Those who disregard the broader implications of what all this means by Saddam's capture make my point. His depravity and human rights abuses SHOULD have been our rationale - not fabricated and made up lies. From the start Shrub and his admin should have been truthful and things might have been different.

For example, if Shrub et al had framed this debate by pointing out the removal of Hussein would have decades of positive implications for the world by stablizing the middle east for the entire world, he could have been more successful. Now through Shurb's cowboy antics we have harmed our relationships with sincere allies.

It is sad that we are seeing this issue through our myopic American eyes. Something that really bothers me is that all of the sudden the right is concerned with these human rights abuses when in fact the largest majority of them happened when Republican presidents were in office.

One other issue is that one huge problem of America as seen through the eyes of other cultures is how we pick and choose the dictator we support at the moment. A great current example of this is the China/Taiwan issue. Here we are, America, siding with a human rights brutal country such as China and not Taiwan.

And frankly, the capture of Hussein is not a "partisan" issue from my stand point, but a human rights issue. Again, I ask those on the right, where the hell were they when close to a million people were hacked to death in Rawanda? Where are they now in regards to the Congo? Where in regards to Saudia Arabia? China?

If we are going to be a country concerned with human rights, then goddamit this means throughout the world and not just countries where we have an economic intrerest and decide to back the dictator of the month that sides with American interests.