Keith Devens .com

I think people are far too focussed on revenge than actual justice. Think about it - is Saddam likely to be treated humanely if judged by the country he terrorised? The only way he will get a fair trial is if it happens outside of Iraq.

From what I've seen of peoples attitudes so far, many readers will be saying "WTF? Who cares what happens to the murderous son-of-a-bitch?" I personally think that's a despicable attitude - we don't have to lower ourselves to his level to bring him to justice. A society can be judged on how humanely it treats its criminals - with the level of prison rape and Guantanamo Bay, the USA is not winning any prizes, so perhaps it ought to do the right thing here.

Of course, it's extremely unlikely this will happen, as the USA is against an international court of law because it doesn't want Americans to be tried (I'm not trying to be imflammatory, but I can't think of a more polite way of putting it).

The only way he will get a fair trial is if it happens outside of Iraq.

I don't think so. The whole thing will probably be televised and very public. It's a modern-day Nuremberg trial, and I think Iraq, as part of its "move from the rule of warlord to the rule of law", will conduct a fair trial.

I don't think it's about revenge, by the way. You can't possibly revenge all he's done.

A society can be judged on how humanely it treats its criminals

And look at how we just treated Saddam yesterday! That was one of the points Austin Bay made in his article I linked to above:

Following his capture by US troops in the 4th Infantry Division, the wasted and weary Butcher of Baghdad received medical aid. For genuine democrats, a disheveled mass murderer opening his mouth to say "Ahh" for the doctors is more than a perfect portrait of defeat. The once defiant thug who gassed Kurds and Iranians, threatened to "burn half of Israel," who raped Kuwait, who slaughtered Shia Arabs, who minced his Baghdad opponents in plastic shredders, who –yes, the evidence is building– facilitated both secular and religious terrorists, gets instant health care at the hands of his American captors. Object lesson: The rule of law and basic respect for human rights means the worst among us will get an aspirin, once the bum’s imprisoned.

As for Guantanamo Bay, I don't think you really know anything about the conditions there you can condemn. And of course, prison rape is a problem, and the country's acknowledged the problem and is starting to try to deal with it. But come on, you're really condemning America for our prisons? Seriously? I don't think you're making a serious argument.

And if "ought to do the right thing" means hand of Saddam to some international court, I disagree that that's the right thing. I agree with Johnson, quoted above.

I really liked this post by Reynolds. He links to some excellent posts by Steven Den Beste you should take a look at.

Finally, I think a lot of the reason people want him to be tried in the Hague is because the UN forbids the death penalty. To me, for Saddam to not get the death penalty for his crimes (what's a stronger word for crimes?) is not justice.

Heh... see.

See again.