Monday, January 08, 2007
The Shia shout back
With all the mainstream media coverage of Sunni Arab and European outrage at the execution of Saddam, it is easy to miss the counterargument, made rather forcefully by a leading Shiite Iraqi yesterday:
States opposing Saddam's execution were the main abettors to his crimes against humanity, said political advisor to United Iraq Coalition (UIC) Mohsen Hakim on Sunday.
He told IRNA that the Iraqi government had collected documents from Saddam's office which proved that the states which opposed Saddam's death sentence had been accomplice to Saddam's crimes against the Iraqi people by supplying arms and providing intelligence and financial assistance.
Hakim said that it is for the first time in the region that a dictator has been put to death by a democratic government. "It is a signal to the leaders of regional states who abetted him in his crimes in the past two decades," he noted.
"The extent of the crimes Saddam committed in Iraq in fact remedied the bad reputation of the criminals of history. Certain leaders are opposing Saddam's execution since they are afraid of their own future," Hakim said.
Elsewhere in the interview, Hakim said that the Iraqi government does not allow anyone to interfere in Iraqi domestic affairs and that putting the Iraqi dictator to death was a national resolve.
Baghdad will review relations with governments which opposed Saddam's execution, he said.
Whatever one thinks of the government of Iraq, it remains the most broadly-based government of any large country in the region, and easily the most legitimate by the standards which prevailed in the West until the chattering classes decided it was more important to glorify kings and fascists than to support American policy. This hypocrisy is most unvarnished among those who argue that it would have been better for Iraqi elites to dispose of Saddam by coup (the favored strategy of the "realist" camp of both American political parties). Most of those who object to the execution of a criminal dictator by the Iraqi democracy after a public trial would have had no problem at all with generals or tribal leaders shooting him in the back of the head.
11 Comments:
By 
Lanky_Bastard, at
Mon Jan 08, 02:29:00 PM:
Most people think Saddam had it coming, but then, most people also think that execution was pretty ghetto. I don't see an inherent hypocrisy there.
By skipsailing, at
Mon Jan 08, 03:43:00 PM:
He's dead, all the way dead. totally and completely dead.
Is there evidence that his hanging has inspired his already quite evil supporters to new depths of depravity?
Honestly it seems that some folks just like to complain. There's an old saying that has been proved true: Some folks would complain if you hung them with a new rope. LB and john have a slightly modified version of this: they complain because Saddam was hung with a new rope.
The simple facts are clear: the Iraqis hung their tormenter. If the sucumbed to their passions during the process, why complain? Oh yeah, because its what you do.
By allen, at
Mon Jan 08, 05:20:00 PM:
The only thing about the prosecution of Saddam Hussein resembling a “show trial” was the theatrics indulged by him and his defense team. As to Sunni outrage, how does one distinguish degrees and cause?
By 
, at
Mon Jan 08, 06:18:00 PM:
Looks to me like they have a long way to go:
Video: Screaming match over Saddam on Al Jazeera
By Dawnfire82, at
Mon Jan 08, 07:29:00 PM:
Was Saddam's little ordeal a 'show trial?' Yes and no. Real 'show trials' are scripted little dramas meant to excuse the removal of some dissident or other political headache who are usually innocent of whatever they are accused. This does not match that definition; this was no innocent victim being railroaded by his parent state for deviant beliefs.
Was this otherwise a formality with a foregone conclusion? Undoubtedly. But you might as well condemn a mythical trial of Josef Stalin when the hangman, a Jewish Trotskyite, says 'So long motherfucker!' as he pulls the lever. This guy was guilty of crimes literally unimaginable in the West and he fully deserved his execution, plus. If being insulted is the worst he got, then he was born under a happy star. The fact that he wasn't beaten, electrocuted, and/or suffer power drills being shoved through his knees does demonstrate something; that he was treated more humanely by those he oppressed than the oppressed ever were. I have mixed feelings about that.
I really doubt that Saddam will be any kind of 'rallying cry.' There are far more important issues and stronger ideas at hand than some dead dictator you used to like. Sectarian strife and Sunni domination of Iraq predate Saddam.
