A Funny Feeling in America
I’m interested in hearing some opinions on the execution of Saddam Hussein.When you think of the 3,000+ American men and women that have lost their lives in this conflict and add to that number the estimated 50,000 or so Iraqis that have died as well, who could think of a more deserving casualty of war than Saddam Hussein?
Yet for some reason, when it all went down, there didn’t seem to be much rejoicing in the streets of the United States of America.
And I’m interested in learning why?
I’m not a fan of capital punishment in the first place, so the weird feeling I sensed when I heard of the execution wasn’t so strange. What was strange was the sense that this weird feeling wasn't contained to me. It seemed like America felt funny about it, too.
President Bush called the execution “a major milestone,” but the leader of the U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq struck the dissonant chord in all this when he stated for the record that “we would have handled things differently.”
What feels so wrong about something that theoretically should have felt so right?
posted by Al Sturgeon | 2:24 PM
26 Comments:
I tend to agree with what Whitney has said - believers in particular probably shouldn't find it surprising or disappointing that we don't rejoice in death - anyone's death.
Could it also be that the brutal executions of innocent people at the hands of terrorists in the past few years have cooled our thirst for executions in general? Are we collectively seeing that bloodshed only breeds bloodshed, not peace?
Could it also be that we all are now beginning to understand that ending Hussein's life really isn't going to put an end to the pain and suffering and death in Iraq? And that we may, for the first time be recognizing that we all underestimated the cost of our endeavor in that country?
My hope is that we have grown weary of violence and are reluctantly letting go of the illusion that it can solve our problems - humanity's problems - of greed, fear, hate and ignorance.
Good post, Al. I really think America yawned at the whole thing. I think it was distasteful to us that it was death by hanging with terrorist-looking people carrying out the act. I think that the recognition that this was meaningless, essentially, as the conflict continues to rage. I also think that Sadam is seen as a madman, not a dictator (currently), and while there is no sympathy for this murderer, and no chance that we might have the wrong guy, this all seemed like just another movie of the week.
While I'm not principally opposed to what happened to Sadam, I think in the context of Iraq, it was just another killing in the street. For our beloved Americans in the field, perhaps it simply places them in greater danger.
That's what I thought about it.
Any way you slice it this execution deepened our proverbial hole.
Did the United States gain a single thing from his death? My moral objections aside, I don't see how we expected this to ameliorate Iraqi violence.
Now due to a cheap cell phone video, the ethnic and religious factions are fractured further.
Just another grave misstep in a mile-long list.
Al, to the extent you asked everyone to comment, I'm the wrong person to ask about this issue. I have always been (since age 12) against the death penalty -- I even won a speech contest when I was in high school on the subject. Back then I was passionately against it, now I'm sort of against it in principle without such strong feelings. That's the way my views on a lot of issues have evolved, so it may be age, jadedness and exhaustion more than any real change in my thoughts.
As to why most Americans don't seem to have reacted with jubilation, I think there has been a downturn in support for the death penalty in general in the past ten years or so, which could be part of it. The fact that it was carried out in a rushed way and using a method that the U.S. does not utilize any longer is another factor (maybe there is one state where it is an option? Washington, if I remember correctly). And then of course there were the disgraceful circumstances with regard to the taunting that went on, and icing on the cake was the video. The whole thing was just a disgrace and I think even someone generally in favor of capital punishment can see that.
I don't think we can separate the fact of Saddam's execution from the way it happened. I haven't been able to, at least. Seeing the video -- the "edited for tv" version -- I had a sinking feeling in my gut. My thought was: once again, defeat has been snatched from the jaws of what should have been a victory.
Whatever I or we may think of the death penalty, the fair conviction and dignified execution of Saddam would have been a real, if small, victory in Iraq. It would have been what the president called it: "a milestone." As it actually happened, however, it's yet another defeat for both the Iraqis and the U.S.
It's hard for me to imagine a way in which it could have happened that would have been worse for U.S. interests in Iraq.
Saddam was stoic, dignified, even admirable, throughout. The state's executioners looked exactly like the terrorists in hostage-execution videos. People who had no business being there -- if this was a state execution, rather than a revenge killing -- were there. They were rowdy. No one, apparently, made any attempt to control them. Their rowdiness was 100% sectarian. What they were shouting was not a slogan of national identity and pride, but "Muqtada!" -- a slogan of not just sectarian, but sub-sectarian identity and pride.
How did these partisans of someone who is a rival power-center to the elected Iraqi gov't get access to this Iraqi gov't proceeding, and why were they allowed to behave as if they owned the place? Who's really running that gov't -- Maliki or Muqtada? The American-backed gov't, or the Iran-backed militia?
In short, the scene laid bare everything that makes an American victory in Iraq not only impossible, but embarrassingly obviously impossible. (And a temporary increase of 40,000 troops isn't going to change that.)
Justice lost to vengeance. The rule of law lost to the continued rule of strongmen. National unity lost to sectarian hatred. The Iraqi gov't lost to Muqtada al-Sadr. And America lost to Iran.
