A British tabloid has published pictures of a half-naked Saddam Hussein, causing US military condemnation.
The pictures appeared to breach the Geneva Convention on treatment of prisoners of war.
But the Sun newspaper defended its action, saying a US military source handed over the pictures to deal a blow to Iraqi resistance.
What is your reaction to the Sun pictures? Was the paper right to publish them? Or do you agree with US criticism of the images?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comment below.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
I never buy the Sun usually but I did on Friday. Seeing this evil old man, locked up is one of the most heartening images of recent times. It's about time we started treating criminals with the level of disrespect that they deserve. All these misguided people talking about rights and conventions make me laugh. I congratulate the Sun.
I thought it was a good way of humiliating a person that has done so much against the human kind, including those from his own blood. At the same time, the question is not if the paper should have publish them, but by whom and why were they taken in the first place.
Anna Palmieri, Brazil
The United States has no position from which to criticise the Sun for publishing the photos. It is shifting attention away from the content of the photos to the question of whether or not they should be published. They shouldn't exist in the first place.
Sara, East Lansing, USA
I am amazed about the many reactions believing that two wrongs make one right and how they fail to see the real wrongdoer, the one taking the pictures. It sounds like if Guantanamo, Abu Graib, and Afghan camps are also ok because some of those guys are bad. By the same token we want Arabs to learn democracy and respect for law, due process and human rights.
Since very few of the postings are from people who have actually read the Geneva convention, perhaps the Sun should publish the articles to inform the public of who did what wrong, who is actually afforded the conventions (Saddam is clearly afforded them) and why these conventions need to be updated for those that are not protected (Guantanamo Bay detainees).
Phil, St. Louis
Why does the Sun and the BBC give this criminal the time of day?
Allan, Vancouver, Canada
The Sun newspaper has an immoral and inconsequent attitude, it is a shame it is one of the top newspapers in UK.
Lucas S Silva, Oxford
I think it is amazing that people have automatically assumed that it was the military that took and released these pictures. Any number of people, other than military, may have taken these pictures. If Hussein is innocent until proven guilty, so to is the US military.
Lynne, Baltimore, USA
When we descend to the level of the 'enemy' we are no better than the enemy. We are meant to be showing a better way. This was not how to do so. Degradation was part of the old Iraq - and the new, now.
It's Rupert Murdoch's fault. He's the one who owns that fishwrap.
Chuck Skookum, Macau, China
The Sun is famous for printing photos of famous people in their embarrassing moments. This set of photos is nothing more, nothing less. As for Saddam, he deserves no greater leniency than Hitler, Mussolini and George Walker Bush.
V.S.S.Sarma, Dubai, UAE
We as Americans need to clean up our act. It's beyond crazy. We are showing the rest of the world that we are just as Iraq says we are. Something needs to be done, I now am ashamed to be an American.
Joe Morale, Garland, TX, USA
Rupert Murdoch, the publisher, is a Bush supporter and associate. This should be pointed out clearly. I wish my country were better about observing the Geneva Convention and setting a positive example for the world rather than a negative example with human rights abuses at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and now here.
Joe Tucker, Austin, TX
If these photos are anything, they are good publicity for Saddam. For once he is getting in the news for something other than genocide, rape, tyrannical rule, destruction, etc.
Dane, Philadelphia, USA
I'd like to lay to rest all the talk about the Geneva Conventions right now. The Conventions clearly state that any country which chooses not to sign them, or any soldier who intentionally breaks the conventions, forfeits their rights under it. Iraq never signed it. They have no Geneva Convention rights, everyone please find another point to make.
Justin, Abilene, TX, USA
It is more important for journalists' time and resources to be put to good use, an old man in his under garment is hardly news. What next the pope picking his nose?
Ahmad Hmoud, Jordan
As usual British tabloids will publish anything as long as it makes them sell more (toilet) papers. Those photos are in fact totally uninteresting. I do not respect Saddam, far from it, nor do I respect or like Bush. However, I would think it just as ridiculous were British tabloids to publish pictures of Bush in his underpants.
