a refund?

not really, because we sure got our money's worth. fucked with the iranians. destabilized the middle east to the point that tottering oligarchic monarchies actually needed our help, which kept our foot on the neck of the world oil supply. then provided the ultimate distraction when bush began swinging wildly after 9-11.

so do you feel safer from terrorism now that they dug him out of his hole?

remember what the pres said and mark it well, because this may be the beginning of the end for people like me:

"if you're not with us, you're against us."

kinda like valerie plame. but i bet you don't even remember her, or joe wilson...

Touché, turtle. What do accomplices deserve? This is the fine line that the ham-handed neo-cons will have to walk this spring and summer; how do they get Saddam terminated without exposing their role in his rise to power? They know that the legitimacy of his sentence will be questioned if it's carried out by their puppets, yet they don't dare allow it to be tried elsewhere. Even if the rest of the Arab world hated Saddam with a passion, they will always expect non-Muslims to butt out of their justice; how will their untried system work when they haven't even resolved the conflicts between Sunni, Shiite, Kurds, et al?

Somewhere there are letters like those that have surfaced between Kissinger and certain parties in Chile in the very early 70's...

The 'we' issue--I'm sure I don't deserve punishment but it's hard for me to understand how certain people in the Reagan and current administrations sleep at night. This is one worry I have--no one in the admin. really can afford to have Saddam talk or have the whole story come out. Will they suppres it by having some joke trial.

But then I think--wait! We have 50% of the story anyway. We know that the U.S. sold him arms and denied his crimes, etc. Then in retaliation for his 'defiance' the U.S. starved the Iraqi people. When that didn't work we invaded and killed a lot of them. And apparently no one seems to care. So would those in the current and former admins. who worked with Saddam really be worried at this point about looking bad?

I feel sorry for all those super conservatives out there. I mean, it must be no small feat to delude yourself into thinking that Saddam was (1) a good guy when Reagan dealt with him, (2) a bad guy when Bush Sr. waged war on him, (3) a good guy while Cheney and his chums were making money off him, and (4) then again a bad guy when Bush Jr. went after him.

Couple that logic with the cries for a smaller government that doesn't interfere in our lives, but which at the same time should be allowed to regulate what goes on in private bedrooms (read: "sodomy" and/or abortion).

The contradictions just melt my mind.

frankly, i'm rather surprised this particular post has only seen five comments. you people are slacking.

Well, much like our dealings with Stalin during World War II, Hussein was once the lesser of many evils. The world is sadly not like the Superfriends, where Superman never makes deals with Lex Luthor under any circumstances. But, on the bright side, the animation is slightly better.

It's the Janet Jackson Principle of dealing with loons like Hussein and bin Laden -- what have you done for me lately? It's a given that whoever runs Iraq for the forseeable future will wind up going mad with power -- something in the water over there. As Woody Allen said, in six months, "we'll be stealing Erno's nose."

Now, we just need to get rid of Castro. I hate that guy.

I guess it's funny I mention him, since many people argue that Gore lost votes in Florida because of the Gonzalez situation.