That's an awfully high price to pay to get one man killed.
It is said that “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” So, here I toss in my ruminations on the subject. They pretty much echo what JD has already said.
Re: Saddam’s Execution
There is no dancing in the streets for two reasons.
(1) There are still a lot of people left in the world who cannot rejoice in the death of even the most heinous of criminals, no matter how deserving of death they are. This was certainly made even less palatable to civilized people by the mocking and taunting that presumably preceded his execution. (I say presumably because I haven't viewed what's on the videos, or even paid much attention to reports)
(2) More importantly, most of us know that it will in no way make matters better in Iraq, and most likely worse, especially for our troops there.
I'm one who is basically opposed to capital punishment. Whether it acts as a deterrent to crime is highly debatable. However, I have a deep-seated gut reaction to monstrous and evil acts of cruelty and violence that makes me say "They deserve to die."
Guess I'm still several steps away from following in the footsteps of Jesus, Huh?
I didn't say this quite the way I intended:
Whatever I or we may think of the death penalty, the fair conviction and dignified execution of Saddam would have been a real, if small, victory in Iraq. It would have been what the president called it: "a milestone."
What I meant was that it would have been a small, but real victory for Iraq, and a milestone for Iraq. As it happened, it was a defeat not just for Iraq, but for the U.S. as well.
Whitney -
What post by DeJon are you reading? I don't get any of the level of negativity you seem to be responding to. There's no mention of Bush or the Administration - just the collective, self-deprecatory "we" and "our".
Even the president, vice president and former Secretary of Defence have admitted we've made serious mistakes in Iraq, so how is it inappropriate to simply say that the thuggish execution of Saddam by the Iraqis just adds to the list of missteps?
I don't get any of the level of negativity you seem to be responding to.
I didn't, either. I understood DeJon to be saying Saddam's execution will make "our" (the U.S.'s) situation even worse in Iraq, quite regardless of whether "we" carried it out or not.
(BTW, Whit, although we didn't put the noose around his neck and pull the lever, we are hardly without responsibility for the execution. While not neck deep in it, so to speak, we are at least knee deep.)
Would you prefer Saddam still be in power?
Compared to what we've got now? Yes. I'm not even sure what exists in Iraq now is an improvement even for the Iraqis, much less for any of us outside Saddam's sphere of influence (which was rather effectively limited to his own country).
As for our involvement in Saddam's fate, it's true we didn't decide (or even directly influence, as far as I know) the nature or timing of his end, but we were involved. We trained the jurists involved in his trial. We held him in prison until we turned him over for execution. I'm not saying "we" did it (nor do I think DeJon was, if I can be forgiven for making that observation), but a comparison to a more familiar execution might be useful: all Saul did was hold some cloaks, yet we recognize his complicity.
What did you expect Bush to say?
I'm not aware that anyone has criticized Pres. Bush's comments about the matter.
Just to clarify my position, I don't really agree that the execution is necessarily a problem for the US.
Al's post was about the "lackluster" response of the American populace to what President Bush characterized as a "major milestone". My position is that this was essentially a "non-event" at best (i.e., had the conduct of the process been entirely above board and civilized (at least as civilized as a state-sponsored killing can be)).
Now, with the clear ugliness of the procedure by the Iraqis, what might have been a non-event or, at best, a minor "positive" occurence, will now surely be a negative - for both the US-backed Iraqi government and for the overall conduct of the US operations in Iraq.
What should have been done differently? The Iraqi government should have been better prepared to conduct the execution in a manner appropriate to a legitimate government. As it is, it looks a lot like the other executions we've seen Al Jazeera air video footage of for the past 3 years. The event only plays into the hands of the terrorists and enemies of democracy as a propaganda tool.
I appreciate Whitney’s question and the responding sentiments. I really can’t expound on what CJR and JU stated. They expressed my opinions more articulately than I could have.
And I certainly fess up to having “negative” feelings related to Saddam’s execution and more broadly the current state of Iraq.
Would one accuse me of believing a media-generated state of affairs in Iraq that is far worse than reality?
The fruits of our labor leave me with all sorts of “negative” feelings. At the risk of being a glass-half-empty kinda person, the misuse of our military forces have produced a burgeoning anti-American sentiment which can only feed the Islamofascist ideology we intended to defeat in the first place.
I’d love for someone to show me where I’m missing the silver lining. Until then, I’ll keeping singing “maranatha.”
Thanks to everyone for their GREAT thoughts. I especially resonated with Jeff's (CJR) hope in his first comment. That is my hope, but I'm just cynical enough to doubt it at the same time.
You have all offered excellent reasons, but I'm still a bit confused by the overall public response. With all due respect, you guys are smart. Your reasons are intelligent, but to run the risk of sounding intellectually aristocratic, this is not the norm. America often reacts emotionally instead of thinking.
I guess I anticipated more celebration marquees, or coffee shop laughing, or high-fives or something. But the sinking feeling in the gut JU described seemed to be somewhat universal, regardless of intellectual thought, and I still found that very surprising.
