[Cerek the Barbaric]

You make some good counterpoints to the article, Timber, but I felt your logic was flawed in one area. You mentioned the Constitution a couple of times in referencing Saddam's right for a "fair trial". That is well and good, but the Constitution would apply only if Saddam Hussein is brought to trial here in the U.S. - something that is NOT likely to happen. Therefore, it doesn't really matter a whit what the Constitution says regarding fair trials and protections for the guilty as well as the innocent...because none of it will apply to Hussein's trial.

And while you did offer good counterpoints to the bias expressed by the articles author, I have to agree with him to a certain degree. As I mentioned in another thread, it is ironic to me that Saddam Hussein is undeniably guilty of a number of atrocities and crimes against humanity, but it was President Bush that was called a "modern day Hitler" this time last year. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img]

President Bush may have flaws in many areas, but I challenge anybody to show evidence of any crimes against humanity he has committed - especially on a scale equal to Saddam Hussein or Adolf Hitler.