Saddam - The Sacrificial Lion

Here is another comment by a US Citizen:
````The shabby, tawdry scene of Muqtada Sadr`s riffraff taunting their defenseless former tyrant evokes exactly this quality of hysterical falsity and bravado. While Saddam Hussein was alive, they cringed. Now, they find their lost courage, and meanwhile take the drill and the razor blade and the blowtorch to their fellow Iraqis. To watch this abysmal spectacle as a neutral would be bad enough. To know that the U. S. government had even a silent, shamefaced part in it is to feel something well beyond embarrassment.``
Hitchen

And an Indian:
``We are all lessened by that video execution - regardless of our beliefs, ideology or location. ``
Anamika

My comments on another site.

Man by nature is political.He loves to aggrandise and hence the psychological causes of conflict. Whether such men act as despots in individual societies or are backed by the political system, they all tend to aggrandise at the cost of the other. Hence dominance; violence a means of policy and so on.

In this case the two driving motivations are the Americain Ideology of democracy at whatever cost, and the spectre of a dethroned despot becoming a symbol of Arabism and Jehad. His demeanour in the entire process of execution, will certainly make him an adorable icon in the hearts and minds of many. So at one hand, he gets sympathy of even those who did not like him and a martyr for romanticson and those who will draw political mileage. Hence this perception of a Moral Dillema will haunt US interests in the Region.

How will USA change that? How will it win hearts and minds?

I for one shudder.

Cheerios

Here are some comments of interactors of Daily Telegrah. I feel that this discussion should take place on a moral plain and not political.

---

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=CVDPWK1IETUZJQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/opinion/2007/01/02/dl0201.xml&posted=true&_requestid=202647#comments

This execution looks like the second crucifixtion of Christ with Bush like Herod cowardly washing his hands of the whole affair. Saddam an evil man showed all the dignity and died like a lion.
Posted by Raj Singh on January 2, 2007 4:15 PM
Report this comment

The position adopted by The Telegraph here is very irrational, perverse and deeply hypocritical. How can it support the deliberate killing of a human being (whether the victim is a mass murderer himself or a saint), but be against the silly taunts he was forced to endure at the hands of the lynch mob? Were the taunts more abhorent than the execution itself?

Also, to those who argue that this was the ``Iraqi way`` of doing things - and therefore not our business - the vast majority of countries (representing a vast swathe of humanity - including various cultures) reject the death penalty. This is a basic fact, as evidenced by international treaties. As it happens, only a tiny few (including the United States, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and those other ``great democracies`` which merely happen to be run by tyrannical rulers) still support that kind of punishment.
Posted by AKPAN on January 2, 2007 3:45 PM
Report this comment

Jarvis - I`m opposed to the death penalty, but the cynic in me knows that alot of people die every day and I`m lucky enough not to live somewhere like Iraq, so if that`s what the Iraqi people feel is needed to bring closure to the bloodshed then I`ll suppress my sensibilities temporarily...

The evidence is, however, that it has done exactly the opposite of helping Iraq, and who can be suprised?

From the moment that the US army announced (to claps and whoops) that ``we got him`` to the moment a full video of his sad, brutal, humiliating death was made publicly available on youtube.com, the whole exercise of Saddam`s capture and trial has reeked of the kind of triumphalism which can only fuel the Arab grievance.

I sensed an inevitability that this is how it would end though. I mean.. right up until a few days before his lyn...sorry, hanging, they were talking about putting him to death in a sports stadium in front of spectators

Iraq a democracy? Maybe in about 200 years.....
Posted by John on January 2, 2007 3:35 PM
Report this comment

Thanks, Errol Flynn (any relation?) In the chaos of the last five years I`d totally forgotten that it was Bill and Hilary Clinton who ordered the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and it was the New York Times who opened Camp X-Ray. It`s a good thing we`ve got people like you to remind us of the truth when some pinko peacenik like Jay Diamond comes along, and it`s an even better thing that rather than offer any counter debate we can just threaten to ``horse whip`` or ``smack`` that kind of hippie scum for saying such stuff.
