In naming "You" as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year," the magazine put a mirror on the cover because, Editor Richard Stengal said, "it literally reflects the idea that you, not us, are transforming the information age."
Too bad we couldn't do something similar in the aftermath of the Saddam Hussein execution. We could truly use a good look in the mirror right now.
Given the obvious brutality of Saddam's crimes, it is easy to dismiss his execution as nothing more than a fitting end for an evil despot. The coverage of his death ran for roughly two news cycles, relegating him to a mere footnote in the annals of history.
I cannot put myself in the shoes of those who tasted firsthand Saddam's atrocities, thus I do not feel qualified to offer an opinion on those who took to the streets in celebration upon learning of his death.
I do, however, feel qualified to offer a critique on America's involvement in this process; in a word, shameful. The execution of Saddam is a horrific reminder of how far astray we have gone from our own values.
The president is correct that Saddam received the type of justice that he denied countless others. But it was still a "Judge Roy Bean" style of justice in which the outcome was known long before Saddam was pulled out of a hole near Tikrit.
Our action's (purpose) to preempt the possibility of danger in the future, which has been the basis for our invasion and occupation of Iraq, is a doctrine that is not recognized under international law. British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith stated as much to British Prime Minister Tony Blair in a March 7, 2003, memo.
If our policy in Iraq were based on the nobility of our cause and the evil of Saddam, why stop with Iraq? Why not invade and execute Sudan's Omar al-Bashir, Burma's Than Shwe, or Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe?
Between Paul Wolfowitz's "We got him" statement in December 2003 and Saddam's execution, is there anything we could have done that would have served as a benefit for Iraqis, who must now contend daily with the mess that the United States has created?
Saddam takes more questions to his grave than his hasty execution answers. Where are the billions of dollars Saddam transferred to foreign accounts before his fall in 2003? Where are the mass graves of thousands of unaccounted victims -- the bloody residue of his reign? What hope do those families have of ever learning the truth?
Though Saddam was convicted of murdering 148 Shiite men, additional trials might have proven embarrassing for the United States. The U.S.'s support for Saddam, tacit or explicit, spanned three consecutive presidential administrations. During that time, his brutality was hardly a secret.
Saddam's execution also creates the irresistible urge to ask the painfully obvious: was it worth it? Was the satisfaction of seeing the noose around his neck worth U.S. troop deaths exceeding the 3,000 mark? Does this offset no-bid contracts, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay? Was it worth it to experience our current moral and economic bankruptcy?
I recognize the difficulty of taking a position that would appear to be in support of Saddam. I further acknowledge that I am adamantly opposed to capital punishment. But as Saddam marched up to the gallows, I fear that he was standing proxy for our own democratic values.
At every unpredictable turn known as the Iraq policy we have gone in the wrong direction.
How did we go from the tragedy of 9/11 to executing dictators who posed no threat to our national security by ignoring international law? A truth and reconciliation commission, similar to that conducted by the South African government, could have done more for the healing of the Iraqi people than a drive-through-like execution.
Instead we must be content to dig ourselves further into an immoral abyss, comforted only by the fact that we had to "out-Saddam" the dictator in order to execute him.
Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist. E-mail him at byron@byronspeaks.com or leave a message at (510) 208-6417. Send a letter to the editor to soundoff@angnewspapers.com.