The one question I have for the leftist peaceniks who call Saddam's execution a warcrime, is how can you be surprised or disturbed that he was executed? Let's just be very specific about the facts of the case:

1. The man was linked directly or indirectly to the deaths of more than enough people to warrant guilt of a capital crime.
2. There is no doubt in any sane person's mind that he was guilty of far more than he was convicted for.
3. He actually got a pretty fair trial, considering the facts 1 and 2, and that allowing him to get off on a technicality would probably have plunged Iraq into a fullscale civil war.

I'm no fan of our invasion of Iraq. I think it was a stupid, stupid decision, and I think Bush has handled it like a rank amateur.

But even I can concede that there is simply no way to call Saddam's execution a crime or even a Bad Thing for Iraq^tm. In fact, as generally anti-intervention and pro-traditional military (militia-based system our founders used) as I am, I would buy Bush a drink without hesitation for putting the Butcher of Baghdad to death.

Maybe seeing his corpse strung up like that will actually cause more violent people in the region to think twice about trying to follow in his path. Even if it doesn't, we'll at least have gone on record as saying clearly that while we may have our heads up our collective posterior on how to run a war these days, we haven't lost our edge on putting mass-murdering tyrants to the sword.