Saddam Hussein

Is it important to be convicted of all your crimes before execution?

Does execution mean ridding the world of a bad guy, or calling someone to account for what they have done? If it is the latter, then they would need to be convicted for that crime first.

In the case of Saddam Hussein, he was responsible for gassing the Kurds, his own countrymen, because he thought the Kurds were going to join Iran's side while Iraq was at war with them. Five thousand people died in that gas attack. Tens of thousands more died in the ensuing drive by Saddam Hussein to dominate the Kurds. So let's just say, they are angry.

And a little disappointed. I guess they wanted to throw a big party, and who can blame them? But don't underestimate the power of having your day in court. It is very strong. People want a feeling of justice and of being heard. And that is exactly what the Kurds did not get with the sneak execution of Saddam Hussein.

Of course the practical reasons for the surprise execution include limiting riots and violence and bloodshed. Understandable. And the upcoming trial of Ali Hassan al Majid, a.k.a. Chemical Ali, will give the Kurds their day in court. But it is not the same as looking your father's killer and confronting him. So anticipate that the Kurds will not be quieted with the mere absence of Saddam Hussein. They were looking for something more: the vindication of being heard.


The Lazy Iguana said...

I think there are reasons why the trial never mentioned the kurds.

1. The Shi'a do not give a crap about the Kurds. The Shi'a are the majority.

2. The USA did not want the Kurds to come up in court. We all know who our good close personal buddy was when Iraq was at war with Iran. We know the USA was actively supporting Iraq with all manners of stuff. So where did Hussien get that gas from huh? Think any of that nerve gas had "Made In The USA" stickers on it? We know that Iraq never made its own gas - so what happened? Did Hussien leave a tooth under his pillow for the nerve gas fairy or something?

If theory 2 is correct it would explain why Hussien was only tried for the crime of killing a hundred or so people - and not one mention of the thousands killed by the gas attack. The USA did not want to give the man the chance to say on the stand "I bought that gas from Ronald Reagan and it was delivered to me by Donald Rumsfeld."

We can never have any blood on our hands!

Econo-Girl said...


You raise some good points. Yes, we were helping Iraq in its war with Iran. But people know that already.

I think internal Iraq instability is more of a reason why they didn't have a trial for Saddam Hussein for the gas attacks. They will cover that part with the trial of Chemical Ali.