Now that he’s been captured, the big question is what to do with Saddam Hussein. Currently it looks like he’ll be handed over to the Iraqis, but why aren’t the coalition hauling him up to The Hague for possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction? That’s why we went to war with him, right? The evidence is going to turn up real soon now, isn’t it?
I guess the coalition is concerned that justice at The Hague is so blind that it takes her a long time to tap her way through even the simplest open-and-shut case and Saddam is such an evil rat-fink bastard that he probably destroyed his WMDs months, even years before the war just so we couldn’t find them.
But that’s OK, Bush has already given himself carte blanche for dealing with terrorists and after all Saddam was responsible for 9/11, wasn’t he? Or was he harbouring al Qaeda operatives? Doesn’t matter, the important thing is that he isn’t an American national, which makes him a potential terrorist, so he can be tried in a US court … well, not in a real US court - they’re so full of bleeding-heart lefties that they’d probably want to give him a medal or something. And the military has been overrun by faggots, so a court martial is no good either. No, what Saddam needs is some good ol’ manly Texas justice Dubya style.
Mind you, the coalition is probably worried that terrorist-loving liberals will whinge that these anti-terrorism powers are somehow unconstitutional, or in violation of international law, or something, and that would mean that they would have to let loose that other menace to the free world: David Hicks. Can’t risk that ever happening.