The Big Trial

Today I will post about this whole "trial" thing in Iraq. The Bush administration has used the trial to show that progress is being made in Iraq. After all - there is a trial! There is a real court house, a judge, witnesses, defense lawyers, and the whole nine yards.

But will it be a fair trial? I say no. Not that the man deserves a fair trial or anything - but lets be honest here. It is impossible for the man to get anything close to a fair trial.

The judge will either be part of the old click, or not. If he is part of the old system, Saddam will be found not guilty. If the judge was NOT part of the old system, Saddam will be found guilty - no matter what. Why even call a witness? Why have lawyers? Why put on the whole show at all? Do they think they are fooling anyone here?

And how can you have a trial in a nation with no laws? There is no Constitution in Iraq. There is no government to speak of really. The nation is involved in a Civil War at this point - and in all civil conflicts both sides say the other side is wrong.

Furthermore - who gave Saddam the means to pull off the crimes he is accused of? Humm lets see here, who sold Iraq conventional weapons and ignored the use of chemical weapons during the 1980s Iran/Iraq war? Who might have even sold chemical weapons to Iraq in the 1980s conflict?

This photo, taken in 1983, is of none other than Donald Rumsfeld when he had more hair and was a special envoy of Ronald Regan. Yes, Saddam was our good buddy back then - because he was fighting that mean old guy in Iran. The same guy we were secretly giving weapons to, because there was some kind of "guns for hostages" deal made.

And we say "we never negotiate with terrorists". We shure did make a deal these two men! We knew they were both on the unsavory side, but we needed stooge A to keep stooge B in check. We gave Saddam chemicals (or at the very least ignored the fact Iraq was getting chemicals from somewhere), which he used against Iran - then we act so shocked that he would use them against others.

I have to wonder if he will bother to use the "I was a stooge of the USA" arguement in "court", after accusing the judgs (and the entire legal system) of being a stooge as well.

Chances are, Saddam will never bring any of this up in the court. I think he already knows what the verdict is. He will never admit to being anything except what he thought himself to be - the President of Iraq, stooge to no man, the alpha male, the head honcho, and so on.

In all reality, this trial should be in the Hauge. But for political reasons the Bush administration does not want that. Having the trial in Europe would suggest that things are not exactly under control in Iraq - so the show is being staged in a building made just for the trial, in the heavily guarded green zone.

Now do not get me wrong here! I am not saying that the man was not a bad dude. He clearly was. Most dictators are not exactly loveable people after all. You can not keep the majority down using flowers and fine chocolate - you have to use bullets and boot heels. Saddam did this very well and for many years. The crimes he is accused of in court are probably just the tip of his personal iceberg of death.

But all during the time he was doing these bad things, not only did the USA know about it - we were giving him the means to do so. We were also looking the other way. The thinking at the time was the arab guy who wore western suits and army uniforms was better than the islamic law hardline openly anti-west arab guy. Even if both were actually giant turds.

If Iraq had never invaded Kuwait, Bush would be treating the man like he treats his other oil buddies over there. His crimes would be overlooked, so long as he kept pumping that oil.