Alain Hernu, Andresy, France
Saddam Hussein would ask "what Convention"?. If he does not recognise the Geneva Convention then the Sun can publish them. He could do with being made "normal" anyway.
Ted Pennington, Western Australia
Although I feel that the wrongdoer is the person who supplied these photos. If someone is this sick enough to take these photos it's the paper's responsibility to filter out the content and avoid printing things which not only destroy their own reputation, but also embarrass the readers.
Ahmed Saleem Kasmani, Karachi, Pakistan
Well it's very clear that Britain and America are bent on erasing Saddam's image as a hero and a nationalist. They want to undo the universal appeal he harvested. They want to implant another dimensional view about him in a manner meant to degrade him.
Che Perera, Perth, Western Australia
All this talk about the Geneva Convention misses a vital point - The Sun is a newspaper, not a country, and so is not capable of breaching the Geneva Convention. The wrongdoer here is the person who took the photos and supplied them to the press and that person should be located and punished - such behaviour is not acceptable in this society. As for The Sun, their prerogative is to sell newspapers whilst remaining within the law - it appears that they have achieved both of those objectives.
Daniel, Asheville, USA
Knowing the Sun newspaper I'm very surprised that the pictures weren't more revealing. However, maybe Saddam has more to hide than they were prepared to show? What baffles me is the comments on this page that say that he didn't abide by the Geneva Convention so why should we? Have these people really considered what they are advocating? That we should sink to the same level as despotic dictators. It's okay because we're merely applying tit for tat as he did it first.
Clive, Milwaukee, USA
Why has no-one reflected on what this says about our society? All the legal aspects aside, it's pretty damning that a situation exists where at least in the view of the editors of the Sun, we will flock to buy a paper to see a bloke in his underpants.
Nic, Atlanta, GA (ex UK)
Yes, these photos should never have been taken, let alone published. But, to blame all Americans as some comments have, is just wrong. Blame the military, blame the government, but do not blame all Americans. There are some of us who don't wholeheartedly support the actions of this government.
Beth, Denver, USA
Is it any wonder so many believe that US soldiers are capable of desecrating the Koran? Again and again, we have shown nothing but disrespect for the people, culture, and religion of the Middle East. Wars do not last forever, but we are not looking to the future. Iraqis who see our contempt today will not be our friends tomorrow.
Matt, San Francisco, USA
How come everyone is up in arms just two years ago the media published the mangled bodies of Saddam's two sons? That was a violation of the Geneva Convention and was "socially acceptable". The propaganda perpetuated through this war has reached a peek.
Patrick, NYC, USA
An absolute disgrace. We should be above that kind of thing - does the Sun not care that people will die because of these photos? Certainly this will be the death sentence for any hostages being held at the moment.
Eileen Bates, London
Evidently the principle reason against the publication of the pictures of Saddam Hussein appears to be that his human rights are being infringed. Perhaps correctly so - but what protection of human rights did he afford to the people of Iraq! It is all too easy to run to be protected by the human rights banner, but it needs to be applied in context.
Iqbal Singh Kang, Tamworth, Staffordshire, England
I find it shameful that any prisoner is treated in a degrading way, no matter their crime. We shout our Western humanity and Christianity aloud and yet we do not follow the very tenants of either. We are clearly able to prosecute and hold responsible for their actions all men and women who act illegally without degradation and torture. If we do not than are we simply not the same as they? Perhaps those who have done great harm may be shown the mercy he did not with greater effect for change. But even should he be so hardened by his crimes that no change is possible, we will at least have stood clearly for the precepts of charity which we in the west say we have.
Donald W Larson, Los Angeles, California, USA
We do not know who leaked these pictures, so to condemn an entire country (USA) or its military seems a bit premature. Let the military investigate. Let's at least treat the USA with as much fairness as people are inclined to treat Saddam.
Andrea, NY, USA
It matters not one iota whether Saddam is or is not a signatory (or observer) of the Geneva Convention. What matters is that we are signatories, and we observe it. We also observe the law that states, "Innocent until proven guilty". The principle is not there to protect the Saddam's of this world - it is there to protect the innocent accused, while their innocence is established - and that is the job of the courts, not the press.
