Tuesday, December 06, 2005


So Why Isn't Saddam At The Hague?

Steve Gilliard asks this question. Why is Saddam being put on trial by the US-installed Salem Chalabi, the son of the con artist who talked us into invading? And why is it that we've put Saddam on trial for one incident that occurred in 1982 -- which, conveniently, was just the year before we decided to support Saddam in the Iran-Iraq War? Remember how one of the neocon calls to action on invading Iraq was that "Saddam gassed his own people"? Why, then, are there no charges on these 1988 and 1989 gassings of Kurds? Why are there no charges on the use of gas against Iranians during the Iran-Iraq War, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera? If the trial were under the auspices of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, or under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, Saddam wouldn't just be on trial for some relatively minor incident. But of course, since it would be a fair trial, Saddam would be free to mention, in great detail, how the same neocons who went after him once were his best buddies. The PNAC Platoon obviously fears this. But there's a larger issue at work here. The Bush cabal simply refuses to recognize the legitimacy of anything they don't control, either directly or indirectly. Here's how that works, in the case of Iraq: They think that the invasion was a success, if only because they did it without the UN's help, and because the UN was unable to prevent them from invading. Thus, in their might-makes-right eyes, the UN's authority and power is forever destroyed, whereas America-under-the-neocons' authority and power is enhanced. Never mind that in reality, America's overextended military is on the verge of collapse, and our equally-overextended economy is about to do the same. Never mind that we are now a rogue and a pariah state in the eyes of the world, which has been working to sever its ties with us and isolate us economically and socially. The neocons think they're Masters of the Universe.

I still think Saddam's not in the dock at the Hague simply because his removal from power was illegal.

The US invasion of Iraq was flat out illegal, everyone with three neurons to rub together knows that. But, what does that matter without some legal institution in which to raise its illegality? The Bushite Regime has fought against the ICC since the bastards came to power; ostensibly because they never wanted an American soldier to be tried by a non-American court.

The Very Last Damn Thing the Bushite Regime needs is having its Commander-In-Chief named a criminal. A fair trial would let Saddam bring cross examine and subpoena witnesses.

Care to imagine, say, Joe Wilson on the witness stand in the Hague?
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

More blogs about politics.
Technorati Blog Finder