Posted by David Llewellyn on January 2, 2007 3:27 PM
Report this comment

Balance please ladies and gentlemen.We all seem to have become slightly demented as 100s of horrible images along with violent language nourish our fears.Look at the way we accuse each-other of being fools or on the wrong track. Beware of feeling more enlightened that the other. This may be followed by messages from God himself! Then we might actually have to do something! Some people want to make our world black and white and are pushing us to take sides. Thought, Meditation and the odd deeo breath as well as some dreaming to let your subconsious have a go at these momenteus events. It`s all too easy for us sitting comfortably away from the battle field to have trenchant opinions. How about listening to ordinary Iraqi people. Where are they given voice? Then ask them how you could help from a practical point of view. Or how about sending some reputable ngo a few quid to bring some relief to these people. Our opinions will have absolutely no effect on the outcome of this war. Our actions on the other hand just might. The only side we should be on is that of the Iraqi population (men, women and children all)
Posted by Jarvis Seliva on January 2, 2007 2:50 PM
Report this comment

Everything about Iraq reflects a gung-ho attitude by the (uninvited) occupiers. Note that when Tony Blair visits Iraq it is only to smile at the (over-stretched) British troops not talk with any ordinary Iraqis. Just given them a nod like the forgotten British public that eventually will have to pay for these (ill-judged) missions without UN permission. Of course any conversation with any IRAQI will provide a response that includes the statement....we know you are in Iraq for the free oil which is paying for your extended occupation. Meanwhile the ``allies`` insist that victory is around the next corner. Play that one again uncle sam!
Posted by Jack Anderson on January 2, 2007 2:49 PM
Report this comment

God loves a repentant sinner more than the self righteous, and Sadam was making repentant statements by calling on his people to live in peace and not to hate even those who invaded the country to remove him. Would keeping him alive in jail as a peace broker among the factions not have been a better option? What vengeance do you derive from killing a peacock whose feathers you have completely plucked, a worthless vengeance. May God`s will be done for peace to reign in Iraq despite man`s folly.
Posted by Joseph Opigo on January 2, 2007 2:18 PM
Report this comment

Perhaps the rather graphic images of this event will burn themselves into the minds of those who glibly call for a return of the death penalty.

It`s easy to discuss objectively and dispassionately in some cafe or bar over a few drinks but when the horrible reality of a violent death is actually in front of ones eyes. Objectivity isn`t quite so easy. yet there are those who would wish this. Of course they won`t get their own hands dirty. No they will abdicate that responsibility to someone else`s conscience.

However, it can`t be undone. Saddam is dead and regardless of the fudge made of it life will go on. Will it have any long term effects on the situation in Iraq? I doubt it. The insurgency is as savage as it can be. It may boost recruitment in the short term but that`s about it. Atrocities will be carried out in his name. They would have been carried out anyway just the media will have a new stick to shake.

He`s as much a matyr as Zarqarwi. I even had to sit and think of the man`s name for a moment then. Saddam`s name will last longer but his effect won`t
Posted by Steve Ipswich on January 2, 2007 1:58 PM
Report this comment

Would the self-hating wimp, Mr. Jay Diamond (see below)

---

an admitted resident of New York, the Left-Wing capital of the Western world

---

prefer to be smacked or horse whipped?

It isn`t America`s right-wing that has caused this mess. The fault lies with Bill Clinton and his communist wife, Hillary, during the era of the Democrat`s ``New Covenant,`` aided and abetted more recently by the treasonous New York Times and that useless little ex-General Secretary of the United Nations, Kofi Annan.
Posted by Errol Flynn on January 2, 2007 1:43 PM
Report this comment

I thought the USA normally takes 25 years to execute people?
Posted by Rick on January 2, 2007 1:15 PM
Report this comment

Lets face it, Sadam Hussain`s record for dividing his political opposition remains unbeaten.
If all the points of view aired in this discussion are representative of his opposition within a Irak during the last 30 years, it is no wonder he lasted so long!
The Monty Python film `Life of Brian`, where the various factions opposing the Romans were always in comical disarray, comes to mind.

Posted by Les Green on January 2, 2007 12:49 PM
Report this comment

The whole thing is a disgrace, but are you surprised? Humiliation and public spectacle is an aspect of US justice (think shackles and jump suits) heavily endorsed by George Bush, as is capital punishment, and they funded the court which tried Saddam, as well as openly calling for his death.

I don`t see how the US administration can walk away from this without being tarred, certainly in the eyes of Arabs who will view this as yet another inflammatory humiliation of Arab people and leaders.

