Fallout From Saddam's Death Penalty Conviction

Leave it to the media to tell you that reaction in Iraq is mixed. Should this surprise anyone? Saddam used the societial divisions to maintain his grip on power. His supporters were the Ba'athists, Sunni Muslims centered on Tikrit and the larger Baghdad region. Shi'ites and Kurds were his habitual whipping posts - and hundreds of thousands of both were slaughtered in his campaigns against both.

The Sunnis aren't happy campers, but the Kurds and Shi'ites are pretty satisfied with the outcome.

If you want some idea at the animus the Iraqi people in general held towards Saddam, look no further than this photo expose of the literally thousands of portraits, mosaics, and photographs of Saddam throughout Iraq. They've been defaced by the Iraqis themselves. The photographer's studio is set up on Hudson Street not too far from the Christopher Street station for those that want to get a better peak at the imagery.

In ‘Saddam Mania,’ a new exhibit at Think Tank 3, Belgian war photographer Teun Voeten captures an aspect of the Iraq invasion that no one else thought to document: the destruction of Saddam’s once-ubiquitous image.

Stop the ACLU notes the schizophrenic nature of the Times coverage of Saddam's conviction. The editorial has one notion of fair justice, while the news side has a completely different one. Covering all the bases, or is it that the editorial board isn't reading the news again? I think the Times is making an emotional argument instead of a rational one. The Times wants to defer (read: delay) the execution of the sentence. Justice delayed is justice denied. Why should the Iraqis listen to the Times editorial board's judgment when the editorial board does not have the Iraqi interests at heart. The healing process is also about instituting the rule of law.

We didn't see Saddam taken out back and hanged for all the world to see moments after the verdict came down. Under Saddam's version of governance, that is precisely what would have happened. Instead, the current Iraqi government has an appeals process and Saddam is taking full advantage of it. That, in itself, is a major step forward. It sets standards for how to deal with disputes, even ones of such tremendous import. It also shows the rule of law superseding the emotional need to rid the planet of such a horrendous tyrant and ruthless dictator.

AJ Strata also takes the Times to task for its latest nonsensical ravings.

Tony Blair has come out in opposition of the death penalty, but as I noted yesterday, I think he's wrong about this - as are most of the Europeans on the matter. If there's anyone deserving of the death penalty, Saddam fits the bill. And this verdict is only the first of a series of trials on the murder, genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity Saddam and his minions perpetrated on the Iraqis since he took power nearly 30 years ago.

The curfew instituted in Baghdad has been lifted. While there was scattered violence, it wasn't as much as feared. The rioting has not materialized, though the media is still waiting for it to happen.

So, what about the timing of the verdict? Is it just a wee bit curious as the timing coincides with the US elections? Okay. So it does. And why shouldn't the US try and tout the successes in Iraq - and successes by Iraqis themselves ahead of a difficult election that Democrats themselves frame as a referendum on Iraq?

It certainly shouldn't hurt the Administration that Saddam's verdict was returned with a death sentence. All Democrats can do is question the timing, and that makes their criticisms seem paltry and unfocused, which the GOP will exploit as being incapable of leading on national security.

Technorati: saddam hussein, iraq, war+crimes, bush, anfal, marsh arabs.