I see a little debate starting up among the nitpicking contingents about

whether or not it wouldn’t have been better to take the Hussein boys alive.

Here’s my two cents’ worth: we did absolutely the right thing.

There were just too many downsides to having them alive–not least the

nonzero probability of their escaping and thereby making us (a) start over

with them, and (b) look like moon-booted doofuses (doofi?).

Even from the intelligence point of view, it might have been better to off

them quickly, before they had the chance to destroy or hand away important

stuff.

Worst of all though, the problem with keeping them alive is: WHAT DO YOU DO

WITH THEM? Given modern sensibilities, they’re going to end up with comfy

cells, celebrity lawyers, and megabuck book deals. No, no, no, no, no.

(There might, of course, be the prospect of Nuremberg-type trials, in Iraq

itself. This “victors’ justice” always smells bad to me, though. It would

smell bad to a lot of Iraqis, too, given that the _actual_ victor in the

recent war was the US of A, and any Iraqis conducting or participating in

such trials would be doing so on the backs of our war effort. There’s a lot

to be said for summary execution. I would have applied it to Goering, Tojo

& Co., too.)