These pictures just show how far the press will go to stir up controversy where it doesn't exist. Newsweek's "story" about pages of the Koran being flushed down the toilet, is another. It just shows you how much we can rely on our news organizations.
This PC, human rights jargon is getting well out of hand. This is on a par with people saying that criminals shouldn't wear orange boiler suits because it is degrading - well if you don't want to be degraded, then don't do the crime! Saddam had a good idea of the consequences of his actions. There is nothing wrong with the photos - he is clean and is being fed - some would argue that he doesn't even deserve that. If it were a photo of someone in the conditions that Saddam would have kept them, that would be the time to moan and whinge - this is not.
They really are getting desperate for page three models.
Richard Earl, Dundee, UK
Will someone please explain to all the troops in Iraq that this sort of thing only gets more of them killed. Even if they don't care about the effect to anyone else, that should catch their attention.
Before saying Saddam is guilty of killing 400,000 Iraqis and is a monster who deserves it, we should recall how many human lives were lost in the Iraq/Iran war, but maybe then he was not a tyrant, but was a frontline state fighting a war sustained by western help. This may be appalling double standards or maybe some sort of selective cognitive impairment.
S Afghan, Coventry
I think this is missing the point a bit. The question is not if the Sun should have published them, but rather that he should not be treated this way. No matter what he has done he should be entitled to due process. Did we not remove him so that everyone could have justice?
TJC, Shropshire, UK
Personally, I would rather the press make us aware of such breaches of the Geneva Convention as, ultimately, it is Saddam's custodians - the US government that provided the picture and should be held responsible. The numerous comments from Americans that he shouldn't be given the rights afforded to PoWs just reinforce the 'pick and choose' civility we are seeing these days, which in the longer term actually benefits no-one.
David O, Amersham, UK
Does anyone else feel like we're in a sort of twilight zone here? One of the most infamous dictators of our time reduced to suing a British tabloid from his American prison cell over photographs.
Laura, Livingston, UK
Some people on this board seem to have missed the point. True Justice is even handed - by its very definition you do not have to earn the right to it.
Ben Barker, Cambridge, UK
I say to Saddam; go and sue the pants of the Sun.
Malcolm, The Hague
Just because Saddam Hussein didn't abide by the Geneva Convention does not give us the right to ignore it. We're supposed to be the good guys remember? The ones who stand for something better than that? These photos are not how good guys act.
Ellie, Edinburgh, UK
It is encouraging to read so many comments speaking out against the publication of these pictures of Saddam Hussein. No matter what Saddam has done or what he stands for he does not deserve to be publicly ridiculed. The Sun newspaper is a joke and a disgrace to the United Kingdom.
Matt, Kent, UK
Before we talk about freedom, democracy, humanity, and dignity next time, we should realize that it does not matter who the criminal is, we have to treat his privacy humanely. He might get death penalty for his crimes. But we have to do our part properly. We cannot be criminals while dealing with a criminal.
Musa, California, USA
How in the world can anyone think that person should have any rights, Geneva Convention notwithstanding? He certainly did not abide by the Geneva Convention or allow his victims to have any rights.
Dolores Leeson, PA, USA
Saddam might have been a murderous tyrant but these pictures of him in his undergarments are nothing but disgusting. As with all prisoners, he still has the right to decency or the values of this world are diminished another point. That it is the Sun newspaper happily publishing them, I am not surprised. I hope they lose the lawsuit to be brought against them.
W P Derbyshire, London
Whatever Saddam is, now he is a prisoner of war and there are rules on the statute to treat prisoners with dignity and humanity. The photos are repulsive. And to think this being touted as journalistic necessity and the editor saying these are iconic images smacks of grandiose delusions.
The US defending the Geneva convention is admirable - when it suits them! Two words - Guantanamo Bay.
The inability to appreciate and understand other cultures by supposedly informed professionals is staggering, one photo ruins years of hard work in a second! It's embarrassing.