The best thing that can come from this is a serious introspection of the bombastic, triumphalist ``might is right`` culture which pervades the US administration and its supporters.

Tough times ahead for the US...maybe they`ll learn something from it. I hope so.
Posted by John on January 2, 2007 12:46 PM
Report this comment

It appears to be a universal truth that those who live by the sword die by the sword (no matter how hard we humanists and other bleeding western hearts try to show them the error of their ways).

The erstwhile nationalist South African apartheid government always insisted that the management of the regime was an internal affair and that outside interference would not be tolerated in any way, shape or form. Perhaps we should learn a lesson from this.

When in Rome, Chaps, do as the Romans do: live and let live.

Hears to a Long Life 2007.
Posted by Stanislau Romanovich on January 2, 2007 12:05 PM
Report this comment

Another excellent example that there is no perfect judiciary system in the world. Another brilliant blow to the delusional ideas of secular humanism. Only God can (and will) administer perfect justice. To those who are so vehemently opposed to capital punishment (despite convictions beyond all reasonable doubt, as in the case of Saddam), I wonder would these same people be so vehemently opposed to paying more taxes to keep unrepentant mass-murderers alive, as well as endless building of more & more high-security prisons, paying for more prison wardens etc. The next time the British government ask for more taxes, do pay up and stop whinging & blaming them for everything. It`s so boring and utterly stupid to hear, yet again, blame assigned to Bush for what the Iraqi judiciary & people wanted. Pathetic Bush-bashing and boring conspiracy theories. By the way, I`m not even an American.
Posted by Ming Ye on January 2, 2007 11:47 AM
Report this comment

The disgraceful manner of execution by Iraqi govetnment, fully supported by US highlights the point that things are out of control and very bleak future for Iraq. which is likely to be enguled in a sectarian conflict, which can even engulf the whole middle east. Well done BUSH.
Posted by Mansoor Alam on January 2, 2007 11:46 AM
Report this comment

It was, indeed, a truly repellent affair (even for those of us who refused to watch the actual execution itself), and neither Bush nor Blair can absolve himself of full liability for it all. I hear countless references to it being the decision of a ``sovereign government`` in Iraq. Where was that sovereignty when the Americans inserted a provision in the new Iraqi constitution clearly aimed at protecting their own investment? And yet, when it came to guaranteeing basic human rights and due process, it all suddenly became a matter of ``sovereignty.`` If only they had recalled the warning issued by the (American) chief counsel to the Nuremberg Tribunal, Robert Jackson: ``We are handing the defendants a `poisoned chalice`, and if we sip from it, we must accept the same judgement.`` But then, hasn`t George Bush himself personally been responsible for the execution of countless black and underprivileged people while governor of Texas, including those who simply couldn`t afford proper legal representation at their trials?
Posted by AKPAN on January 2, 2007 11:38 AM
Report this comment

Saddam`s killers have achieved the impossible: they have made us feel sympathy for him, for his grace under pressure. There may not have been dignity in the dying, but there was courage. An ageing man with a grey beard stands, looking bemused, beneath a makeshift gibbet while his enemies taunt him. As he is saying a final prayer, the trapdoor is suddenly released and he plunges to his death, a brief expression of surprise registering on his face as the floor gives way
Posted by Swati Sharma on January 2, 2007 11:30 AM
Report this comment

Its everything they touch that turns to dross. The Americans started this whole thing, drawing gullible Blair in with promises of oil. They caught Saddam. They held him prisoner. With Iraqi puppets they tried him. It was decided many months ago what the outcome was going to be. They had control and they could have stopped this travesty of justice. Of course he was guilty of all charges, but it would have been so much better if he had been allowed to rot, visibly, in prison. He seemed proud, or resigned, when he was led to the rope. With no Sunnis present it was always going to be interpreted as a lynching.

America and Britain have a lot to answer for, and that includes allowing the martyrdom of the despicable Saddam.
