Sadam is dead! hell yes!

[dave_mc]

The more offences that Saddam was charged with and that he would need to be tried over would increase the likelihood that lawyers would manage to get the whole proceedings tied up in red tape for years.

So they went for the one that they knew they could get him for without getting sidelined for years.

OK - I concede that they may also want to avoid negative publicity over supplying weapons etc to his regime.

I am left feeling that this was all a late clean-up by George junior to finish off what his father didn't have the guts/stupidity to (and it wasn't politically provident to do so either)

that's a good point. they can't execute him several times, obviously enough, if they know they can nail him on one case, might as well go with that...

[JJretroTONEGOD]

I wonder if Bush will ever get put in trial in a court of justice for killing innocent Iraqi's! and innocent people, after all it's supposed to be his responsibility, and I also wonder what else the American goverment have hidden from the world?

I have a cousin who has actually been in Iraq, and appently there's lots of drinking going on in British and American troops all day every day.

This is a SERIOUS issue!

keep em coming people, looks like I started something here  

[Fubar]

that's a good point. they can't execute him several times, obviously enough, if they know they can nail him on one case, might as well go with that...

The problem with this is that groups of people then feel that justice hasn't been done for them, this has been a big issue for various kurdish groups in particular but also for everyone else persecuted by Saddam. This is not a good thing to have happen when they are attempting to build a United Iraq!


Bush and Blair stand no chance of ending up charged with war crimes. Whilst they are guilty as hell, the victors are never actually indicted.

[Muzzzz]

okay, the saddam regime sucked, but nobody thought to consider what effects his execution would have in iraq (cough *riots* cough). The execution was wrong. Could you imagine if Iraq invaded Britain or America and executed Blair or Bush on charges of killing innocent Iraqis? Saddam's execution was just a poorly-thought-out flexing of political muscles.

[dave_mc]

that's a good point. they can't execute him several times, obviously enough, if they know they can nail him on one case, might as well go with that...

The problem with this is that groups of people then feel that justice hasn't been done for them, this has been a big issue for various kurdish groups in particular but also for everyone else persecuted by Saddam. This is not a good thing to have happen when they are attempting to build a United Iraq!


Bush and Blair stand no chance of ending up charged with war crimes. Whilst they are guilty as hell, the victors are never actually indicted.

true. as I've (doubtless) said in the past, they were after him from the very start. "we'll get rid of him one way or another"...

[I_cant_play]

Frankly I found it hard to take his trial seriously. Not only was the trial itself a joke, but he's being charged with killing 100+ people? If that were good reason for a leader of a nation to be executed, not many US presidents (the ones elected since the beginning of the cold war) would have died in their sleep. I think Saddam was a terrible person but not any worse than many others that were allowed to live normal lives after committing attrocities on civillian populations. In addition, I think most people could see that removing him from power in Iraq would simply create a power vacuum that the terrorists the US accused Saddam of collaborating with would be waiting to fill. As much as he was a horrible person, he brought relative stability to the region.