good post.

What are our options in terms of leadership there?

In Afghanistan, we have the benefit of Karzai who generally impresses me with what little I know.

In Iraq, it appears we have few good, if any, options.

The Iraqis botched the PR aspects of this execution, and I don't favor making executions public spectacles. They should remain somber affairs, with no fanfare.

I distinguish between the concept of capital punishment, which I maintain is legally, historically, economically, morally and culturally justified and the actual implementation, which historically in our nation and in other nations is misapplied.

It is misapplied if race is a determining factor when to apply it. Same for gender.

We need to do what we can to ensure we don't execute innocent persons. It should be done without fanfare.

I'm not worried about the dignity of the executed but the dignity of the system. Saddam deserved to be shot without notice, buried where nobody could ever remember him, and no remembrance of him made.

If pigs could fly.

So we should nothing because we can't do it perfectly?

You know the efforts the legal system seeks to achieve no innocent person is executed. We employ many procedures to provide that protection. I worked as a federal judicial law clerk with others who specialized on death row inmates. There are diligent efforts to be fair. Let me further add, I know a relative intimately who participated in the decision whether to impose that penalty. It is a horrible thing to do. The relative related, even though it was done in other times, that it caused this relative to have to vomit profusely to consider the imposition. It is a very serious issue. But just because it is serious doesn't mean we should shirk the responsibility.

There are many abuses within our system of justice and I wager far more abuse is dealt out in the non-death punishments than in death cases.

Can we do more? Absolutely. Are we trying diligently? I believe so.

The whole trial was a sham from the beginning. Sadaam was convicted of killing 148 people in reprisal for a failed assasination attempt. Is it a coincidence that the trial didn't center around Sadaam's use of biological weapons against Iran and against the Kurds? Perhaps we didn't want the question to be raised as to where Sadaam acquired those biological weapons. Perhaps we didn't want it demonstrated that the U.S., by supplying Sadaam with biological weapons, was complicit in those crimes against humanity.

I don't condone Sadaam's reprisal for the failed assasination attempt, but it's hardly something extraordinary. I just find it hypocritical that we didn't urge the Iraqi's to try Sadaam for the real "crimes against humanity" that he committed, crimes he committed when he was in our pocket.

Actually, they are in the middle of a second trial associated with the Kurd genocide:

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650219135,00.html

"At his death, he was in the midst of a second trial, charged with genocide and other crimes for a 1987-88 military crackdown that killed an estimated 180,000 Kurds in northern Iraq. Experts said the trial of his co-defendants was likely to continue despite his execution."

Apparently they decided that one death penalty was enough so they just went ahead and executed him.

If we can't execute humans with perfect justice we shouldn't do it.

does this apply to war also?

Nice soundbite, but we can't do anything with perfect justice so no justice should be rendered. I submit we do the very best we can.

Talk about an anti-climactic trial -- trying someone who is already dead. How much press is that going to get? Is the timing of the trials of coincidence? I don't know whether it is or not, but it's an interesting question.