A Reason To Keep Saddam Alive?

• December 29, 2006

An unsigned op/ed appearing in the The Boston Globe states that Saddam should be kept alive until he has faced all of the charges against him.
I’m sympathetic to the argument about Iraqis getting to see their former oppressor sit through the trials for all of the wrongs he did to them, but at some point common sense has to kick in. After all, as Mr. Tea says, how many times can we actually hang him?
At this point he has been convicted of enough crimes to send him to the gallows once already. Why drag this thing out? The longer Saddam’s trial drags out the longer Saddam has that Iraqi courtroom as a forum for his insane, evil rantings and the longer he’ll serve as an agitator in an already turbulent situation.
I say hang the bastard and get it over with. Now that he’s had his day in court, let him suffer the consequences and be done with him. The sooner he becomes a footnote in history, the better.

Tags: Politics, War On Terror

http://Array Bat One

Pilgrim,

I believe the Iraqi court has ruled that the current, second trial, the one involving the killing by poison gas (WMD!!!) of the Kurds, will continue despite the anticipated absence of the primary defendant.

Clearly a different set of rules than those we enjoy in this country, where a federal appeals court recently reversed the fraud convictions of Enron’s founder and CEO, Kenneth Lay, on the grounds that his death prevented him from continuing his appeals of those convictions.

(I note, parenthetically, that no one has yet been tried, convicted, or gone to jail for the debacle that was Global Crossing… least of all former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe who should have.)
Bat One

I say hang the bastard and get it over with. Now that he’s had his day in court, let him suffer the consequences and be done with him. The sooner he becomes a footnote in history, the better.

Few people to the right of Ramsey Clark or Medea Benjamin would disagree with your sentiment about Saddam. But there is a more salient, less emotional point about his impending date with the gallows… one alluded to by Jay Tea over at Wizbang. And that is current Iraqi law.

Saddam is no longer our concern. He was turned over to Iraqi jurisdiction, and Iraqi tribunal, and he is, rightly, answering to the Iraqi people for his crimes, not to us, and certainly not to any pathetic “world court” as did Slobodan Milosovitz. What we want, any of us, is of no concern whatsoever.
Pilgrim

Bat,

The point you made earlier was a good one about Saddam not being our problem any more. It will be interesting to see how all the “leave Iraq to the Iraqis” crowd will respond to this.
Pilgrim

If a person can be tried in abstentia, why can’t they be tried when they’re dead/ same thing. The guy’s just not physically present on the stand.

Hang him and let Allah sort it out.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

You know what they can have as many trials as they need in Iraq, but I would recommend getting the sentence over so there is no chance for Saddam to ever come back.
Bat One

Pilgrim,

Thank you! I am fascinated by those self-righteous critics on the left who disparage the President’s attempts to bring a sustainable, functioning system of self-government to Iraq, as if the Iraqi people were somehow not worthy of those efforts, who then turn right around and list a series of demands which we ought to tell the Iraqis what to do, how to do it, and when.

And what is most amusing, in a pathetic sort of way, is that most of these intellectually hapless critics call themselves Democrats… oblivious to the irony.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Very true, Bat. Too often folks here in America forget that the Iraqis are sovereign, and while U.S. opinion carries a lot of weight over there, ultimately it’s their call.

SayAnythingBlog.com

A Reason To Keep Saddam Alive?

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments