Like millions around the world, I watched the coverage of Saddam Hussein’s execution last night, wondering if we were going to be treated to the live video or whether we’d be treated to simulations like this one. Eventually, I suppose the video will be all over the Internet, but I’m not certainly it’s something I really need to see. Ultimately, I’m not at all certain that Hussein’s execution will even matter all that much.
(For all you Right-wing Evangelical types, Jesus has posted his own video commentary on Hussein’s execution.)
So Saddam Hussein’s dead? So what? What, really, is going to change in Iraq? Random car bombs will still bring random death and suffering to innocent Iraqis merely trying to make it through another day. More American soldiers will be killed by snipers and roadside bombs…and for what? Is anything really going to change? Will Iraq suddenly be a better place now that Saddam Hussein is roasting in Hell? Will Sunni and Shia alike finally come to their senses and realize that they’re better together than apart? Yeahm right….
Realistically, of course, exactly nothing will change. Iraq will continue to be the single most randomly lethal place on the face of the planet. Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader © will continue pouring yet more American lives and billions of tax dollars into a war we can neither win nor prosecute properly. And the Grim Reaper will continue having a field day. Same as it ever was.
So Saddam Hussein is dead? Big deal….
After all is said and done, George W. managed to kill the guy who had attempted to assassinate his dad. It only cost three thousand American lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
Why are impeachment hearings not being held?
OK, maybe this is a good time to tally:
1. Bush has caused the deaths of 200000-650000 Iraqis in 4 years. Isn't this more than anyone claims Saddam Hussein caused in 32 years?
2. By about March 2007, more Americans will have died by Bush's hands than by Osama bin Laden's.
IMPEACHMENT AND TRIAL NOW.
Indeed.
The Liberal Media are functioning perfectly. Not a single reference, that I've seen, to the fact that the "crimes" for which Sadaam was convicted and killed took place while he was supported by USA-Reagan, USA-Rumsfeld, & Co. The gassing of the Kurds would have been the next charge against him--and the US supplied much of the military equipment. and again sent official support for him 11 months after the event
The Liberal Media are functioning perfectly. Not a single reference, that I've seen, to the fact that the "crimes" for which Sadaam was convicted and killed took place while he was supported by USA-Reagan, USA-Rumsfeld, & Co. The gassing of the Kurds would have been the next charge against him--and the US supplied much of the military equipment. and again sent official support for him 11 months after the event
Wow...two-fisted, stereo KoolAid swilling, RBD. No one denies that Saddam was a bad man, and that if there ever was a convincing argument for the death penalty, it was Saddam Hussein. Perhaps if you could stop channelling Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh for a moment, you'd understand that NO ONE here is condoning any of Saddam's crimes. Yes, Saddam's execution is a great victory for Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader © and his fellow neoCon theocrats. My point is that it changes exactly nothing in Iraq...and it doesn't.
Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying or why. You seem to have reacted very angrily at something or other and are lashing out without really reading, and bothering to understand, what I said.
Who is condoning Saddam's crimes? My "crimes" (in quotations) is a hardly veiled reference to the US Kangaroo court--a Quisling court-- that judged him. And I would not have expected you to think that my "Liberal Media" label echoes O'Reilly-Limbaugh etc. On several occasions PRS has carried good stuff about Our Liberal Media--our "Liberal Media," that is. Remember?
The great victory for our Shrub is precisely the point. The general tone in OLM is, yes, that the execution probably changes nothing in Iraq but that it is a worthy accomplishment for US foreign policy. Not to mention the overt complicity of the US in the very crimes of which Saddam was convicted and killed is on a par with OLM's treatment of the WMD in 2002-2003, from the NY Times to the major TV networks to just about everyone else.
No, Saddam is not a convincing argument for the death penalty.
Bush and Blair and Osama and Iranians and radical Shiites are all celebrating.