Nobody will argue that Saddam didn't get what he richly deserved. That doesn't mean, though, that the events that brought us to this point don't deserve some serious scrutiny and a cynical perspective.

I've long suspected that paying back Saddam for the assassination attempt on Bush's father in Kuwait was President Bush's primary motive for signing on to the neo-con agenda in attacking Iraq. There's too much info here to ignore - his "Fuck Saddam - we're taking him out" comment, the fact that he's kept Saddam's pistol as a trophy to show off to visitors, (if that's not psychologically revealing, I don't know what is - it seems to be his way of reminding others, and himself, "this guy was a threat to my family, and with my powers as commander-in-chief, I took him out."), the fact that he's mentioned numerous times, "this is the guy that tried to kill my father."

What I didn't find out until recently was that Laura Bush had accompanied Bush Sr. and Barbara Bush on that same trip to Kuwait, where the alleged assassination attempt was to have taken place. That means that, if successful, not only would Bush's parents have been killed, but his wife as well. I was sort of stunned to learn this, because, in my mind, it really does explain Bush's obsession with getting Saddam, to the exclusion of all else, even finding Osama bin Laden.

The president of the United States used the U.S. armed forces as his personal hit squad, and the U.S Treasury to foot the bill. Like a child playing with toy soldiers, except it's for real. I wouldn't have had a problem if Bush had authorized some black ops to take Saddam out. Probably illegal, but at least understandable. But, an entire war waged (incompetently) essentially to satisfy one man's bloodlust? An impeachable offense, if only the concrete evidence existed to prove it. All we'll have is circumstantial evidence and gut instinct.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/11/1047144969140.html

"It's easy for the left in the States, caught up in criticism of and loathing for the Bush Administration and it's failed adventure, to forget that missing WMD notwithstanding, Saddam Hussein was a monster"

It's easy for the far right to constantly construct strawmen. Stop telling us what we think. We're not all goose-stepping nod-headed idiots like you. We actually disagree with each other on things, which is what makes us strong, and what makes it easy for people who wear the same armband and march in a straight line to look powerful.

We don't all think alike and I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing that. The reason we're on the "left" has to do with not being so damned cock-sure about everything. I have a lot of "conservative" beliefs too. Back in the 70s, I would have been considered a Republican. But my God, shut the hell up about what the rest of us are.

I'm not left, nor am I right. I am upside, all the way, baybee. You can keep your polarization. Save it for the bears your greed is drowning.

Let me see if I have this right. Saddam should not have been executed. The trial was handled poorly. There shouldn't have been a trial at all.

The author believes that the trial will provoke "intense questions about whether his trial was fair". Gee, what result wouldn't?

He wonders "what the fallout will be". Same as we have been seeing for years now.

He believes that the trial should have promoted "national reconciliation". On what planet does this guy live?

He believes that "this act of revenge helped Saddam portray himself one last time as a symbol of Sunni Arab resistance, and became one more incitement to sectarian warfare." Wouldn't sparing Saddam's life have portrayed him as a symbol of the Sunni Arab's brutal dominance during his years in power and become one more incitement to sectarian warfare?

I wonder if the author would have been happy if Saddam had been turned over to his Sunni pals for trial, received a pardon, a pension and a retirement home in the south of France.

Now that Hussein is dead, I wonder which dictator/thug/criminal the US is currently propping up will be labelled an "enemy of freedom" ten years from now, if not sooner? Will they be Sunni, Shiite, or Kurd? Maybe some warlord in Africa? Indonesia? Pakistan? Russia? Iran?

So long as the neoconservative philosophy of global crusade remains in effect, there will always be someone out there somewhere who is an imminent threat to the existence of the most powerful country in human history.

Despite all the moral turpritude surrounding Saddam's demise, I think we abjectly and forever diminish whatever sense of morality we have by invoking this murderer's corrupted sense of morality. Unfortunately, such solutions sustain mankind's greatest hypocracy.

The inevitable Middle Eastern firestorm over Saddam's execution might perhaps have been muted, if not eliminated, had he been tried and sentenced by an international court, either the ICC or a special court specifically sitting to hear this case. The weakness of this idea, of course, is that there would be no way to predetermine the verdict.

I'm not sure what prompted your rant, but perhaps you should calm down and read my post again. I don't know why you believe I'm on the "far right?!" Is that paranoia, or just very poor perception?

My point was simple. Most posts are discussing the trial and execution purely from an American perspective; and many are suggesting that it's little more than a US-orchestrated show trial. I disagree.

Regardless of the bad judgement that led us into this war, or the disasterous tactics subsequently employed, Saddam's finale really wasn't about the US or the Bush Administration. It's about Iraq; the Iraqis really are the main players in this one. It's understandable that we can lose sight of this given the current mess, but nevertheless true.

First, I don't see any problem with the trial. It is similar to trying somebody for a crime that was committed in full view with millions of witnesses. Impartial jurors are impossible. The conclusion was inevitable.

Was it revenge or justice? In the scope of things, who cares? It is not for the US to impose our justice system, flawed as it is, on the rest of the world. Could Bush have gotten the sentence commuted? Probably, but why should we meddle in their courts? It's their problem. But did we meddle? Probably.

Was it a good idea? Again, who knows. I imagine we'll find out.

Why was it so important that he be executed this year? Well, without even reaching for my tin foil hat, I can recall that Bush is committed to making decisions on how to proceed in Iraq in early January. I can also recall that Bush just hates to have to change his mind and can not under any circumstances admit that he was wrong. He can, however say that the death of Saddam marked the end of a chapter in the Iraqi reconstruction. Everything was wonderful up to that point. Now it is time to move on, and since the situation is different, different tactics/methods must be used. He wasn't ever actually wrong, see... Man is a rationalizing animal, not a rational animal.

It is my opinion that Saddam was executed to spare Bush a little embarrassment. Everything else was secondary. Since this is probably unprovable, note that it is only my opinion.