Steve Ziai, California, USA
It is definitely the Sun's right to publish the pictures however misplaced their values are. It is unfortunate that the US military will ultimately get the blame for allowing these kinds of pictures to be taken and smuggled out.
Akin Oladoye, Ohio, USA
It's totally irresponsible of the Sun to publish these pictures. We rightly criticised Saddam's regime for using our POWs in this way during the first Gulf war. Now we show the world that we have equal disregard of international law. How can we ever expect to earn the trust and respect of the Arab world?
Mark Collins, Bristol, UK
Showing photos like this is no different than showing recruitment posters to potential terrorists.
Paul Doherty, Sileby, Leicestershire
He certainly looks in better shape than he did when captured. Clean underwear, well fed and happy. What's all the fuss about?
Paul Palyza, Sydney Australia
The only issue here is that of the tabloid gutter press trying to make the news rather than just printing it. Why do we put up with it? It drags everyone down to their level. This is different from the odd paparazzi photo of celebs behaving badly, although why they should have to put up with it either is beyond me. This kind of thing should be stopped in law.
I think it was totally thoughtless of the Sun to print the pictures. I agree the man is a monster, but what good are these photos going to do our troops over in Iraq? It will be just as damaging as the pictures the Mirror printed. Why can't the press think of our soldiers before themselves for once?
I can't say I'm really surprised the Sun was used in such a silly ploy. Do they actually think these things through? The US may have won the war but they are certainly not doing a very good job at winning the peace.
Mark, Southampton, UK
I don't care about the pictures being shown; although I think it's pretty needless. My concern is that some smart lawyer may use it to get him off some of the crimes he's committed.
Andrew Garrett, Cromer, England
I keep hearing about this Geneva Convention thing. One question: is Saddam's signature on that document? If Hitler had not taken the cowards' way out, I wonder how many Londoners would have been upset to see him in his underwear.
Frank, Miami, USA
It is probably against principles of humanity or ethical conventions to publish such photos, but they are a strong visual lesson to potential or emerging dictators (see recent events in Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan).
Tania, Lausanne, Switzerland
While Saddam Hussein was undoubtedly an appalling man, and a little bit of humiliation would be a tiny part of the punishment he deserves, it is up to a court to impose that punishment, not The Sun. I strongly oppose the attitude of "we all know he is guilty, so we can do what we want to him". That way lies the lynch mob. Saddam should undoubtedly be tried for his crimes. Until then, the principle of "innocent until proved guilty" should preserve his rights - including to privacy.
Alec Cawley, Newbury, UK
I never thought the day would come where I'd support Saddam on something. It isn't entirely shocking that The Sun was the paper to change my mind though.
The US military should not have allowed these photographs to have entered the media. Having said that, of course, leaks are notoriously hard to prevent. As for the Sun, I think we should just say it was tasteless and leave it at that.
I don't read the Sun. It was your news organization that brought the images of Saddam into my home. You report that displaying the images is likely a violation of international law, but you broadcast them and post them on your website. You reek of patent hypocrisy. You get all the benefits of catering to base voyeurism while pretending to act in a spirit of honest journalism.
Sam Thomsen, Raliegh, NC, USA
A vexing question for journalists: where do we draw the line? There is no doubt the cruel dictator tortured, murdered and did not care a damn for people's feelings as long as his power and influence was recognised. But there are rules for captured war criminals and the Geneva Convention has to be followed to the letter. The Sun flouted the legal standards that were universally recognised and grossly erred in publishing the photos.
Pancha Chandra, Brussels, Belgium
Shabby journalism? It was the Sun wot dun it.
Chris Moore, Bournemouth
What is the point in fighting wars to supposedly protect the morals of our world, if it is those very morals which seem to go out the window when it comes to America and its allies?
James, Nottingham, England
If we are unable to obey our own laws then what right do we have to tell others what to do?
John Lawrence, Southampton, UK
Would someone please take all the cameras away from the US Army.