Posted by Jeremy Bell on January 2, 2007 11:22 AM
Report this comment

Americans think they are the most important people on this planet but forget there are others too. Americans should brave themselves for very trying times ahead
Posted by Horo on January 2, 2007 11:20 AM
Report this comment

saddam got what he deserves. iraq is not Britian and the rules there are different. this is the main thing that the west failed to understand and that east is east and west is west. the western failures in iraq and afghanstan are due to failure of understanding this basic fact. saddam will never be a martyr even with sunnis. he had got a fair execution by iraqi standards
Posted by dr issa on January 2, 2007 11:16 AM
Report this comment

So Washington is heavy with recrimination - but what about recrimination in the UK? As a British conservative I believe firmly in the rule of law, and was horrified by the wholly illegal Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, which took place without a UN mandate. The consequence of this invasion - the judicial assassination of a fellow head of state - should make Tony Blair, as an Oxford graduate in law, quake in his shoes.
Posted by Edmund Burke on January 2, 2007 11:14 AM
Report this comment

Nonsense. He`d be ``a martyr`` to the fanatics whether jailed or killed. This way at least he`s a ``martyr`` who will never, ever return. A whole line of plotting by the insurgency and the anti-Bush crowd has been utterly confounded. It may not be perfect, but it`s enough.
Posted by Julian Morrison on January 2, 2007 10:48 AM
Report this comment

A demised leader, taunted and humiliated before his execution. The `ruling` power `wash their hands of the event.
Haven`t we heard of an event like this that happened a long long time ago? Human nature never changes.
Posted by Fred. Whitehead on January 2, 2007 10:39 AM
Report this comment

There never would have been a right time to carry to the execution; better that it was done sooner rather than later. But the fact remains that Saddam went with some dignity, whilst the baying witnesses allowed their feelings to show at the wrong moment. But that is what happens in a sectarian, divided country, on the verge of civil war.
The outlook is extremely bleak and the sooner we are out of it the better. Brown`s first act should be to remove our troops in his first 100 days.
Posted by swatantra nandanwar on January 2, 2007 10:36 AM
Report this comment

Exactly how many times do we have to say ``I told you so`` before you lot will start to get the message?

Posted by F Wright on January 2, 2007 10:35 AM
Report this comment

Executing Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do. Executing him in the circumstances that we have all seen was no less brutal than the executions for which he himself was put on trial. It seems pretty clear in this instance that he pot and the kettle are the same colour. For America to now cry foul is closing the door after the horse has bolted. Let`s face it, this could and should have been avoided.
Posted by Geoff Turner on January 2, 2007 10:11 AM
Report this comment

The dignified and much-edited silent footage of the judicial execution of Saddam Hussein was in itself alien to Western sensibilities but should have been enough - along with footage of the body - to satisfy those in Iraq who would not otherwise accept the end of the former Dictator`s life.

The clandestine (though there is much to suggest those supervising - if that is the word - the execution were complicit) second filming which looks better than a camera phone with sound has done incalculable damage.

Iraqis supposed to be officers of the State showed themselves to be highly partisan and treated Saddam Hussein appallingly. It matters not Saddam`s crimes as an absolute dictator: far smaller men with lesser remits showed themselves in an equally ugly light at this event.

Saddam behaved with dignity. He was aware of the official fiming. The illicit film actually puts him in an even better light - the bigoted fools who took part show that Iraqis of all political and religious hues cannot yet be trusted to behave like civilised human beings.

You begin to wonder if such people deserve democracy. It seems to me we have a vicious circle here: Iraqis behave in a manner akin to that the former Dictator and his predecessors had shown them for perhaps 40 years.

This is chicken and egg - Saddam did not make the Iraqis like this - he simply rose to the top in an administration which was already brutal and partisan. There is not a shred of reconciliation or closure about the democratic regime or his death. Iraq looks doomed as a nation state.
Posted by simon coulter on January 2, 2007 10:06 AM
Report this comment

The murderous thugs that put down Saddam are now tarred with the same brush as Saddam himself and they deserve all that is coming to them.

No matter what position they hold, law they are hiding behind,their nationality or religion.

This is EVIL at work for everyone to see.
Posted by J F Wilson on January 2, 2007 10:02 AM
Report this comment

he was the lion of iraq and in his death he was the man.
A Great man indeed .
Just because the US and Great Britan say that he was bad does not make him bad.
he has to be judged from his standards and from the western standards

Posted by Deepak Singh on January 2, 2007 10:02 AM
Report this comment

Congratulations to the U.S. administration on their magnificent ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and achieve precisely the opposite of their intention! Will they never develop the ability to walk upright and use their brains. When they learn that they need to respect and work through World institutions rather than the law of the gunslinger and lynch law then they may deserve some respect. Saddam Hussein emerges as the dignified victim and martyr - just what Bush needed! He should have been tried before the World on all charges, as should all world leaders who abuse their trust. They would have done better, having comprehensively wrecked Iraq and stirred up moslem fundamentalism, to put him back in charge to sort the mess out!
