Should Saddam still be in power?

War supporters have taken to asking this question. They ask it, because all that is left to support the war is rhetorical trickery, now that it has been confirmed that Iraq was free of the weapons that were the reason for the war.

So should Saddam still be in power? Of course not.

Some good can come from an evil. The evil of invading Iraq for false pretenses resulted in the good that is the removal of Saddam.

Similarly the evil that resulted in the mugging of a traveler in the Gospel of Luke resulted in the good of a Samaritan coming to his aid. Does that mean I endorse the beating of the traveler?

Many children are dead because George Bush ordered the war that caused their deaths. One can talk about "unintended consequences," but the British and American war planners were well aware that 50% of Iraqis were under 16. They knew without doubt what would happen in this war.

None of those children are liberated. They are simply dead. Meanwhile, Saddam is still gardening during his quite comfortable detention.

An evil is an evil, and the incidental good that may come from it does not negate that evil.