Saddam was always going to get the death penalty. There was never any doubt, although I was hoping that perhaps he would get the same fate as Rudolf Hess spending his whole life in Spandau(?) could have been arranged.

Saddam made three mistakes when playing brinkmanship with the US.

First mistake was not pulling out of Kuwait when he was given the chance. He seriously underestamited the US resolve.

The second was playing silly-buggers with the UN Weapons Inspectors. As it turned out Iraq had nothing to hide. The Inspectors should have been given free and easy access.

The third was underestimating how stupid GWB is.

The loss of life and destruction in Iraq is a terrible tragedy, and putting Hussein to death won’t make any difference to the ongoing killings and disorder. Bush has really dug himself and America into a fine mess. But what really astonished me over the weekend were remarks by Howard over whether there should be an early withdrawl of troops. He said words to the effect that it would be “a blow to US prestige”. Was Howard serious? What is more important: US prestige, or putting Iraq on a stable footing so Iraqi people can get on with living?

Of course he was a scape goat - he was a bad man but killing him willnot make one iota of difference - the announcement of hisdeath penalty not long before the US mid terms - that looked like a bit of stage managed drama - didn't seem to work any either.

If there was any justice in this world Sadamm and George W would be locked up together in one cell.
Poetic justice is the name.

I am going to be accused of stirring the pot here, but I have to ask if Saddam was as bad as they say... I mean really.

Look, no doubt he was a murdering swine, but we have all been lied to so comprehensively over the last few years. Are they lying about the extent of this too? Maybe the story of his crimes is not so awful as the propagandists would have us believe.

There are some things that you are not allowed to bring up in polite society. There are many things that are carefully omitted from the TV news and commentary. That always makes me wary.

It is the greatest pity that SH was not publicly tried in an open court. We all need to know what creates and sustains the SH's of this world, otherwise history will go on repeating.

If I have given offence to any of the victims of those times - forgive me.

Saddam was the only man who keep Iraq under one banner.He was an American generated dictator.The US wanted a balance of power in the Middle East so that world oil supplies would be secure at cheap prices.

If a cartel of Middle East countries fixed the price,then they could hold the world to ransom.Hence the US had a policy of divide and maintain competition.

Saddam kept a balance of power in the Middle East by keeping Iran and the other oil producers on the back foot.Now Iran is the emerging super power with one of the largest best trained armies in the world that the US is afraid of challenging.By getting rid of Saddam they have empowered Iran who could unite all the oil producers and make our lives very unpleasant.

Yes to a large extent,he is the scape goat for US incompetence.There are plenty more like him in Iraq,and uniting Iraq without a ruthless dictator will be nigh on impossible.

The US has made a mess if Iraq and created millions more who hate the West.Bin Laden must be laughing his head off because Bush and Rumsfelt have created more terrorists than Osama could have produced in his wildest imagination.I don't think the Muslims will accept democracy since it weakens their religion.They have witnessed the demise of religion in the West and there is no way the Mullahs will relinquish their power.

How do the US extricate themselves from this almighty mess?