Posted by Alan on January 2, 2007 9:48 AM
Report this comment

So the quick death meted out to poor old Saddam wasn`t quite as nice for him as it might have been. Diddums. Now he is being handed a `crown of martyrdom` by all the depraved western journalists who were not nearly so morally offended by the many thousands of people tortured and murdered without trial by this monster.
Anyone who takes Saddam for a martyr evidently has no morals, but there are degrees of moral degradation. It would be difficult to sink any lower than, for example, an anonymous Telegraph leader-writer who is happy to play the martyrdom card for Saddam, merely for the sake of a bit of clever-dick political sneering designed to stir up trouble.

Posted by John Blackburn on January 2, 2007 9:45 AM
Report this comment

I have always thought Saddam a fascist tyrant - however his execution has only increased my respect for him. I am also beginning to feel an anymosity towards Iraq`s Shias that I never had before.
Posted by hakim on January 2, 2007 9:33 AM
Report this comment

Saddam was a mass murderer with contempt for the kind of legal process that most of us enjoy. That in no way means he should have been stripped of a humane and decent departure. Worse, the Iraqi government is now perceived, not as a new beginning, but as the continuation of the old regime - just with different colours. Britain`s complicity, rather than coming out staunch against the death penalty when there was still time, will forever link the United Kingdom with the mayhem that is now Iraq. That Blair still has a parliamentary majority is a stain on the character of every left-leaning voter in the country. You should all be ashamed.
Posted by Mark Mcfarland, Hongkong on January 2, 2007 9:33 AM
Report this comment

When men of honour must do vile deeds they do them themselves.
Posted by Noel Falconer on January 2, 2007 9:06 AM
Report this comment

The whole Saddam thing reminded me of when I first went to University as a politics student ten years ago.

I can remember very clearly the lefty types all argued that Saddam was obviously an evil man, that Iraq should be invaded and that Clinton should not be given a second term as President given his reluctance to go to war like Bush Snr.

The righty types all argued at the time that sanctions were the answer, invasion was a very bad thing and that Saddam should be left alone to die and Iraq could then change itself.

How times change! - nobody on the political spectrum has anything to be proud of here.
Posted by Dara on January 2, 2007 9:06 AM
Report this comment

I`m sorry, but you come across as like nothing so much as the first officer in the Caine Mutiny!
Having, as a media organ, been part of the whipping up of the baying mob, when the denouement comes you retreat to the back of the crowd, dissociating yourself from the event.
Bush is to be applauded for his discreet comment - Blair`s `no comment` was a cowardly option.
Shame on you all!
Posted by Graham King on January 2, 2007 8:58 AM
Report this comment

I seem to remember the media outcry over Washington`s tasteless gloating over the capture of Saddam. To me any attempt to mitigate their role in this squalid affair flies in the face of every thought, action & reaction of the US government and their Gung Ho military from day one of the Iraq debacle. Not for the first time their belief that might is right and that they have God on their side unravels into trigger happy incompetance.
Posted by Vandiemen on January 2, 2007 8:56 AM
Report this comment

``Mr Bush could be forgiven for thinking that everything he touches in this ill-starred country turns to dross.``
There is absolutely no indication of Mr Bush ``thinking`` what he was doing about that country since 2001.
Posted by sam_m on January 2, 2007 8:23 AM
Report this comment

I detest Saddam, but I detest as much this dreadful miscarriage of justice. Saddam Hussein is not the sole villain in a process that, from the outset, was designed to produce only one outcome. The conduct of the trial was a travesty of justice on several counts. Justice emanating from a flawed trial will not bring reconciliation but will beckon retribution.
Apart from the fundamental unacceptability of capital punishment, there are
more immediate and pragmatic reasons why Saddam Hussein should have been
made to pay for his crimes by a sentence other than death. While most Iraqis
may view Hussein`s death with relief, the country`s Sunni population now
have an even more tangible handle to dismiss the Saddam Hussein trial as
nothing more than a political show put on by an illegitimate US-backed Shia
government. Hussein`s execution could also keep Sunni factions from joining
the political process in Iraq, fuelling the Sunni-led insurgency in the
country, it could even encourage Iraq`s Shias and their various militias to
step up the reprisal killings against the Sunnis.

