It's convenient that Saddam is dead, considering all the aid the US has given him, he'd be a bitch of a witness in an investigationof Bush Whitehouses

Robert Parry at Consortium News

The hanging of Saddam Hussein was supposed to be – as the New York Times observed – the “triumphal bookend” to George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq. If all had gone as planned, Bush might have staged another celebration as he did after the end of “major combat,” posing under the “Mission Accomplished” banner on May 1, 2003.

But now with nearly 3,000 American soldiers killed and the Iraqi death toll exceeding 600,000 by some estimates, Bush may be forced to savor the image of Hussein dangling at the end of a rope a little more privately.

Still, Bush has done his family’s legacy a great service while also protecting secrets that could have embarrassed other senior U.S. government officials.

He has silenced a unique witness to crucial chapters of the secret history that stretched from Iran’s Islamic revolution in 1979 to the alleged American-Saudi “green light” for Hussein to attack Iran in 1980, through the eight years of the Iran-Iraq War during which high-ranking U.S. intermediaries, such as Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates, allegedly helped broker supplies of war materiel for Hussein.

Hussein now won’t be around to give troublesome testimony about how he obtained the chemical and biological agents that his scientists used to produce the unconventional weapons that were deployed against Iranian forces and Iraqi civilians. He can’t give his perspective on who got the money and who facilitated the deals.

More

On the timing of the execution of Saddam. Can't we do even one thing right?

Instead of having a dead dictator, we now have a martyr. Why you ask? Because we gave him the opportunity to equate himself with the muslim martyrs of the past.
rcald at Daily KOS

As many of you may not know, Saturday morning is the beginning of the Muslim holy days called Eid-ul-Adha. This is the "big Eid" lasting 4 days; the slighter shorter "small Eid" takes place at the end of Ramadan (which this year, was at the end of October). Eid ul Adha has two major elements of signifcance within in Islam.

First, the festival marks the end of the Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca. Hajj is one of the five pillars of Islam. It is one of the most important parts of the muslim year.

[...]

The second, and more significant in this case, aspect of Eid ul Adha is that it marks the muslim prophet Ibrahim’s willingness to sacrifice his son Ismael at the command of God (You may know these characters better as Abraham and Isaac). This festival’s name is often translated as the Feast of Sacrifice. While regional traditions vary, Eid ul Adha is normally celebrated by a family group sacrificing a lamb and sharing it equally amongst relatives and the poor. This is a day which usually combines something akin to American/Christian ideas of Thanksgiving and Easter: there is a pervading sense of thankfulness for the bounty of God and an emphasis on both charity and feasting as a manifestation, at the same time there are constant rememberances of sacrifice in the name of God.

Given the context of this holiday, Saddam Hussein’s statement that "I sacrifice myself. If God wills it, he will place me among the true men and martyrs" takes on a new level of meaning. Hussein is playing into the sensibility Iraqi muslims, as well as more secular Iraqis for whom such a prominent muslim concept will still resonate. He is equating himself to the muslim prophets (the "true men"), like Ibrahim, and at the same time evoking martyrdom.

More

On making a new martyr.

Richard Sale at Sic Semper Tyrannis

"I am so tired of hearing the word "dictator" and Saddam together. It's on a level with "anal" and then "sex." Yug. Instead of demonizing him, why not first of all mention that he didn't die a coward. He looks perfectly composed as he eyes the rope that is about to break his neck. And you have to admire the fact he didn't repent of his megalomania, saying to the hangman, "Iraq is nothing without me."

But he also was a skillful ruler and a legitimate one, as you pointed out in your briefing to the White House in late 1990 or early 1991. He had an extraordinary insight into his people --knowing when to massacre a section of a tribe or instead, build it a whole new sewage system and a string of free clinics.

Why demonize? Think of Somoza or the shah or Trujillo or the whole awfully bloody bunch of shits we have used to advance our ends in the world. We did after all back Stalin and lied for years to the public about his actions and character. Amazing.

More

"Paybacks are a bitch," thus says the Dark Wraith

...In my editorial of November 6, 2006, "In Moot Defense of Saddam," I set forth my condemnation of what constitutes yet another brutish violation of international law by the Bush Administration and its various agents of opportunity.

Writing at her blog, BlondeSense, Liz notes that Saddam's execution is the result of conviction on capital charges related to "...killing 148 people who were planning to assassinate him back in 1982." In comments on the thread from that article at BlondeSense, I expressed my assessment of what will result from Saddam's hanging. In edited and expanded form, I herewith publish that assessment as an editorial position of The Dark Wraith Forums.

Spiteful vengeance breeds spiteful vengeance. Despite the belief by neo-conservatives and a fair number of supporters of capital punishment that they are the best at all manner of retributive violence, and despite the American people's belief that we are seeing the worst of the quagmire that has become our unjustified, illegal attack on and occupation of Iraq, we as a nation have not even begun to see what horrors may rise from the sands of that grim and ancient land.

[...]

And yet, when that payback is visited upon us—and it will come to us—we shall scream bloody murder at the injustice of the outrage. That, of course, is to be expected of a tribe that has lost its understanding of tradition.

More

Some of the things Saddam did to the U.S.

Charles Karel Bouley at Huffington

...like Pilate, as we Americans try and wash the blood of Hussein off of our hands (and make no mistake, his death is squarely our doing, and it cost us almost half-a-trillion dollars) we need to ask ourselves, what did this man do to us to deserve this, the ultimate form of punishment?

