This is the question Democrats should be publicly asking over and over again. Why are we going to turn Saddam over to Iraq for trial?
Did we turn the Nazis over to the German people after WWII? Of course not. Their crimes of aggression were tried by the Allies. Having defeated the Nazis, it would have been patently absurd to have turned their fates over to the people who essentially put them into power.
And what if Iraq acquits Saddam? Is that a decision that Americans wil be comfortable with? I think not. Better yet, what if they acquit him and then re-elect him in free elections? As ludicrous as that may sound, is that a possibility - no matter how remote - that we should accept? And yet, by turning Saddam over to Iraq, aren't we disclaiming any right to object to such an outcome?
Democrats need to remind people that, no matter how laudable an outcome, we did not invade Iraq to bring a criminal to justice. We invaded to disarm a country.
The fact that the international community has no basis on which to try Saddam for a failure to comply with international WMD agreements should not be allowed to be forgotton.
Does anyone think that if we had found substantial WMD that we would not be trying Saddam ourselves?