Yes, it was a shabby trial, not that Saddam did not deserve to die or be shut away, but the very fact that he died with the utmost dignity, or like a martyr, if the camera shots give true indication.

Unfortunately, it could give the impression of the very ancient - means to the end doctrine - of the Old Testament.

As one of the Tribe of Abraham, and as a Muslim, Saddam's sadism could be justified, as aspects of sadism are always involved in a total slaughter of an enemy or unbeliever, as was given the go-ahead by a God not only in the original Promised Land of the Old Testament, but as all similar slaughter has been done since in the name of religion, which sadly includes Western Christian colonialism.

Maybe the Sermon on the Mount is the one prayer meant for us to help solve the above rotten riddle?

He should have been shot in that spider hole he was hiding in and buried on the spot. No prayers, no grave, no marker. No recognition. And no glory. "But, but, he deserved a fair trial". No, I say. He should have maybe been dragged out upon the street and given to the women for punishment. Now that would have been justice. :-)
In the end, Saddam, his brother in law, and his chief justice got the measure of justice they had handed down to the Iraqi people. How can one be more just than that?

I shudder to think what may have happened had Mr Hussein been found not guilty. We would have been treated to articles about a 'mass murderer and dictator' escaping punishment.

As an Australian, I think people such as Hicks, Hussein and his cohorts should be tried in a fashion that suits the times and that has an Australian flavour.

How about trying them before a kangaroo court, with Judge Lynch presiding?

Bushbred

Particularly on high profile issues like Hussein I think the US only feigned a hands-off approach. This included his execution.

I get the feeling that the US permitted the Iraqis to execute Saddam Hussein in such a tauntingly primitive way to convince the world that the US/Coalition should remain in Iraq to, in effect, manage that country's affairs permanently. The picture painted is that only the forced and final implementation of western democracy and judicial ideals will lift Iraq from mayhem. You can't extract Iraq's oil if there is mayhem.

The trial had extensive Coalition input (behind the scenes) but the Iraqis were left to themselves for the hanging. It appears the judges and prosecution received extensive assistance from Coalition advisers particularly in gathering evidence. From his capture in December 2003 Hussein was held by US forces primarily at Camp Cropper, Baghdad. Iraq and the US may insist that he was under Iraqi control, but, the nationality of his close-in guards would tell the story.

It may be that the day of the execution was the first and only day Hussein was passed into full Iraqi custody.

Coalition criticism (Blair, Democrats, Republicans/Bush in the US) of the manner of Hussein's execution comes too easily.

By having full control of Hussein the Iraqis were given enough rope to hang/damage any impression of Iraqi independence that would be acceptable to the Coalition.

On a similar tack the more the US makes sounds about considering withdrawal the more its actions point at a desire for permanent residence. There are strong rumours Bush will announce an extra 20,000 men for Iraq within the next 2 weeks. Withdrawal by sending more troops to Iraq is a hard concept to sell.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Is there anyone who seriously believes that Saddam was innocent of his alleged crimes? Personally I'm satisfied that he was guilty. And I agree that he was correctly sentanced to death. That is an appropriate punishment because it offers, hopefully, some relief to the families and communities throughout the world who have been so sadly affected by Saddam and his brutal regime.
I do have an issue with hanging. It think it is enough to simply put the Saddams quietly down, perhaps by injection, maybe a more subtle method involving a hidden sleeping potion causing a slumber, during which the criminal is overcome by whatever toxin needed to end the life. Hanging has no merit (nor does electocution or gas), it is brutal, and reflects poorly upon the administraters of the punishment. Finally, whilst those that bleat about the poor show of justice annoy the crud out of me, I still appreciate their endeavors to maintain a high standard of justice in the world. But they ought to target their protests more thoughtfully. Pick on a case where there might be some reasonable doubt, and champion that.

I think that most of the people on this forum have missed the point of the article completely. It was not about the guilt or innocence of Saddam Hussein but the shambles that was his trial and execution. It's funny how people presume themselves to be judge, jury and executioner in a case that, in practical terms, is so far removed from their own lives. I don't care if his guilt is obvious to the average Joe, I still value a fair trial and it doesn't appear as though Saddam has received one. It's also funny how a crude and uncivil execution and even capital punishment itself is suddenly ok. Cheap justice is not justice.

Don't worry Tak. There's been a similar discussion running on Andrew Bartlett and many there missed it, too. After 120-odd posts its degenerated into a brawl over abortion and alleged innocence of embryos ( we cogniscinti know different concerning these crafty sausages though, dont we? ).
Congrat Plantagenet, a single post involving depth; standing out like a gem against the surrounding bog of bs.

At least we can agree on two things

1 The manner of his trial , whilst maybe lacking in the refinements of a western court system, was still more orderly than the trials of his opponents when he was in power.

2 The nature of his end, on the drop of a rope, was humane compared to the departure of some of his victims, feet first into a shredding machine.

Working on the basis of "We reap what we sow", all in all, Sadaam got it pretty good, certainly better than his victims.

The world is not a perfect place where rules of procedure are followed without flaws or variation.

I would encourage those who are holding their breath, waiting for perfection, to please do it outdoors, it stinks up the house if no one checks and finds you suffocated a few days later, especially in this heat.

Aquarivs... I just noted you referred to the 'spider-hole' saddam was found in.

I'm a little curious about one thing... had you ever heard the term 'spider-hole' before they found saddam in one?
Have any Americans ever hidden in a spider-hole? Or do they only use the more familiar 'foxholes.'

I would have thought that saddam was nasty enough, without us having to create new terms specifically for him... it just reeks of managing peoples views, when really, he was bad enough for us to come to that conclusion ourselves, without being so blatantly led.