Now, I don't want talking points, I want facts. What did he do to the United States or its citizens to deserve death? Well, let's start with what he didn't do.

He didn't attack us on 9/11, nor did any of the hijackers act on his behalf.

He didn't finance the Bin Laden construction company or Osama Bin Laden in any way.

He didn't give safe haven to Bin Laden or any of the terrorists.

He did not condone Al Quaeda.

He did not have weapons of mass destruction.

He did not have a nuclear program.

He posed no credible threat to the safety or security of the United States directly.

He never said he wanted us all dead and then followed that statement up by testing a nuclear device.

He did not financially support madrases directly, training radicalized Islamic fascists that would later threaten our country (that's Saudi Arabia).

More

Congratulations on the execution of Saddam.

Martin Lewis at Huffington

Some thanks are in order:

1) To George W. Bush. It only cost $354 billion (and counting) and the lives of 3,000 very expendable US military to enable the President to demonstrate to his dad that he has a bigger Dick. Or is one...

Isn't it ironic - don'tcha think? Saddam hung so that Dubya can prove that he's BETTER hung...

2) To George H.W. & Barbara Bush for raising a child with such wonderful values.

[...]

More

Larry Johnson on the 'execution' of Saddam

Larry Johnson at No Quarter

The shallow minded will celebrate the execution of Saddam as a victory and perhaps as a watershed moment. It ain't either--i.e. victory or watershed. If this is a pivotal moment it is simply turning a corner and driving into a deadend alley.

Remember the happy talk and predictions surrounding the death of Saddam's sons way back in July 2003? The Times of London, in describing the demise of Uday and Qusay, reported that:

They were the targets of the first US airstrike, and repeatedly attacked during the campaign. Their escape from Baghdad was a source not just of frustration to the invasion forces, but also of gnawing anxiety to Iraq's people. With the mangled bodies retrieved by the 101st Airborne from the columned villa in the northern city of Mosul confirmed as those of Uday and Qusay, therefore, the United States has turned a corner in Iraq whose psychological importance is hard to exaggerate. Even if Saddam himself is still alive, his dynasty will be dead.

Turning that corner turned out swell, didn't it? How about Professor Fouad Ajami's nifty prophecy about the benefits we would reap from Saddam's capture?

More

You know your country is in trouble when:

Riverbend

2006 has been, decidedly, the worst year yet. No- really. The magnitude of this war and occupation is only now hitting the country full force. It's like having a big piece of hard, dry earth you are determined to break apart. You drive in the first stake in the form of an infrastructure damaged with missiles and the newest in arms technology, the first cracks begin to form. Several smaller stakes come in the form of politicians like Chalabi, Al Hakim, Talbani, Pachachi, Allawi and Maliki. The cracks slowly begin to multiply and stretch across the once solid piece of earth, reaching out towards its edges like so many skeletal hands. And you apply pressure. You surround it from all sides and push and pull. Slowly, but surely, it begins coming apart- a chip here, a chunk there.

That is Iraq right now. The Americans have done a fine job of working to break it apart. This last year has nearly everyone convinced that that was the plan right from the start. There were too many blunders for them to actually have been, simply, blunders. The 'mistakes' were too catastrophic. The people the Bush administration chose to support and promote were openly and publicly terrible- from the conman and embezzler Chalabi, to the terrorist Jaffari, to the militia man Maliki. The decisions, like disbanding the Iraqi army, abolishing the original constitution, and allowing militias to take over Iraqi security were too damaging to be anything but intentional.

The question now is, but why? I really have been asking myself that these last few days. What does America possibly gain by damaging Iraq to this extent? I'm certain only raving idiots still believe this war and occupation were about WMD or an actual fear of Saddam.

Al Qaeda? That's laughable. Bush has effectively created more terrorists in Iraq these last 4 years than Osama could have created in 10 different terrorist camps in the distant hills of Afghanistan...

Read the rest

Sadam is dead. And...?

Exactly what has changed?

Barbara O'Brian at Crooks and Liars

...Patriotism, apparently, demands that we celebrate Saddam’s death, even though he’d been stripped of his power and has been pretty much irrelevant for some time, and even though it’s unlikely his death will change a damn thing.

Josh Marshall gets it:

… This is what we’re reduced to, what the president has reduced us to. This is the best we can do. Hang Saddam Hussein because there’s nothing else this president can get right.

The very inauthenticity of the whole farce amounts to Bush Administration fingerprints. The confusion of pageantry and progress, of substituting photo ops and symbolism for actual accomplishment, is a hallmark of the Bush Administration. Yes, they’re all about covering up their ineptitude, but I wonder if at least some of them (like the President himself) honestly don’t know the difference.

Read more

Is snuffing Saddam such a good idea?

Yeah, he's scum. But a recurring thought in Iraq seems to be "things under Saddam weren't as bad as we thought." And many now see him as being an icon for resistance against the occupation.
Steve Clemons at Huffington

The track has been laid. I don't see any way that Hussein can escape execution -- but everyone involved needs to realize that Hussein is no longer just a criminal, thuggish, murderous tyrant in the eyes of most Iraqi citizens.

To many, he has become a defiant leader fighting American oppression and someone who portrays himself as a proud and ferocious Sunni force. Many Sunnis want him back -- and we need to prepare for something big, very big, when he dies.

More