I hope it is related to the fact that "our side" looked like the bad guys in their executioner hoods, because truth be told, I've been wondering if Americans in general had a problem with that...
Thanks again for your thoughts. Feel free to carry on...
I think Americans in general are just in such a depressed mood about everything having to do with Iraq, it would take something truly extraordinary to lift their spirits enough to celebrate. Another grainy video of somebody being executed isn't it.
Whether they think through it or not, I think people instinctively get the message I suggested from Saddam's execution. That's what I was vaguely trying to get at when I mentioned the sinking feeling I had when I first saw the video. I hadn't had time to think through the issues involved, but already my gut knew it wasn't a good development.
I hope it is related to the fact that "our side" looked like the bad guys in their executioner hoods, because truth be told, I've been wondering if Americans in general had a problem with that
For me, at least, the jury's still out on that one. I think Americans recognized that regardless of their personal feelings about "our side" being the hooded executioners, this was going to cause us problems.
Oh, and also, I don't think Americans felt threatened by Saddam, nor did they have a sense of having been wronged by him.
OTOH, if Osama were caught and executed...
Does anyone beside me see an interesting psychological or sociological study here? (Oh, how I long for a research university.)
I'm almost always interested in a psychological or sociological study, Whitney. Are you referring specifically to a study of the regional differences you mentioned? (I thought you were at UT. Not so?)
~~
An interesting side issue to all this has been the Iraqi gov't's response. For one, their attempt to find out (or hush up) who took the video has been a Laurel & Hardy comedy. For another, it's interesting to me that who took the video has been the only thing they've shown any interest in. They don't seem to consider the manner in which Saddam was executed to be a problem at all. They just want to know who had the nerve to make it public.
These guys learn fast.
Interesting thought on regional differences, Whitney...
Maybe that gets me closer to explaining my confusion. Here in the South, I've heard many a sentence begin with the phrase, "Wull, I'll tell ya what we awta do..." And the completion of those sentences usually employ phrases such as "shoot 'em in the head," "nuke 'em," and on occasion, some version of tying a rope around someone's neck & taunting them while they die. Or worse.
These suggestions even coincide with avoiding those long appeals, etc.
Yet there wasn't much public rejoicing in my neck of the woods when the very suggestion took place, and although you guys are probably right, I'm still not convinced that the stereotypical Southerner's reaction is based on how the war is going in Iraq.
JU, do you think the reaction would be different if it was bin Laden?
I do. There wouldn't be a ticker-tape parade or sailors kissing girls on the sidewalks of Times Square or anything, but there would be some real "we owed him one" rejoicing.
As ridiculous as it sounds, I think Saddam has been the recipient of some sympathy in the U.S., probably more as backlash and rejection of GWB and what looks like a botched effort in Iraq.
Bin Laden enjoys no such favors. The toppling of the Taliban and the continued pursuit of Osama and al Qaeda in Afghanistan feels justifiable (because it is).
Saddam looked like a really bad guy whose biggest mistake was making GHWB look bad. Whether it's reality or not, that's the perception. Other evil dictators remain unscathed, but Saddam is hanged and Osama taunts us from Whoknowswhereistan.
And yeah, for those of us opposed to killing of any kind, executions are never cause for celebration.
Were you not in Austin (or at least somewhere in TX) for a while?
I'm so confused.
Terry -- whoknowswhereistan! Boy, I spent a week there one night!
As for Saddam's execution. Hussein was a symbol. I don't mean that to in ANY way diminish the atrocities he committed. But to Americans, he was a symbol and not much else (an obviously deranged symbol, but a symbol nonetheless). Alive or dead, he still symbolizes the same things (you can fill in the blanks for what he symbolizes), and those things haven't gone away. The symbol remains. So there's a hollow feeling in a lot of us.
Any of that make sense? I'm reading Derrida, so forgive my use of the word symbol a lot.
Whitney -- few people on this blog know the true joy of living in SoCal. That's why I don't ever bother making actual points in my comments. The beach is usually calling my name.
I do love Hawaii. The beaches are much better there. But wow, it's hard to get a job there. At least for the likes of me.
Hrm. Terribly, terribly confused. Oh, well. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
Saddam was a symbol, Mikey? I thought he was a horny toad.
I'm still not convinced that the stereotypical Southerner's reaction is based on how the war is going in Iraq.
What do you think it's based on, Al?
I really don't know (which was the impetus behind this post).
I still hope it has something to do with the last paragraph of Jeff's first comment - coming to see that violence isn't a real answer. But I'm not convinced that's it either.
I still hope that's where the sinking feeling in everyone's gut is coming from I guess...
The Americans ensured that Saddam Hussein became the one thing they did not want him to become: a martyr to the Sunni cause.
Violence by all parties has been seen as instrumental to producing the society each has dreamed of. So far, all it has produced is grief and hatred. Need to find a few paradigm, but I don't see it happening until the next administration.
Not with this rumored "surge" coming on.
Post a Comment
<< Home