Revenge Killings Are Not About Justice

By TChris, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Sat May 23, 2009 at 05:35:15 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Many Iraqis are unhappy that Steven Green will not be executed for the atrocities he committed in Iraq, including the rape of a teenage girl and the murder of her family. A Sunni leader considers the sentence "insulting for Iraq's honor" while a leader of the family's tribe said:

“This is a tribal issue, and we cannot accept any moderate sentence except death. His life is the only cost that we will accept.”

If execution is the only "moderate sentence" the tribe will accept, one wonders what a harsh sentence might look like. Killing Green's family, raping his children, and burning down his house? A belief in eye-for-an-eye punishment or revenge is the reason Americans most frequently cite for their support of the death penalty. While it isn't surprising to hear similar views expressed in Iraq, particularly with regard to Green's horrific crimes, killing for vengeance or honor is not justice. [more ...]

As this blogger observed, Saddam Hussein's hanging was a revenge killing. It's easy to argue that Hussein deserved to die.

Many might see it as justified, but of course revenge killings are always justified -- by the motive of revenge.

Iraqis, like Americans, have little reason to view George W. Bush as a beacon of moral clarity, but in his bumbling way he managed to articulate the same point:

GEORGE BUSH has said the chaotic execution of Saddam Hussein looked like "kind of a revenge killing" and showed that the Iraqi government "has still got some maturation to do".

Anyone in the United States, Iraq, or elsewhere who equates killing for revenge or honor with justice has "got some maturation to do." Steven Green's death would not have made Iraq or the United States a more just country.

< Saturday Open Thread | Nuggets-Lakers Game 3: Go Nuggets! >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

TalkLeft's DMCA Infringement Notice Policy

Revenge Killings Are Not About Justice | 14 comments (14 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

does the tribe really deserve that harshness (5.00 / 4) (#1)
by 3cats on Sat May 23, 2009 at 06:29:34 PM EST

"This is a tribal issue, and we cannot accept any moderate sentence except death. His life is the only cost that we will accept."
If execution is the only "moderate sentence" the tribe will accept, one wonders what a harsh sentence might look like. Killing Green's family, raping his children, and burning down his house?

I think that is kind of harsh. I read it as the tribal leader misspoke and meant to say we will not accept any moderate sentence, we will only accept death. Obviously their values are different than yours, but to suggest that they somehow would support it if the tragedy that happened to this family if it happened to an American is a little offensive to me. I have not read anything that gave me any reason to believe they would under any circumstances support an atrocity of that nature. And it offends me because an American committed the atrocities and it seems the story is being turned into a "how uncivilized are those people anyway" story. JMO no offense.

: I did not (none / 0) (#6)
by TChris on Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:23:50 PM EST

suggest that Iraqis would support a random act of violence against an American family. My point is that "eye for an eye" vengeance against Green would involve rape, murder, and arson. The eye for an eye philosophy of punishment matches extreme brutality with extreme brutality. I am not condemning Iraq as an "uncivilized" country; I am condemning the "eye for an eye" philosophy (which many Americans accept) as uncivilized.

how uncivilized are these people? (3.00 / 1) (#2)
by cpinva on Sat May 23, 2009 at 06:53:08 PM EST

actually, pretty damn uncivilized, to be blunt. notice the "tribe" was referred to? not the community, not the country, the tribe. we're talking old testament here. these people are still operating in BCE time.

just because their values are different from mine, doesn't make their values worth a damn. this whole "different cultures" bit is a crock, designed to make us feel guilty because we abhor abhorrent "cultures".

sorry clyde, i don't buy into it.

mr. green is an abomination to all of us, i hope he rots. however, let's not forget, it was because of the bush administration's actions that the army found it necessary to lower its standards, to the point where a mr. green was allowed in to begin with. he was a ticking time bomb from the moment he got to boot camp.

A troubling concept... (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by DeborahNC on Sat May 23, 2009 at 10:01:46 PM EST

I find many troubling tenets in the Old Testament, but many Christians and Jews in our own country and abroad embrace those ideas and incorporate them into their own lives. That's why so many people in this country support some of our harshest laws, e.g.,the death penalty. Moreover, I don't want to necessarily designate those two religions only, because others around the world hold similar beliefs.

I guess my point is that Iraqis are not alone in adhering to those types of principles. "Uncivilized" behavior can be found worldwide, even or especially in our own country.


