I don't think Saddam Hussein led a very enlightened regime, but a few observations are in order:
  • There was no civil war under Saddam Hussein.
  • Saddam Hussein did not support terrorism and indeed prevented it within his country.
  • Saddam Hussein indeed killed many people and oppressed more with the aim of stabilizing his regime. But stabilizing his regime prevented a civil war with a potentially much larger death toll.
  • Saddam himself didn't kill nearly as many people as the embargo imposed against Iraq by the United States, which caused the deaths of millions of children.
  • Now that Saddam has been removed, Iraq is in a civil war that has so far cost 400.000 or more lives - many more than in Saddam's regime.
  • Now that Saddam has been removed, Iraq is a genuine terrorist haven.
  • It is realistic to expect that things are only about to get even worse.
Who, then, is the real criminal? Who is responsible for most of the deaths that have happened in Iraq in the past 20 years?

Is it Saddam Hussein?

No.

The United States and Europe are responsible for a factor of magnitude more deaths in Iraq than Saddam Hussein's regime was. The embargo killed millions of people due to lack of food and medicine, and the civil war has killed upwards of 400.000 already, and is going to kill more.

Granted: Saddam Hussein behaved stupidly enough to attract all this to happen. But he is not, eventually, the cause for all this suffering and death.

So why sentence him to death?

When Saddam Hussein's death sentence is carried out in a few weeks, and George W. Bush appears on TV croaking about justice, it will be a sad travesty. The real perpetrators of much bigger crimes against Iraq will remain free.