[Amp Divorax]

Originally Posted by normac

Like I said, I'm not defending the fact that he's done terrible things, only that he was tried unfairly. If death was inevitable all along, then why the trial in the first place? We could say that Bush is responsible for the death of just as many Iraqi civilians for ordering the whole invasion. Should we sentance him to death by hanging as well after a sham trial?

Reading nova's posts: You're so right. His death is only to serve as symbolism for a new era politically. If he remains alive then there will always be supporters for him.

You can say the same thing about confessed serial killers in Indiana who get the death penalty for much less than what he's done. Also, trying to compare the decisions made by the two of them doesn't really work too well since Saddam's actions were deliberately done for one. While Bush did start a war, he didn't do it with the expressed intention of causing widespread terror or intentionally killing innocent civilians. Yes, there are innocent civilians who have died in OIF, but I should state that such a thing is unforunately unavoidable in a war!