Myles, San Francisco, CA
I believe that journalism has gone to the dogs. The press seems to feel they are above reproach and not liable for the stories they choose to print. On a more positive note, maybe the pictures will silence those people who speculate as to his treatment while in captivity. The man did not look bruised, abused or hungry.
Ann Lee, Houston, TX
The photo shows that the man is well fed and has clean clothes. He deserves no less and no more.
Dr F Kotkin, Seattle, USA
Well, God forbid it ever happens but if some UK/US soldiers are captured and paraded around on TV or some newspaper we will be in no position to complain about it.
Brian Lores, UK
Let's get something straight. It's not a violation of the Geneva Convention to take photos of POWs. It is a violation to publish them, so it's the British who are in violation. Stop lecturing us for your crimes.
Dean, Boston, USA
It's irrelevant in light of the things this man has presided over as the dictator of Iraq.
John Smith, Tennessee, USA
Isn't it a fantastic coincidence that these pictures are published at the same time that the torture practices in Afghanistan by the US were published.
John Winter, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
If anyone feels humiliated by these photos, they are those who agree with his ideology and actions. To see a mass murderer in a humiliating way, considering how he humiliated millions is nothing more than poetic justice!
Ron, Vancouver, Canada
Is everyone so ignorant and stupid? We should lead by example if we are to win the hearts and minds of the world and the so called 'war on terror'. This doesn't. Irrespective of what he has done.
Lee Newham, UK
Thank goodness that the British press is still able to print pictures like these. The American press is so shackled that it cannot publish anything that can be construed as anti-war. Whatever you think of Saddam Hussein, the Americans are doing their cause no favours by being seen as vindictive occupiers.
Chris, Telford, UK
Saddam Hussein lost all his rights when he committed the atrocities he did. The fact he has to do his own donkey work makes a nice change. Seeing him be humiliated in front of millions doesn't bother me at all.
Simon, Newbury, Berkshire, UK
The photos and the continual apathetic attitude of Americans which have posted here demonstrate everything that is wrong with America. They rant about freedom, but simply pick and choose when it's applicable. The whole point about human rights is that you can't repeal them whenever you feel like it.
Mike, Northampton, England
For me it is not about Saddam's rights, but more about how we behave and conduct ourselves. We should treat all people with a certain level of personal respect regardless of their opinions, actions or crimes. That's what makes us better than someone like him.
One of the worst mass murderers in human history has had his dignity compromised and this is supposedly a violation of the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war and a crime against humanity. What has this mixed up world come to?
It's a cheap shot at an old tyrant. I'm sure it contravenes some Geneva Convention ruling, but sadly, Saddam is old news. I'm more concerned about the continuing death toll in Iraq, not the style of underpants a sad, old former dictator wears.
Rob , Bromley, UK
The Sun humiliates itself by its justification for printing these photos. While a violation of Saddam's human rights is overstating the case, the Sun is demeaned by gloating because he's in his underpants. The Sun editors obviously failing to understand the link between their base actions and those of Saddam.
Barry B, UK
Just a pity the editor doesn't realize where we would be without the people of the USA and the men that gave us our freedom. It seems the educated idiots will always try to knock the USA no matter what they do.
Ted Cain, Whitstable, UK
Any newspaper would be right to report they had obtained these pictures but wrong to show them. There were internationally agreed laws against such a thing.
Peter Mitchell, Surrey, UK
What worries me is our own morals. They are lowering day by day. There is no doubt that Saddam was barbaric, but what are we becoming.
Toosy, Guildford, England
We all seem to have lost grasp of reality nowadays, as we seem to keep treating criminals and murderers better than the victims. The fools who are responsible have a lot to answer for.
John Thompson, St Albans, Herts
I thought I lived in something called a civilised society. Obviously I am very much mistaken.
Brendan MacLean, Birmingham, UK
Christopher Skeet, USA: Whilst we're on the subject of hypocrisy, and alliances with murderous dictators, I didn't notice much outcry from Washington over recent, bloody events in Uzbekistan.