I dunno (none / 0) (#8)
by Steve M on Sat May 23, 2009 at 09:34:56 PM EST

Either they're civilized enough to speak English, or else we're maybe being a little harsh based upon a translation. It's our choice to translate the word as tribe, after all.


: Actually, the middle eastern (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Inspector Gadget on Sat May 23, 2009 at 09:47:08 PM EST

cultures do refer to themselves as members of tribes. It's just a word that defines the group they belong to. Not sure what is so uncivilized about the word, we still have tribal cultures here and there's nothing uncivilized about it.

I don't really buy into that whole deal (none / 0) (#11)
by MrConservative on Sat May 23, 2009 at 10:35:49 PM EST

But I think every society should learn the importance of respecting human rights and dignity.


We have, and continue to (none / 0) (#4)
by Inspector Gadget on Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:04:47 PM EST

put people to death here for lesser crimes than what Green did. Not sure what justifies the tone of self-righteousness in the post.

We think our system is best because it is ours, it is both all we know and what we have been told. Maybe someone should admit that our system is far less successful at deterring violent crime than theirs is. Or, maybe, their culture is simply less violent.

Iraq did nothing to us. They were not the perpetrators of 9/11, they did not have WMDs, they were not harboring and/or training terrorists, and they were not preparing to harm Americans. Iraqi's have every right to want to see some suffering handed down to people who went beyond the military actions and personally murdered and raped their citizens. If that is wrong, then insist the pirate be sent back to Somalia to face his own courts and justice system.

I do not (none / 0) (#5)
by TChris on Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:17:30 PM EST

think "our system is best." No country with as many executions and imprisoned citizens as the United States can claim to have the best criminal justice system.

My post is not intended as a put-down of Iraq. My point is that the sentiments now expressed in Iraq are the same as the sentiments expressed by American supporters of the death penalty: justice means "eye for an eye," justice means vengeance. I think that view of "justice" is seriously mistaken, whether it's advocated in the US or in Iraq or anywhere else. I thought the last paragraph of my post made that clear.


: Thanks for the clarification, (none / 0) (#7)
by Inspector Gadget on Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:31:21 PM EST

although the last paragraph is the only one where one finds criticism of the death penalty as being universal.
Invoking a quote from GWB needed a head count of his Texas death penalties, and a reminder of his slip of the tongue, "this is the guy who tried to kill my dad" comment before attacking Iraq to clarify the inclusion of his thoughts. Otherwise, the exposure of such hypocrisy can be missed.

OK (none / 0) (#12)
by MrConservative on Sat May 23, 2009 at 10:38:33 PM EST

I agree that he should not be put to death. I cannot agree that this judgment is consistent. This was one of the worst murders I've heard of.


true enough, (none / 0) (#14)
by cpinva on Sun May 24, 2009 at 12:05:51 PM EST

At least the Iraqis are not hypocritical.

just insane.

the death penalty, regardless of what country it occurs in, is always about revenge. we just pretty it up by making noises about "justice". if we truly believed that, executions would still be public events, not shrouded behind brick walls and bars, taking place in the middle of the night.

tell me, how were mr. green's actions any worse than those of the "manson family"? there've been many horrific cases, in this country, where the perpetrators received life sentences, many of them far, far worse than those committed by mr. green and his buddies.

Not sure what is so uncivilized about the word, we still have tribal cultures here and there's nothing uncivilized about it.

simply put, it tends to reflect an inability to rise beyond the parochialism inherent in the basic reason for a tribes existence: survival.

tribes originated as a means for man's survival in the harsh physical environment he inhabited. as man learned to control his environment, the original purpose of the tribe tended to disappear, as did most tribes, in the civilized parts of the world.

hence, the use of the word "tribe", to define a group, other than in a strictly ceremonial sense, tends to identify that group as not having achieved basic, modern civilized norms.

on one hand (none / 0) (#16)
by of1000Kings on Sun May 24, 2009 at 05:32:57 PM EST

you've argued that America is the greatest country in the world...

on the other hand you've argued that America should be more like other countries that aren't as interested in civil rights...

still not sure what to make of your comments yet...can't tell if you're just snarky, playing around or if you're sarcastic because of lost ideals or if you honestly believe what you type (although that's low on my list of probable reasons for commenting)...

If I had to put money on it I'd say you're just playing around...and I'm usually pretty good at making the right bet...

: might be your first candid response.. (none / 0) (#18)
by of1000Kings on Mon May 25, 2009 at 01:42:39 AM EST

and have to say, it came off pretty well...
like to see more of that in the future...