Posted by Dr Kailash Chand on January 2, 2007 8:16 AM
Report this comment

Nothing became him in this life like the leaving of it.
Posted by cuffleyburgers on January 2, 2007 7:49 AM
Report this comment

A new law is reported to being approved by W that from now on the suspects of any crimes will be given over to the prosecutors for dispensing justice.

Meanwhile, someone who didn`t support the role of a leader in life unless he was supported by US, has attained the title of martyr that he didn`t deserve, unless also supported by US
Posted by Jody Bush on January 2, 2007 7:12 AM
Report this comment

I seem to recall that The Telegraph was in favour of executing Saddam Hussein. Could the editor please suggest a nice, cosy, civilized way in which this could have been carried out.
Posted by jmn on January 2, 2007 5:50 AM
Report this comment

It is imposible to buy this arguement because as the world percieves it, USA runs the show there. Minuts before his death, Saddam was in custody of US Gaurds, who I am sure under a well articulated procedure handed him over. I am also sure that lots of paper work was completed before USA like Herodes, washed its hands.
Unfortunately the backwash of this Lynch will add to the hate that exists in the Muslim (predominantly Sunni)World against USA.
Posted by Ijaz Gul on January 2, 2007 5:30 AM
Report this comment

Yet another horrific outcome from the lack of leadership and misguided meddling from US
President George Bush. This dangerous goofball, and the military/industruial/oil buddies are directly or indirectly responsible for all that is going on in this propped up government in Iraq. When is this evil man going to be tried for War crimes, as was Saddam? I wonder how swiftly Bush will be hung? Yep, you guessed it...he won`t even be tried. So, maybe they should go after his family as was done with Saddam`s? I never supported Saddam at all....but the Bush family did....until he no longer served their purpose. Bush and all those involved MUST be tried for the war criminals that they most definitely are. Responsibility for all this death and destruction must be directly laid at their feet. Posted by Luca Ponti on January 2, 2007 5:24 AM

Re: # 130
Also Indian leaders were not defated leaders, only defeated leader meet such things

Re: # 128
I think the trial was done by elected govt with judges. It was Iraqi court system. Trial was not unfair , he had lawyers and had defence team. And the judgement was delivered and death sentence was awarded. The execution was not done properly without traces of minimum dignity. It was wrong and shameful. Middleeast is not known for decency to be shown to defeated rulers. Great leader of AWAM ZAB was hanged and even his private checked afterwards to if he had religious procedure, shameful act. Iraq is cruel place for defeated people. Even dirct decendant of messanger Allah (PUBH),Hashmite king of iraq was assured safe passage and after surrendering including him his family was slaughtered (likr Tsars of russia). Then General Abdul Karim Kassim when lost power was slaughtered after fake trial. Then it is said mr S.H. also killed leader of Baths strong man of IRAQ A.B. in helicopter accident. In Afghanistan Doud ousted king, traki killed doud, Amin killed, last communist leader was willed and hanged as butcher kills animals and hangs. Iranian revolutionaries killed prisoned former primeministed Abbas Hoeda and displayed the bullet ridden body of late prime minister, they killed own talkative minister Sadeh gob Bazadeh ( some thing like that), killers of Mujib did not spare his children , wife, grandchildrens, its kill or get killed atmosphere which excites people and sense of equilibrium lost for centuries.
The hunter had became hunted and restraint was lost. And Mr.S.H. at last showed no remorse for what he did things to his people. HE was not treated with decency is regratable but even at last he could not leave hatred behind and showed his hatred for Pursians and jews that was not degnified as he was meeting this situation neither persians or jews were responsible. Its all going just like many did not like NS but his trial of trying to kill General was as fake as can be and see then he was convicted of such crime our court system has not failed but collapsed or always white washing coups and Chief judge becoming water bearer of General is more indecent that indecent tragic way execution carried by wrong way. I think Shias should have been magnaminous and commuted his sentence to life improsonment and sent to Saudi Arabia as Musharaff did to NS.
