[lbo-talk] re more should be would be

Brian Siano siano at mail.med.upenn.edu
Wed Dec 17 07:00:35 PST 2003


Stephen Philion wrote:


>Exactly. Why _not_ those other guys? I'm all for throwing them into the
>courts, too. (Can't see why you're asking _me_, though...)
>
>--as i said, it doesn't matter that you wish that to happen... not one bit.
>and the answer to why not the other guys is perfectly obvious I would think,
>thus the pointlessness of wishful thinking about any form of justice outside
>of victors' justice (i.e. farce) in the case of Saddam...
>
>
This argument is a mug's game. Obviously, no one could possibly exact perfect justice for Saddam. His crimes are just too great. (Even if one subscribed to the "eye for an eye" theory of justice, how could you murder someone thousands of times over?) Matter of fact, even if the trial of Saddam Hussein were conducted as well as it possibly could-- extensive testimonies, documentary evidence, Johnny Cochran on the defense team-- it'd be impossible to satisfy everybody. (Heck, if the Iraqis try him, _they_ might decide to stick to prosecuting Saddam, and leaving the U.S. out of it. I'd prefer they didn't, but it'd be their decision, and what _I'd_ want has nothing to do with it.) In other words, you're imposing an impossible standard, i.e., it ain't justice unlss you, personaly, ran it.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list