Does Saddam's execution justify the war in Iraq?

Question

16,273 Iraqi civilians died in 2006 alone and just under 60,000 civilians have died in total since the beginning of the American occupation of Iraq :
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070102/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
On the penultimate day of the year, Saddam Hussein was executed after an illegal trial fixed and supported by a US government that had him hanged and therefore swiftly silenced before any pending trials revealed the extent to which American arms companies had been working with the totalitarian dictator until very recently, thus avoiding any embarassment.
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17212

Given the total disaster and the fact that the number of US soldiers alone (not to mention Iraqis) who have died in Iraq is now greater than the number of people who died in the WTC on 911, and given that this war was illegal according to international war and there were, in fact, no WMD in Iraq, does Saddam's execution alone justify the war?

Aztec, I fail to see the comedy you see in the death of 16,273 innocent people in the space of a single year as a result of the destabalization of their country following illegal occupation by a foreign power.

Answer 1

The horrific and brutal murder of Saddam Hussein by a rabble of thieves and corrupt officials is an absolute disgrace. Shame on all of us.

I am intrigued by the figures you have stated in a very thorough and well constructed question. I would like to refer you to a study carried out by the lancet in October 2006, which although quickly denounced as inaccurate by the US administration responsible for the mass genocide was actually conducted according the the US' own concensus policies. This study estimates the total number of deaths in Iraq since the beginning of the illegal occupation to be closer to 655,000. This is significantly higher than the number of deaths Saddam was sentenced to death for. Can we expect blue berets to turn up in Washington and Whitehall to carry out an extraordinary rendition to collect Bush and Blair and lead them to the Gallows ?

Answer 2

About right on all counts, and the Iraq war like most conflicts we we've been in not was only illegal but costly and stupid as well. This whole idea about revenge for 9/11 is wrong, as it was not the Iraqi's nor the Afghans that had any part of this attack, but those were about all Saudi's, except for two. International law prohibits invading and killing another nations leaders without being sanctioned by the UN or international governing body. We went into Iraq strictly for the benefit of Israel, and will more than likely have troops there for the next 50 years or so, just like in Japan.

Answer 3

I thought it was kind of lame for them to pull him out of his country, considering now it means anyone could do it to anyone. In reality though, Bush only got away with it because of the attack on the WTC, but I don't know if Saddam said he helped with the attack of the WTC though. I wouldn't think he needed to help considering Osama is extremely rich. Saddam probably was guilty, but if he wasn't it's just how the world turns and sucks for him. I do not like how he ran his country though. Anyways, I guess to answer your question I wouldn't think it justifies, the number of troops we lost was horrible and I would be more content if they captured Osama, but Saddam had to be executed or the war would be for naught

Answer 4

No. Al-tough he was a person that did need to be dealt with
accordingly, The war in Iraq did not need to happen until after they (U.S. Government) captured Bin Laden . Bin Laden should have been the center of the manhunt for his actions on 9/11. Saddam should have been dealt with after Bin Laden.

Answer 5

of course not. this was never about saddam, bush and his cronies just had to say that afterwards because their first reason turned out to be a lie. and bush has also now said that iraq wasn't involved in 9/11 at all, they still claim that the war there is a part of the war on terror, but that's only true because we made it so by invading. certainly his execution was justifiable in and of itself, and he was undoubtedly guilty, but that still doesn't justify the invasion. all the stupid neocons gots us in there because we were "going to be greeted as liberators" and now they haven't got the balls to admit they were wrong

Answer 6

You people never stop do you? LOL

Thanks for the laugh!

-Aztec276

Answer 7

no, but it doesn't matter now because he's dead.