But Shias and Kurds have agenda to break Iraq , Shias actively are trying put fear in minds of Sunnis and Kurds are quitely working to keep areas under command free of terror and waiting at proper time to exit Iraq at their own timing. It appears it will like old india which was trifercated same iraq will be trifercated. All things should consider under backdrop culture of successesion through execution in middleeast areas. Its all sad there is nothing good.
Good day every body

``Pakistan would have been much better off had the Afghans become true Communists at heart.`` (salim chauhan)

what a daring concept! -- Pakistan would have a PLA instead of a MMA -- and the US all 7/11 -- instead of 9/11.....!

Re: # 129

I think all dead otherwise sure many nations, specially UNO would have liked to try and hang all three.

My question is that if Saddam was hanged... why were people like Casteist racist hindu fascist bigot Gandhi and his disciples Nehru and Patel who plotted the deaths of millions of people not tried for crimes against humanity?

Whew! What a response!

Re: my Pakistani origin and other India-Pakistani or Bangladeshi or Afghani barb-trading: no comments

Re: Shia-Sunni issue: there are clear indications that the U.S. wishes to exacerbate this issue (Samarra incident, giving leeway to Muqtada, etc.) , although there is ample evidence that this is an artificial distinction. The historical origins of the Sunni/Shia versions of history will remain, so there is no point in focusing on them. In my opinion, Sunni/Shia do not meet the threshold of being theological sects, but rather political groups based on two different versions of history. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/29/fox-civil-war-positive/ - proof that the US is aware of this and is using it for its ends.

Re: hatred of the West: well, I admire the West for a lot of things. The current crop of untruthful chicken leaders are not worthy of their ancestors, like Thomas Jefferson or John Stuart Mill. We should not hate the West, nor worship it - treat it objectively.

Re: why I wrote this eulogy: If one can be written for Stalin, or Napoleon I, or Napoleon III, or Henry VIII, or Lord Mountbatten, why not Saddam? Something I will write on in the future (insha Allah) is that it is a sign of colonial inferiority complex that we hold our leaders to an angel-vs-devil standard, resulting in a deep sense of insecurity and worthlessness. Sub-continental or Muslim leaders are not better, nor worse than the leaders of the West or the East. They are humans, let us study them as humans, applaud their nice deeds, and criticize their failings. This will go a long way towards rehabilitating the morale of the Ummah, and of other neo-colonized peoples.

Also, when a person dies, it is `game over`. Game, set and match - just report on it. Give death the dignity it deserves. Letting biases or hatreds spill over after death shows the non-objectivity of the hater, and is akin to those who mutilate dead bodies.

I was never a fan of Saddam, nor is he my hero, but I believed he deserved a fair shake, just as every person in history does. Nations that write their own history survive, those that let their enemies do it for them - are doomed to be subdued and lost in history.

Will be back tomorrow.

Akber sb,
by justifying saddam , youare encouraging dictatorship.It`s not fair.
one should always audious for injustice , whatever the circumstances are.
of course , he was the lion among the dictators.
however timing was roung and selected intionally to hurt Muslims.
Saudi Arab didn`t say a word!

#123, Sadna,
I realize that you are obsessed with Afghanistan and the role played by Pakistan in the unfortunate country. Did you ever bother to think that when the Afghans were flirting with Russia and playing ``Communist,`` under Dawood and later, that they should not have involved Pakistan when their flirtation turned into a date rape? Pakistan would have been much better off had the Afghans become true Communists at heart.

tolinin: what you say is true. however, i was merely commenting on your remark regarding the reason they have not had a military coup in india while we have had three.

#121,
Aiyn? kiya tusi pathani hondi aye?

#120 Arjun2 {``when muslims hate, we need to look at the root cause...when they get paid back in the same coin, it`s islamophobia``}

Arjun Bhayya,

It`s kinda like when Christians start a holy war, declared by a bloodthirsty Pope and loot, rape, and massacre innocent civilians, it`s called a Crusade. When Muslims respond with their own violent holy war, it is called ``terrorism.``

#118
Zarqawi was from Al Qaeda, which can reduce a nation to rubble and assassinate Ahmed Shah Massood and no one cares. The US has decided to fight in the same craven way and posters who were yesterday talking of hanging Karzai from a lamppost are showing outrage at Saddam`s hanging. The hypocrisy of both sides of this `civilisational` divide (as if there is any `civilisation` in mass killings) is sickening.