My Feelings On Saddam's Trial

[Infinite Hope]

If we had released him to the Iraqis completely, they'd have drug him through the streets the first day.

Our involvement merely slowed that process to push them toward using deliberation, no matter how hasty their first national murder trial was, no matter how puppeted their first national trial was. While surely we influenced it, I think it sets a better precedent for democracy than the precedent that would have been set if he had been drug through the streets by the Shi'a.

We can hate Bush and all he's done while being realistic.

I want democracy work despite everything bush has done - I don't want everything to fail just to further prove his incompetance.

[Benhurst]

1. Do you know anything about Iraq's history, the subversion of its

democracy by the British and American Oil interests, and the enabling of Saddam by the American Government in order to counter Iran?

When is the last time you saw Bush walk among his people, even with the protection of his goon squad? A police officer was killed a month or so ago because The Leader had to speed at break-neck speed through one of his own army bases for his own protection.

A kangaroo court trial of even a hated dictator sets NO precedent for democracy, any more than Bush's "unitary executive" sets one for this once-great Republic.

[knowledgeispwr]

11. Yes, I have studied the history. Using a court sets a precedent of using

an institution rather than vigilante justice.

[ProfessorGAC]

14. Show Trials Are Not An Admirable Institution

The verdict and sentence were pre-ordained. That is not a sound precedent. Did you feel they were an effective tool for the Soviet Union in the Stalin era?
The Professor

[Benhurst]

15. A kangaroo court established under an occupying force sets

no such standard.

[kentuck]

2. Wish in one hand and...

shit in the other and see which gets full first. Freedom? Democracy? Do you actually believe that bullshit?

[SanCristobal]

3. To be fair,

the one thing the Iraqi government has managed is to get all three of Iraq's ethnic groups involved in the political process. It has failed at everything else, but they do get out the vote.

[TahitiNut]

4. The majority of those "involved in the political process" in Iraq don't even stay in Iraq.

They live in Syria, Jordan, and Iran ... even in London ... not believing Iraq safe enough to to live. By "involved," I mean part of the elected and appointed government.

Funny how this doesn't get much press.

The Iraqi "government" is barely functioning. The parliament was not able to meet in December because it could not attain a quorum. Many key Iraqi politicians live most of the time in London, and much of parliament is frequently abroad. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki does not control large swathes of the country, and could give few orders that had any chance of being obeyed.

http://www.juancole.com/2006/12/top-ten-myths-about-ira...

[kentuck]

5. Meaningless...

They voted under Saddam also. Nobody believes the vote in Iraq means they have a "democracy"....except maybe you and a few right-wing nuts.

[Benhurst]

6. As a matter of fact,

The Bush Crime Family's fingerprints were all over the Iraqi election.



UNITED NATIONS, Jan. 26 -- The United Nations' top elections official, Carina Perelli, sharply criticized U.S. military forces in Iraq Wednesday for distributing material urging Iraqis to vote in the country's elections Sunday.

Perelli and other U.N. officials are concerned that such U.S. military involvement is compromising efforts to convince the Iraqi public that Iraqis are directing the elections.

Perelli said she and the top U.N. election official in Iraq, Carlos Valenzuela, have been "asking, begging military commanders" to stop the distribution of material promoting the elections. Officials from the U.N.-backed Iraqi Electoral Commission have also asked the United States to stop, she said.

...

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39753-2005Jan26...

[Igel]

9. I'll disagree with others a little.

And I think the election was far from meaningless. It got the major groups to vote, but how they voted was symptomatic of the basic problem in Iraq, and a bit depressing: Almost nobody separates their interests from their ethnicity/sect/honor group. The voting went almost entirely by ethnicity and sect: Secular Sunni, religious Sunni, secular Shi'ite, religious Shi'ite (with subdivisions by 'figure for imitation')....

Unfortunately, while I don't think * is omniscient and all-powerful and therefore don't think that he or his engaged in much manipulation of the vote, I also don't think that getting out the vote was all that big a deal. At the time I was agnostic on the matter.

[knowledgeispwr]

12. It's unlikely. What I said was that the trial...

is more likely to encourage democracy than vigilante justice.

[jarab]

7. I, too, would love for Iraq to swear off its barbaric ways ....

despite all the errors of 43 and in spite of the fact that his legacy would be enhanced. I would like to see some democratic form, whatever might be compatible with their culture. Ours won't work for everyone the way it does for us; it would have to be tailored in each instance.
But here's the DU thinking, if I may:

Why Iraq when there are other despots (remember the axis of evil for starters?)? We cheer Castro's dire illness, but we've never brought him around to western style democracy.
Is theirs (Iraq) even a fledgling democracy? I would suspect any country could have negotiated that voter turnout with three American GIs manning each voting booth and entire companies making the roadways to the voting stations safe.

Is that sentencing court independent, or are they doing the will of GWB? You do know we said we were turning over this and that to the Iraqis over the past year, yet when push came to shove there were our own comrades front and center.
If there is any manipulation by the U.S. in any area of this sentencing or appeal process, then it's all rotten.

We couldn't even turn over Saddam to the new democracy because we feared his escape. A justified fear, imo.