I suppose the propaganda machine always rolls on... I guess I just get a little annoyed when people don't object to it.

TurnRightTurnLeft

Fox-hole refers to a shallow hole dug for protection and used as a firing position. The fox-hole (American military slang)is akin to the British slip-trench, also used for individual cover and as a firing position. A spider hole is U.S. military slang for a small one-person foxhole, often camouflaged so that it can be used for ambushes. A spider hole is typically a shoulder-deep, protective, round hole, often covered by a camouflaged lid, in which a soldier can stand and fire a weapon. A spider hole differs from a foxhole in that a foxhole is usually deeper and its design emphasizes cover rather than concealment.

Spider-hole vis-a-vis Saddam Hussein refers to the hole they pulled him from where below he had lived for some time in a bigger hole. I think the term has been misused in this instance.

I don't know any American soldiers who hide in spider-holes.
I once watched several Americans run like hell for what could have been a fox-hole. I could barely see though because I was just peeking over the edge of what was a fairly new shell hole.

I don't understand, is what you mean that you object to their propaganda because it inhibits your propaganda and your propaganda is what? Based on what? That you think spider-hole was invented to demean Saddam Hussein?

"I would have thought that saddam was nasty enough, without us having to create new terms specifically for him... it just reeks of managing peoples views, when really, he was bad enough for us to come to that conclusion ourselves, without being so blatantly led."

bushbred

"Unfortunately, it could give the impression of the very ancient - means to the end doctrine - of the Old Testament."

Please stop trying to look for literal interpretations of the Old Testament. That is mainly the province of fundamentalist Christians, usually with a doubtful translation, rarely if ever in the original Hebrew. It was also used to effect by the medieval Church to justify persecution of non Christians by claiming , falsely that the Jews had a primitive law. In fact many scholars have noted that the Sermon on the Mount was largely a reinforcement of traditional Jewish views and not a change in direction. Read a book on Jewish and Muslim law.

But getting back to the article, why do we spend so much time on the trial and sentence of Saddam and ignore general issues of justice in the Middle East and a mention of the trial and possible death sentence in Bangla Desh of peace seeking journalist Salah Choudhury?

The left seem to be totally unwilling to question problems in some Islamic nations preferring to criticise the US, Britain, Spain etc. for their alleged attrocities and shortcomings. Why?

Fair enough aquarivs if that is the case... however I've yet to hear the term spider hole reference once in the media, prior to saddam being found in one. I was indeed implying that the term was keenly used to paint him as a villain, when such language was unnecessary. If you can point me to a media reference referring to a spider hole that is dated prior to the discovery of saddam, I'd be much obliged.

TurnRightThenLeft

Spider-hole; American Vietnam era-American Pacific era descriptor. You would have to find a news article no earlier than April 1975 to find such a reference. More likely even earlier?
News reporters in combat zones like to think that microphone they carry is a 80lb ruck and a FN all wrapped up in one. The first thing they want to learn is the jargon, not realizing most field jargon is fairly black humour. It's the soldiers way to find the bright side in a difficult situation.

There's this spider, called a trap door spider. Ambushes it's prey from these holes that they burrow and then make little lids out of spider webbing. Some bug comes crawling past unawares and spidie nabs it on the way by.

Japanese used them during the Pacific war, and the North Vietnamese did the same during their war with South Vietnam and the American army.

When your head is already on a swivel and your bladder or your sphincter holds the key to your last nerve ending, having an enemy pop out of nowhere dead in front or more like behind you... If you survive, naming that moment becomes important.
Not many think to carry a change of pants. :-)

funguy

Thanks - just did a little research.

The comments particularly from TRTL and aqvarivs are getting mighty interesting.

AQVARIVS I'm assuming you served in Vietnam and maybe a bit later on...? You can bring many learned perspectives on what it might be like in Iraq and Afghanistan that we "civvies" can only imagine.

Pete

Pete

I did get to Vietnam in the '80's and that war had long past but, one could still be killed by undetected land mines. Even today I think?

Elsewhere I did a bit of urban house to house. Kicking in doors and throwing grenades and clearing the place room by room. Dashing from pillar to post and spying around the corner. Wouldn't have been so bad if there had been just one side to the street. You spend most of your time with your shoulders scrunched up around your ears while you try to get further into your helmet. I spent a lot of time trying to find a way to get my butt under my helmet. I figured I could take one in the leg as long as I was pointed in the right direction to escape that first burst of gunfire.

Whats going on in Afghanistan and Iraq is even worse. Those poor soldiers have to police the streets as well as defend themselves from attack and they can't defend themselves until they're shot at. Which means a car bomb ignites, or an IED is triggered, or a man drops in front of you before you react. And if you do get ambushed by a bunch of al-qeada or talibani types and some civilian gets clipped in the firefight. Well, guess which side gets blamed.

I don't think the Americans lost a single soldier getting to Baghdad(?) but, lost 3000 as police.

Me. I'll go in hard and take my chances. I'm not going to go in and stand around in the sunshine with a poster board saying, "over here!"
:-)
Cheers!

aqvarivs

Thanks for the description mate.

Regards

Pete

Touche aquarivs. Clearly you have more knowledge of military lingo than I. It's probably more a case of the media running with the ball in this instance.
In review, I must admit I haven't seen as many negative suggestive terms during the course of the war, aside from 'axis of evil.'
I guess by and large the propagandists prefer positive spin, such as 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' or when legislating, items like the 'Patriot Act.'

I've yet to hear Saddam's palace referred to as a 'Fortress of Darkness' but heck, let's see what Ahmadinejad's referred to as in the upcoming weeks.