roachboy

agreed, ofkuo--that is why i expect that the present chaos will somehow find a way to kill saddam hussein. the trial will be a fiasco. hell, you see the same thing happening all over--think about the fln in algeria manipulating the threat of the fis to its own ends--and the americans have done worse....

not sure what you mean by "perception is huge, even for the iraqis"---explain more?

the only thing that is strange in this situation is the flourish of the pseudo-trial.

as for the idea of war crimes being the exclusive purview of countries that loose wars, see "the fog of war" for robert macnamara "meditating" on the fire bombing of japan--and his inability to be anywhere near as forthcoming on the subject of vietnam-have you seen the film? what do you make of that? could it be a problem for him precisely because the american lost that war?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Dragonlich

OFKU0: Alternatively, the evidence shown will be so horrific (think holocaust style horrific) that nobody in their right mind, not even Arabs, can possibly deny how evil Saddam was. His execution will be considered justified, and he will go into the history books as the guy that murdered hundreds of thousands of fellow Muslims.

Lebell

While they were able to hold power, yes, as was the govt. of Nazi Germany.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

SLM3

So what did that legitimacy afford them? They were recognized by what, 3 countries? Are there varying degrees of legitimacy?

Do you associate legitimacy with sovereignty?


SLM3

brianna

the way he came to power is completely irrelevant to his trial.

saddam still has enough support among the iraqi people (not to mention the rest of the arab world) that to serve him with an unfair trail would risk initiating another wave of violence against americans. if the us government truly wants to help the iraqi's to create a democratic society we must help them to create a fair court system where everyone, even the most guilty among us, is granted a fair trail.

OFKU0

Perception being that Iraq is a supposed template for democracy throughout the mid east and in some ways the model ( or again supposed model) of a/the mid east future of coerced democratization.

The Iraqi's have to embrace democracy, which I think they want, but democracy has a price, especially regarding and dealing with the rest of the mid east. Up until a couple of years ago, no one cared about Iraq. Now they are under a microscope and everything they do, in the short term is scrutinized. I can understand them wanting to exercise their new freedom with the Saddam case, but I don't know how this case democratically speaking will be defined.

If the U.S pushes for further democratizations as warranted by them through the mid east, the Iraq model will be critically debated as to its successes and failures which I think in the end, the idea of an all encompassing mid east democracy will be rendered moot since the perception may be, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.' But maybe not.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

Lebell

In their case, you would have to ask them what legitimacy afforded them. As far as the US was concerned, it afforded them the courtesy of being asked first for a man who was directly responsible for the MURDER of 3000 people before we took them out.

Seems to me that that was a pretty good deal that they should have taken us up on.

And since they were not answerable to anyone else by virtue of having been conquered (as of then), then yes, they were sovereign.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

brianna

note that we were not asking him to stop murdering people, we just wanted him to give up any weapons he might have had.

roachboy

agreed, biranna:

just take a look at american foreign policy since, say world war 2---murder is not a concern that moves it--murder by a politically expedient despot is not even remarked (think peron and after, think pinochet, think central america, the list goes on and on and on)---it is murder by someone who has become other then politically expedient is unacceptable. that is simply how the states work, how they have worked, how they are working in this context. this history--which is more evident to people outside than it is to those inside the states---explains why so many people around the world view american claims about its actions with at least cynicism. sadly, bushwar has done nothing to change that.

it is maybe because american actions have for so long been at cross purposes (with very very few exceptions) with its words that theatres like the potential trial of hussein acquire their weight, and why the official american view of that trial is simply not shared by most of the rest of the planet.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Dragonlich

roachboy. it seems that you're rather cynical about the US government, even though they're not that different from any other government around the world, in that they will try to increase their power. The US aren't alone there, you know.

You might be surprised to learn that the terrorist opponents of the US aren't nice people. They have no problem whatsoever with killing humans, not even their fellow Muslims. I for one see the US as being way more moral than those guys; besides, the US is on *my* side in this war.

While I'm on the subject, I suggest you take a good hard look at your apparent belief that "most of the rest of the world" sees this trial as a US puppet show. Just because *you* see that, and just because a lot of people you know see that, does not mean that a significant portion of the human race sees that. <b>And it certainly does not mean that it's true.</b>

roachboy

dragon--maybe--i should not have used that terminology then--retracted.

what i am going by is the range of newspapers that i read every day--most of which are not american--and a range of other sources--including curiously bbc world service, which was talking i think last night about polls that indicated somethjing like what i was saying. but you are right===poor smenatic decision on my part.

as for the "terrorists" not being nice people=-=maybe not, but remembr that the bushcase for linking hussein to alqeada has fallen apart entirely, and if the situation has changed now in iraq, it is mostly a function of american actions--the invasion, etc.

and as for the history of us foreign policy--knowing about this leads you in few alternative directions--sadly it is a legacy the amerians--myself included---have to live with. but it makes no sense to pretend that this history does not exist, and that it does not have effects on american presents and futures internationally.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

brianna

i can't believe that this fact really needs to be spelled out but here it is again:

criticizing the actions of the US government in the "war on terror" is not the same thing as saying that the terrorists are better or even on equal footing with our leaders. as members of a democratic society we all have the right to criticize our government and doing so does not put the critic on the terrorist's side. I expect my government to act in ways millions of time more moral than suicide bombers, people who fly planes into buildings and people who choose to kidnap civilians and behead them, in fact i expect this so much that i hardly ever consider the possibility that our government would do anything near as morally wrong as the actions endorsed by al queda -- this does not mean that I think our government is perfect or even good enough.

shades of gray people.

Mehoni

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/01/iraq.saddam/

Why isn't he being charged with the Iran-Iraq-war?

__________________
There seem to be countless rituals and cultural beliefs designed to alleviate their fear of a simple biological truth - all organisms eventually perish.

Dragonlich

I'd say it's because a lot of Iraqis feel rather strongly about Iran...

But to move away from the past, I would welcome such a charge. I would not be surprised if the Iraqi court allows it.

kutulu

We did a lot of dirty dealings with Saddam. There has to be a truckload of information that he knows and we don't want him to talk about.

There are a lot of questions about the legitimacy of the invasion of Kuwait and what we could have done to prevent it.

Publius

Personally, I have always said that the best thing to do with Saddam is to turn him over to the French for trail, they will (probably) convict him and banish him to some small island in the Atlantic from whence he will stage an invasion of France and take over the country, then we can go liberate France and all would be right wiht the world once again.

Seriously though, I don’t see what the big rush is to see this guy tried and executed. This does nothing to support the legitimacy of the new interim government and if anything works against them. If they were really serious about establishing a new democratic government free from corruption then this puppet trail of Saddam is not exactly the best way to lead off. I’d wait a few years until a fully elected government had been put in place, a constitution had been established, and laws had been laid out with a court established to try those charged with violation of those laws.