Ugly as this may sound, the reason Saddam's execution raised such a perplexing reaction probably has something to do with how sick contemporary Arab culture has become. When Westerners are expressing regret about his execution, they have an eye on the Arab world's violent and emotional reaction.

I am against the death penalty with two exceptions: wartime military crimes (treason, cowardice, murder of prisoners and civilians, mutiny) and tyrants such as Saddam. That being the case, I have nothing against his being condemned to death. But what this unwholesome display of spite showed was that his death was being treated, not, as with the sombre and silent ceremonies at Nuremberg, as a necessary act of justice, but as a piece of sectarian violence. So might die an IRA man caught by hardline loyalists, or a loyalist torn apart by a republican mob. And the fact that the trial itself covered not the whole of Saddam's crimes, but only one specific act which just happened to strike at the current Prime Minister's party and supporters just reinforces my impression. Charles Krauthammer, whom you could never describe as a sentimentalist or a weakling on these matters, has some excellent remarks on this matter.

We have no right, so the story goes, to impose our values on another culture, to assist the birth of democracy, to overthrow even a brutal dictator. However, when it comes to the execution of a brutal dictator, then that other culture should strictly adhere to the rules and standards laid down by us.

An aside: there was nothing but the mere appearance of justice at Nuremberg. There still has been no real justice for the victims of the Holocaust. Nuremberg was a farce.

Joshua: well, yes, we know that where you are concerned there would never have been any of your notion of "justice" unless every last European not of the Jewish religion had been lined up and shot. I was speaking to sane people.