Inconvenient Justice

Shiite militants celebrate Saddam’s sentencing in Sadr City. You can bet that these militiamen won’t thank the US for bringing the dictator to justice. Note the obsolete rifle held aloft by the main figure. The weapon is more useful for killing unarmed civilians than fighting well-armed US troops. It’s no small wonder why the Mahdi Army got mauled in Karbala and Najaf.

When Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed, Bush’s critics were not pleased. Democratic Congressman Pete Stark declared that the killing was performed, “just to cover Bush’s (rear)”. While another Democratic Congressman (Dennis Kucinich) contemptuously stated that the White House “can spin it all they want”. It’s as if he believed that there was no significance in the death of the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Even more bizarre was the statement of Michael Berg, the father of an American civilian (Nick Berg) who is believed to have been killed by Zarqawi. He was quoted as saying, “Zarqawi is a human being. He has a family who are reacting just as my family reacted when Nick was killed, and I feel bad for that. I feel doubly bad, though, because Zarqawi is also a political figure…”

A political figure? Was he elected to office?

Following a successful countrywide referendum on a new Constitution, a permanent National Assembly was created in Iraq’s first truly fair elections in their entire history. Now this government has finally sentenced Saddam Hussein to hang by the neck for one of his many crimes against humanity.

Even before the verdict was announced the conspiracy accusations began flying. Saddam’s defense attorney, Khalil al-Dulaimi, begged to postpone the sentence because he claimed it was timed to boost President Bush for the mid-term elections. It is not Bush’s fault that the trial is over and Saddam was found guilty for his reprisals in the wake of the Dujail assassination attempt. The crime was committed by Saddam and he should pay for it. Yet Bush critics didn’t hesitate to hop on the bandwagon and spew the typical anti-Bush fare.

The Huffington Post chimed in with an article that rehashes a tired leftwing argument based on moral relativism. Joan Shore blurted out, “How can anyone in a civilized world justify or condone what has happened? Invading (preemptively) a sovereign nation, occupying it, capturing its leader, setting up a kangaroo court, and sentencing him to hang for crimes against his own people...

Did we dare do this with Idi Amin, with Joseph Stalin, with Chou En-lai, with Pol Pot?”

First off, this sovereign country invaded another sovereign country, Kuwait.

Secondly, what is so evil about bringing a criminal to justice?

Third, today Iraq is ruled by a legitimate government while Saddam seized power in a bloody purge.

Finally, I wonder about the maturity of Bush critics. What the hell does Idi Amin, Joe Stalin or anyone else have to do with Saddam Hussein? Why must we be continually subjected to these immature arguments that claim a dictator was unfairly treated because he was made to pay for his crimes while other dictators aren’t. The only relevance that argument presents is that we aren’t bringing enough dictators to justice.

Yesterday a BBC opinion piece hopefully declared that this verdict will have little impact on the American elections. The article asks, “Was it an election ruse, bearing the mark of Karl Rove, the President’s chief strategist?”

Herein lies the rub. Even if the verdict occurred in June it would still be labeled as a cover-up or as some other injustice by Bush’s critics, just like Zarqawi’s death was. The anti-Bush crowd channels everything that happens in Iraq into any possible means that can be used against the President. In their minds the conviction and sentencing of Saddam Hussein is no cause for celebration because it will benefit President Bush. This is why they obsess so much over the verdict’s importance to the elections. They can only see boogey men at work behind the timing because it upsets their propaganda which paints President Bush as the real criminal.

Since anti-Bush activists are busy making victims out of Iraqi Baathists, Al Qaeda and the Taliban - Saddam Hussein’s guilt introduces a hefty dose of reality that disturbs their worldview. It makes them quite uncomfortable.