Sorry for the very, very late entry to the thread but one point. It has been stated time and again that prevention of serious crimes against humanity/genocide is a legal reason for going to war.
Now I don't pretend to be an expert on middle Easern affairs but wasn't Saddam quite a nasty bloke engaged in some fairly nasty goings on? Wouldn't that make the war legal and thus not give the accused even a stump to stand on, let alone a whle leg.
End of the day we have this moral point plus the UNSCR lending legitimacy to our involvement, he was given a direct order, he refused to obey said order, he's guilty.
Michael Edic QC