--i'm not sure about that. they described saddam as a vicious dictator, serious human rights violator, etc. but the monster aspect i don't really see in their rhetoric. i don't get the impression from ali or chomsky that saddam was a 'monster', he was a run of the mill dictator, not much different from many others that exist worldwide. they certainly never bought into the hitler comparisons. in fact they go out of their way to make it clear that saddam wasn't a 'monster' as is understood in the monster discourse (i.e. monsters stick out from other bad guys)...
my sense from them is that they analysed the saddam regime the way they would analyse the post-Stalin soviet regimes of past. worthy of opposition, but no need to agree with the monster analogies...if by monster we mean monsters as in those bad guys who really stick out...as opposed to run of the mill dictators...
steve