Isn't an eye for an eye at the heart of most civilised justice systems? Isn't the punishment meant to be proportionate to the crime? No wonder people complain when people who speed in their cars get let of with a fine.

Not really. 148 people is a lot in my book and if it means convicting him a nod is as good as a wink in Saddam's case.

In what way did Saddam not get a proper trial? He may not have been tried for Genocide but trying him for a "minor" crime of the same nature is surely better than letting him off the hook?

Yes, the penalty must have some kind of proportion to the crime. Yes, there is proof that he authorized the killing. Yes, he probably deserved to die. But if you are trying to convince a country that your system is better than the one they used to have, you need to do it in a clear way.

From what I heard, only three countries supported his death: US, Iran and Israel. When the whole international community is against something, I consider that something is flawed.

The real problem with Saddam is not that he was executed. The real problem is that USA goes after some dictators and lets other thrive.

The issue is not if Saddam killed 148 or 148 thousand people. The issue is what we do as humanity to save us from wars and ultimately annihilation.

The west does not teach real democracy with acts like this...it only teaches that the only real value these days is power. But if the game is reversed (and it will) and countries like China get more powerful than the USA, then there will be a payback and in the same way. And that can only be back, as it will certainly mean a global nuclear war.

I've been observing the discussion for some time. While I agree in principle with what you say about the fairness of the proceedings, I'm curious to hear the answer to one specific question: how would you go about providing Saddam Hussein with a fair trial?

There are some sad facts that we all have to face. For example, two defense lawyers employed by Saddam Hussein have been killed. Do you think it was possible to prevent such a thing from happenning (using reasonable means)? If it was possible, how? Making everything about the trial secret is not a viable option, because then the public would feel cheated. If it wasn't possible, can a fair trial still be held when things like this (which are not in any way under the court's control) are happenning?

There were many other occurences that influenced the trial in some way, and also many political powers using the trial to further their own agenda, both within and outside of Iraq.

I admit that there were major flaws in the process, including the public-forced resignation of judge Rizgar Amin on grounds of being 'too lenient'. However, I also think that an absolutely fair trial for a person so well-known for his actions is an idealistic dream we can never hope to achieve.

Also, one final question. Do you think it would be better or worse for the entirety of Iraq to let the Saddam Hussein trial go on for years, which would be neccessary to have him tried on all charges?

Of course, we can't be sure, but I do think that having the trial go on and on would only destabilise the country further. If I had to choose holding a more fair but painful trial (which would with great probability achieve the same conclusion as the unfair one) or the well-being of my whole country... well, let's just say it would be a difficult choice.

As I said, I'm arguing from a luxurious position.

I find that impossible to answer, not knowing what was done to prevent it in the first place.

Definately.

I think so, but I never said it is easy (or that they didn't try). Just that the end result wasn't it.

I think it would have been better to have him tried for some of the more horrible things he did, yes. Note that there are two trials against him still in progress(!).
I wouldn't argue that the trial should have been dragged out, but the way it concluded now felt rushed - which is not a good thing.

I'm not sure. I don't think this will do much for the stability of the country either way. If anything, I think it will enrage what following he has left even more.

Care to explain that? Or are you again confusing questions and objections against the trial process and Hussein worship?

I formed my personal views mainly by reading history books. From both "western" and "middle eastern" historians. Notable authors include: The Sun, Dail Mirror, The Grauniad and to balance things out, Viz.