the accused was aware at all times of what was happening.
c) Have to establish that it happened with the intent of destroying that particular populace.
And probably a few more important things that I forgot.

So proving that Saddam tried to commit genocide against the Kurds will make the trial a lot harder. It can take years and years to find and present the required evidence, witnesses and so on. We've seen that in Milosevic's case.

So two options now IMHO:
1) The trial was just prolonged by potentially years.
2) The trial really is just for show, and the genocide charges will be pushed through without concern for all the proving that would really have to be done.


Wont be an issue. His trials a sham. Hes dying no matter what. The Iraqs themselves have said "why dont we just kill him already".

Hes a dead man, even if he didnt do it, which we all know he did.

<snip>

On a Charles Taylor related note, one of my old school friends had the dubious honour of guarding him while he was in transport. He sat directly across from a mass-murderer and looked into his eyes. His story totally beat any work related anecdote I had to tell.

Technically that means if Charles Taylor (also facing a UN war crimes court) dies in jail he must be an innocent man too?!
Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

As for Taylor, I saw an excellent documentary about Summer 2003 in Liberia the other day, and the battle for Monrovia. I must say that the Americans didn't look particularly glamorous in that one, what with the mountains of dead bodies in front of their embassy and all.

Why? Do you enjoy watching people die?

No, I hate to see people die. I love to watch monsters die.

Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

As for Taylor, I saw an excellent documentary about Summer 2003 in Liberia the other day, and the battle for Monrovia. I must say that the Americans didn't look particularly glamorous in that one, what with the mountains of dead bodies in front of their embassy and all.

Innoncent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. But in the eyes of humanity, he is a mass murderer whose time on this world should end.

No, I hate to see people die. I love to watch monsters die.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

I do not think that is a risk, in my case.

I do not think that is a risk, in my case.
You just made my point for me better than I could possibly have done so myself.

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
- Friedrich Nietzsche
When you gaze into the abyss, it's not supposed to wave back!
- Terry Pratchett. ;)

As for the OP:
Personally I had hoped that the trial of Saddam would be something more than just for show - I would have liked a real, fair trial, one to show that the international community was serious in their commitment to both international law and the protection of human rights.

I fear that we shall see none of this. So far the trial is a farce, and it shows no signs of improving. Like many things in Iraq, the trial seems to be not completely thought through.

My question is, what could have been done to make it better?

In my opinion, one thing that should have been done is either move the trial from Iraq to an international arena, or delay the trial to security in Iraq was greatly improved. It serves little purpose to conduct the trial under such chaotic circumstances as presently seen in Iraq, where judges and lawyers gets threatened and killed.

And this post made me a Pimp, it would seem :cool:

I do not think that is a risk, in my case.
Have you ever heard Charles Taylor speak? The sort of thing he's talking about?

You'd swear he was just like you at some point, fighting those who committed evil, with any means necessary.

I do not think that is a risk, in my case.
Exactly.

Things that happened yesterday are not currently risks.