By allen, at
Mon Jan 08, 07:58:00 PM:
Shochu John,
Saddam’s execution has aroused far less outrage on the “Arab street” than the Danish cartoons. That might demonstrate the unpredictability of cause and degree of outrage. Moreover, Muslims apparently awaken outraged. Consequently, the West is becoming less moved by the street theatre.
As to Saddam’s defense team and assassinations, the same can be said for the murder of prosecution members and their families.
Saddam’s team tried a modified version of the Charles I defense and lost, for the same reason. As to bravery:
“When Charles was beheaded on 30 January 1649, it is reputed that he wore two shirts as to prevent the cold January weather causing any noticeable shivers which the crowd could have easily mistaken for fear or weakness.”
He remained quite dead, nevertheless.
By , at
Mon Jan 08, 09:54:00 PM:
Yeah it always seems that the evil leaders always have their bootlickers just look at they way the liberals go crazy for FIDEL CASTRO and especialy that idiot JIMMY CARTER
By , at
Mon Jan 08, 11:22:00 PM:
Taking everything into consideration, the execution went well. How, you ask? Consider all of the things that could have happened after the U.S. handed over Saddam into Iraqi custody and he left the presence of U.S. eyes.
He could have been led out onto the platform, beaten to a bloody pulp.
He could have disappeared without a trace.
He could have been hanged without a drop and forced to die by strangulation.
He could have been beaten or struck on the execution platform.
But he wasn't. He appeared on the platform with no signs of having been mistreated. He asked, and was allowed, to die without a hood. The executioners then wrapped a cloth around his neck to prevent decapitation during the fall. He was clearly hanged properly and died instantly.
The only impropriety was the same sort of trash talk between Saddam and everyone in his presence that he had been exhibiting since his capture. I suspect that he wouldn't have had it any other way. Proud blustering was his trademark. Why would he change his persona in the final seconds of his life when he knew he was being videotaped?
Sadly, Tom Hanks wasn't present at the execution to ensure that Saddam's
execution was conducted according to Liberal Hollywood Standards, but
what happened was pretty damn close to what could be reasonably expected to happen in a best-case scenario, and those carping about the exact circumstances sound a whole lot like they are mourning the loss of a hero.
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Mon Jan 08, 11:33:00 PM:
I understand why Shochu John believes that the events surrounding the execution of Saddam will fuel the fire in Iraq. Sunni leaders will certainly attempt to make it so, and try to elevate him to status of martyr. And certainly, what people say, they often come to believe.
But I don't think the practical effect will be much worse, if at all. As SJ says, there will certainly be ample comments by Sunnis trying to incite followers to greater rage. It will certainly look as if we have unnecessarily given them a rallying point for awhile.
I don't think it will last for the following reasons: the Sunnis have painted themselves into a corner, and many of them know it. That Al-Sadr remains influential is their last focussed rallying point. Secondly, I don't think anything new can rouse their anger higher other than temporarily. Resentments can last a lifetime, but there's only so many times you can go to the well for fury.
By K. Pablo, at
Tue Jan 09, 08:57:00 AM:
In reflecting now upon Saddam's hanging execution, it is difficult for me to accept that it was somehow unjust. I note most of the criticism has, as a premise, that our hypertrophied notions of justice were not aped by Iraqis.
It is our hypertrophied notions of justice which have give terrorist combatants battlefield access to our court system. It is our hypertrophied notions of justice which have directly led to our troops' Rules of Engagement straightjacket. The list can go on and on, and I do not seek to bore you.
The justice meted out to Saddam was of a more poetic type. That's what my gut tells me. And certainly if your heritage contains Sharia as a component, you are likely to understand this type of justice as well.
Leftist critiques of the process are often based on their absolute rejection of the death penalty. Leftists are also fond of accusing more moderate people (such as ourselves) of an insufficient sensitivity to cultural factors. Well, here go the leftists imposing their Western views of justice on the Arab muslim peoples....
Celebrate diversity, dammit.
By Dawnfire82, at
Tue Jan 09, 07:09:00 PM:
"Celebrate diversity, dammit."
Queasy leftists are lucky that he wasn't beheaded in a public square. Or burned alive, like they're doing to people in Thailand.
