'We Got Him': Let Iraqis decide what to do with Saddam

Opinion Journal ^ | 12/15/03 | editorial board

[Pokey78]

When U.S. administrator for Iraq L. Paul Bremer spoke those words yesterday, viewers around the world rejoiced. But it was the spontaneous reaction of Iraqi journalists--who could not contain their emotions when images of the captured Saddam Hussein were flashed on a screen--that demonstrated just how important this moment is for Iraq's reconstruction.

[stylin_geek]

How fortunate is it that Uday and Qusay were killed? Imagine if those two maniacs were still running loose after Saddam was captured.

[elli1]

I could not agree w/ this article more.

[dr_who_2]

Right on.

[ARCADIA]

As long as Iraqis have ownership over the process, this has the possibility to be a cathartic experience for that nation, and one that prevents Saddam from becoming a martyr for an ongoing resistance.

How would you feel if the Iraqis decide to free him, put him in charge, and award him a new palace? Would you want to be a member of the Iraqi jury that convicts this SOB and risk having thousands of his followers after you for the rest of eternity?

Iraq has neither a government, nor order, nor much of a legal system right now. The process is still under development, and it will take quite some time to pull it together. The best way to go is to use a US military tribunal, with open media coverage, and plenty of local testimony/condemnation.

So be it if it creates a few martyrs. We should be willing to do all that we can to help them martyr themselves ASAP.

[formercalifornian]

Or if he somehow escaped, what would that do for Iraq or the U.S.

[MissAmericanPie]

No, it's fine to let Iraq have the first crack at him. But if the Iraq court system proves to be as corrupt as the US court system, it's best to have a back up plan. First try him in Iraq, then before an American military tribunal.

[Post Toasties]

I think there are several justifiable benefits to letting the new Iraqi government try Saddam Hussein for his war crimes and crimes against the Iraqi people.

[umgud]

Sadman should be told he is going to die.

How he dies should be contingent on how cooperative he is.

[ARCADIA]

The last thing Iraq needs right now is a polarizing show trial. It would probably end up with the country blowing apart into various ethnic tribes. We should try him; ask the locals merely to state the facts, render and carry out judgement, and then move on. This is our loose end to clean up; the Iraqis should remain focused on the future and on the positive aspects of building a new and better nation for themselves. There is nothing to be gained (except perhaps for our media clowns) by creating an emotional circus a la Rodney King or OJ.

[John Valentine]

How about this:

"However, the tantalising detail provided in the intelligence document uncovered by Iraq's interim government suggests that Atta's involvement with Iraqi intelligence may well have been far deeper than has hitherto been acknowledged.

"Written in the neat, precise hand of Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and one of the few named in the US government's pack of cards of most-wanted Iraqis not to have been apprehended, the personal memo to Saddam is signed by Habbush in distinctive green ink.

"Headed simply "Intelligence Items", and dated July 1, 2001, it is addressed: "To the President of the Ba'ath Revolution Party and President of the Republic, may God protect you."

"The first paragraph states that 'Mohammed Atta, an Egyptian national, came with Abu Ammer (an Arabic nom-de-guerre - his real identity is unknown) and we hosted him in Abu Nidal's house at al-Dora under our direct supervision.

" 'We arranged a work programme for him for three days with a team dedicated to working with him . . . He displayed extraordinary effort and showed a firm commitment to lead the team which will be responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy.'"

If a private communicaton between Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti and Saddaam Hussein dated July 1, 2001, regarding Mohammad Atta and the commitment he hdd made for "attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy." cannot convince someone that there is a direct connection between Saddam Hussein and the events of September 11, 2003, then that someone must be Howard Dean or Cynthia McKinney.

Any reasonably intelligent person would ask if Mohammad Atta had attacked any targets other than the World Trade Center or Pentagon between July 1, 2001 and September 11, 2001, because he certainly could not have had any expectation of doing so AFTER September 11. The attacks of September 11, 2001 were the only attacks directed and coordinated by Mohammad Atta in the period in question.

The inescapable conclusion is that the targets referenced in this memo wer the ones in fact destroyed by the team led by Mohammad Atta. And if one gives credence to the memorandum at all, these targets were "agreed" to be destroyed by Saddam Hussein.

What is described here is no mere "link"; it looks more to me like a chain of cammand.

The Democrats that have been moronically chanting the mantra "No link between Iraq and Al Qaida" and "No link between Iraq and 9-11", ought now to commit public seppaku out of respect to the shame they have brought on themselves and their nation.

But, never mind, they won't do it. At the very least, though, they ought to have the decency to change the name of their party to "The Idiot Party" as a clarification for the least intelligent among us.

[ARCADIA]

Correction: "We should try him; ask the locals merely to state the facts, render and carry out judgement, and then move on." should read: "We should try him; ask the locals merely to state the facts, we should render and carry out judgement, and then move on."

[elli1]

The Iraqis have suffered at Saddam's hands--first & most. Don't demean them by treating them like little kids.

[ppaul]

[Caipirabob]

Whatever they do, they should be tagging and attaching any sort of electronic tracking mechanisms that exist to his tail just to ensure that even if he tries to escape they know where he is. I don't think Bush will go "cream puff" on this though. If anything we will hold him secure for the Iraqis. Personally, I think it's such a huge intelligence coup alone that we won't see anything happen for a while, except perhaps an ongoing shortage of jumper cables in the Middle-East.