Why Are We Trying to Kill Saddam?

I know it's hard to think when the President and his administration are doing such a great job of re-directing -- "no, we haven't found any WMDs yet ... yes, Osama's still Bin Forgotten ... yes, we know the economy is ... oh wait, look! Is that two queers trying to get married? Stop those bastards!" -- but try to pull back from their rather ham-fisted attempt at redirection, put aside the complicated feelings about the war and its aftermath and ask yourself this question:

Why are we trying so hard to kill Saddam Hussein?

I mean, it's not like he's ever going to be allowed to return to power, by either us or the Iraqui people. Indeed, if he somehow manages to survive this murderous manhunt he will probably live out the remainder of his years the way Pol Pot did. So he no longer poses any credible threat to the United States (not that he ever really did, of course). And we've already established that he actually didn't have anything to do with 9/11, the only possible justification I can come up with for actively trying to kill him now that hostilities have ceased.

So what's up with us actively hunting human beings we just don't happen to like? What happened to putting such people on trial?

How can we tell other countries that assassination and violence don't solve anything, when we are quite clearly and deliberately trying to murder someone, and spending $4 billion a month doing it?

When did we turn into a pack of bloodthirsty, sadistic murderers? And how does that make us better than him, exactly?

Is it just possible that this policy, like the policy of pre-emptive war, like the policy of ignoring international treaties, like the policy of mortgaging our kids' futures to buy some thrills today -- may come back to haunt us someday?

Ponder that, won't you?