That's the problem with dealing with some countries. You have a choice between bad and worse. We could have just completely ignored them and been more isolationist I suppose, but that might not be in anybody's best interest either.
Not picking on you because I know what you meant, but I found this funny. It's not like it's very tranquil there now. Unless of course you're talking about the current wave of violence turning tidal.
dictators dont just drop out of the sky. 3 years after the invasion, its obvious to all why the the only stable form of govt. in iraq was a (brutal) dictatorship. in hindsight, containment was the better option.
The trial was far from perfect and this verdict was pretty much a given. Still it was important to go through with this trial and to have allowed Saddam to be able to face his accuser in court if Iraq is ever going to have hope for a civil society. This verdict strikes me as karmic.
Yes, I followed it a bit. I've also been following the trial for a while now. I trump your pathetic basso reference with an incontrovertible fact that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am correct... Tony Snow was asked whether the administration manipulated the date and answered by saying such thinking was "preposterous" and "absurd." (For those of you playing at home, that's the 3,495,875th time this administration has resorted to bluster and feigned outrage when a simple yes or no question would prove embarrasing if answered truthfully.) No need to apologize.
Now why would they do something like this? Saddam’s Verdict Announced Four Days Early, Court Won’t Finish Writing Decision Until Thursday Yesterday, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal announced that Saddam Hussein had been found guilty and would be sentenced to death. But it didn’t release the official verdict. NBC News has the story: The court was created by the administration-controlled Coalition Provisional Authority and still exercises considerable control over the court. The New York Times reports, “American influence…has been undeniably pervasive, with about 90 percent of the $145 million in annual costs for the court and associated investigations paid for by the United States Justice Department, and lawyers sent by Washington acting as advisers.” http://thinkprogress.org/
I honestly beleive they got Bin Laden somewhere. . and will 'get him' officially on the eve of the Elections in 2008 Rocket RIver
Whenever a government is thrown by power and force, the fate of formal head wil be decided by politcal interest, whether he will be death or alive. Executing Saddam may not be in the best interest of US, but the successors in Iraq want him dead to limit his influence or position themselves. Not to upset them, US has to support that. On the end, you can't expect to have a working democracy after you impose democracy to a country by using everything including war but democracy.
yea . . . but who knew Kerry would be such a weak $%%%$@$ that they didn't need him to win Rocket River
Hey IROC it! Go Cheney yourself Blair Opposes Death Penalty for Saddam Prime Minister Tony Blair said Monday he opposed the death penalty for Saddam Hussein even though the deposed Iraqi leader's trial had reminded the world of his brutality. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thenewswire/
Because the trial is over and they have determined the outcome. That they haven't finished writing the formal decision yet doesn't really matter. The bare bones of the outcome are that Saddam was found guilty of crimes against humanity and was sentenced to death. That is a legitimate news story, whether the Democrats want it reported now or not.
Seems it was the republicans that wanted it reported now rather than later. Sort of like posting the instructions on how to build a nuclear bomb on a government website and possibly aiding terrorists.
Two TV stations closed for showing Iraqis protesting against death sentence for Saddam http://electroniciraq.net/news/2603.shtml