Is it our place to police the world of evil, and do we get to say which continent begins our enforcement?
It may not be a Christian thing to do (it truly isn't), but when one lies the way this administration has done for six years it's nor putting on tinfoil to suspect their every move. It's not being excessively judgmental when one calls a spade a spade. It's being honest.
Trust is earned, and once earned, even then it might be squandered again.

This administration hates Saddam so much - the reasons are guessed at - I think we should have had an independent body do this trial ...and I agree it had to be done. Generally, if there's proven bias in a trial there are other recourses.
I personally "think" he would have been found guilty in a fair trial, but my thinking doesn't count when someone's life is on the line.

Iraq hasn't done ONE successful thing independent of the U.S. since we invaded (the proper word); why would we think they "independently" gave Saddam justice? And, one would have to admit it was their justice to dish out to their own former dictator.

All this back and forth is aimless at this juncture because the plans are in motion, and he may be already hanged before I hit "post message".
jmo, as always -

...O...

[Bluerthanblue]

8. democracy can not be spread with carpet bombs and

by the point of a gun-

Democracy can only be built by a populace dedicated to working to live in concert with others that we may not agree with, but with whom agree to live at peace with- There needs to be some kind of common 'thread'- and if religion is the leading factor- there cannot be a democracy- In pre-bush Iraq Christians, Muslims and Kurds lived and practiced their faith- Iraq was 'unique' because of this reality- There is little hope that any lasting non-theocratic leadership will ever be established in this area again.

You claim to desire to be realistic- I'd encourage you to give up YOUR desire for 'democracy' to be established in Iraq- You cannot 'dictate' to the people of Iraq, what kind of lasting governance they will have, or should have.- Because THEY (the people of Iraq) are the ones who will have to live work with the 'government' they choose, or allow. Not you- and not I.

[Texasgal]

10. I am just confused here...

Iraq has been hanging and executing criminals for decades!

This is what THEY do. THEIR court system sentenced him.

I don't understand the problem here.

[knowledgeispwr]

13. Right. n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

17. Then, You're Both Wrong

At least you've got company.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

16. The Trial Was A Sham

When Stalinist Soviets held show trials and then executed their "defendants", did you feel the same way? Now, i admit that the dissidents were innocent, but some of the generals who were put through the show trials during Stalin's military purge were as horrible to the Soviet people as Saddam was to the Iraqis.

Did you say about those generals "this is what they do, what's the problem"? If you did, shame on you. Nobody deserves to be executed as the pre-ordained outcome of a phony trial.
The Professor

[Bluerthanblue]

18. are you trying to say that the 'government'

that exists in the area of this world formerly known as Iraq, is fully functioning?

Functioning well enough, and without Outside influences and manipulation that this 'trial and pending execution' can be even jokingly seen as legitimate?????

I've got a bridge i'd like you to have a look at.......


Trying to claim that "IRAQ" (whatever that name might represent right now) is anything other than an ocean of chaos with a few heavily barricaded islands aka.'emerald cities'- is foolishness.

Or denial- WE are 'controlling' Iraq- or trying to- and we aren't doing a very good job of it-

THEY don't have anything we don't prop up and orchestrate TexasGal- I think you really know that at heart- it's just easier to pretend 'we' don't have our fingers in the pie?

[Texasgal]

19. We must likely do

have our fingers in the pie.

Thing is, that Iraq has always had some sort of DP as a sentence. That has not changed. I am just curious as to why people are so shocked that he will be put to death for his crimes.

I am also very bothered by the fact that no one has even brought up the victims here. He gassed innocent women and children! Halabja was one of the worst crimes of humanity ever!

Iraq has a death penalty, the have for decades... hell, maybe even centuries. THEY are utilizing their will.

[Benhurst]

20. Under international law, even war criminals such as Saddam and

George Walker Bush are entitled to fair trials.

Saddam's show trial was a joke. He should have been sent to the Hague for a fair trial by the International Court of Justice; but such a trial would have revealed secrets the Bush Crime Family did not want told.

[Bluerthanblue]

21. Saddam is not being killed because he gassed

innocent women and children- That was not what he was 'convicted' of doing-

His guilty verdict about the villiage of "Dujail in 1982. It was there that the country's then president had 148 Shi'ite Muslims put to death following a failed attempt on his life."

Halabja was a terrible disaster, but far from one of the worst crimes of humanity ever- (in my view- there are far too many candidates for that 'distinction' to begin listing them)

And If we are going to support condemning Hussien for Halabja, then Rumsfeld, Bush Sr. and many others need to stand trial as well- including the american companies that produced the gas, and the American soldiers that provided co-ordinates to the Iraqi's who supposedly released the gas.

It's too complicated to put in a nice tidy package, brush the crumbs from our hands and say "Tsk, Tsk" TexasGal- We've had the death penalty for centuries- that doesn't make it right-

You so desperately want to believe this is the Iraqi people 'utilizing their will' i'd feel much less shame and guilt if i could honestly believe that myself, but i can't-

WE control what is permitted and not permitted in Iraq- that much is clear- with the exceptions of the IED's- and they aren't 'going away'- anymore than we could leave Iraq in the imaginable future, and have any semblence of *'s vision for Iraq remain-

There is nothing we can do for the dead- except to try and stop others from dying pre-maturely-

it's a lose = lose battle.

peace,
blu