Like, I guess, most people around the world, I scratch my head and wonder how the United States (and please don't try to tell me this was an "Iraqi" thing) could make such a complete mess of their revenge killing of Saddam Hussein. Regardless of how one feels about the death penalty, or the the oft documented crimes of Hussein, it continues to amaze me how such an allegedly sophisticated nation, with all the money, expertise and great minds it has at its disposal, continues to pile fuck up on top of fuck up. Why is the screamingly obvious not obvious to these people. James Wolcott puts it best:
Bush and Blair could fuck up a baked potato. When they put their heads together, there's nothing they can't get wrong about Iraq, and that includes the botched execution of Saddam Hussein, a low-tech lynching that neither is man enough to condemn.He also links to this rather good commentary from the, always, incisive Patrick Cockburn in The Independent (which I'm a little late in coming to as I've been away). And as Lindsay says:
Executing Saddam Hussein was no more meaningful than pulling down the Saddam statue after the invasion. Hussein's trial and punishment could have been an opportunity to get Saddam's crimes on the record and administer real justice to a war criminal. Like every other opportunity in this war, the Americans managed to squander it.
Posts
1 comment:
The execution of Saddam was a political assination.
If Bush and Blair were tried in the same court for their crimes against humanity they would be swinging from the end of a rope faster than you could say war criminals.
Post a Comment