Johnny W, Hull, England
There seems to be a large amount of people completely missing the point of why publishing the photos of Saddam was wrong. The idiotic Sun has in one foul swoop, made an already fragile and dangerous situation for our boys in Iraq even more dangerous by inflaming the anger of the Iraqi people in the name of the public's right to know. What a load of rubbish. Pictures of Saddam in his underwear are not news. It's sensationalist, disgusting, irresponsible behaviour.
I don't care very much. We tend to forget Saddam's crimes in the past, and the invasion of Kuwait which ultimately brought this on himself. But the Americans are insufferably self righteous about their human rights record. They are as bad as religious fundamentalists.
Andrew Layton, London, UK
As a soldier who is bound by the Geneva Convention I am appalled at these images of a POW. The comments I read that state Saddam was not very nice fill me with despair. Two wrongs seldom make a right. What is it we are fighting for?
Ray Hewitt, Bracknell England
Personally, I don't care how demeaning these photos may be for Saddam. He inflicted far worse on his own people. But if they are in contravention to the Geneva Convention, then publishing them is wrong.
Dave Godfrey, Swindon, UK
I just fail to see the news or journalistic value of those pictures. How on earth is that front page material?
Saddam Hussein has committed crimes against humanity, he had been captured and will face a criminal court and will answer for his crimes: this being done with the due process of law. People like him and the ordinary prisoners of war are protected by the Geneva Convention - of which the UK and USA are signatories.
Bob Sebastian, Ash Vale, England
Yet another unbelievable own goal brought to you by the paper that published the outrageous shots of American and British troops allegedly abusing Iraqi prisoners. How can we elevate ourselves to moral superiority when our own media behave in such a sensationalist manner?
Mrs L, Kent
We are supposed to be better than the tyrants we overthrow. With Guantanamo Bay, all the abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan, the support of tyrants in Uzbekistan and elsewhere, we demonstrate that we are no better.
Mike, London, UK
One wonders how the Murdoch press would have reacted had a captured coalition soldier been paraded in front of photographers in just his pants.
Damian Lataan, Verdun, South Australia
To Vincent Coles London. It doesn't matter whether Saddam followed the Geneva convention or not. We are supposed to be civilised. When we have to compare ourselves to Saddam we really are in a mess.
Jonny Mayle, Cranleigh, Surrey
We see nude and degrading pictures in the papers every day, so one man in his underpants is hardly worth crying about.
Paul Collier, London UK
I believe this to be confirmation of the low level of journalism of this newspaper.
Jim O'Neill, Newcastle under Lyme
Think of the good that could come from these photos. The Sun is sued by Saddam Hussein, immediately the money is frozen by the courts whilst some of his victims sue him. In the end the Sun readers pay the compensation to the victims.
Barry P, Havant England
The photographs of Saddam upon his capture were distasteful. This is just downright morbid. We are seeking to administer justice to this man for what it is alleged he did in the past. Show trials are unwanted and unwarranted and make a mockery of that justice. It really does beg the question why on earth is the Sun paying for these photos, and also who is in charge of ensuring these continuous embarrassments in US custody cease.
Duncan Burrell, London, UK
The Sun's argument that 'Saddam broke the law ... so can we' is simply morally corrupt, no matter the disparity between the crimes.
Derek Geary, Barcelona
Saddam Hussein has been caught in his underwear!! True, its a breach of the Geneva Convention but if people really believe that all armies abide by that treaty, which by the way the USA is a signatory with reservations, then they are extremely naive. And although not quite related, in response to those calling Hussein a murderous dictator; yes he was but he was also helped into power by the USA and Britain
I think it's pretty rich of the US to claim the photos breach the Geneva Convention, when they did that themselves to the prisoners in Camp X-ray. The US seems to want to have their cake and eat it, too.
Susan, London, UK
The conventions are there to protect everyone from abuse by the world's press. In order to protect everyone, including you, me and other people just like us across the globe they need to be applied evenly and without judgement. That same right must be applied to people like Saddam. The Sun was wrong to publish these pictures.
Chris, Aldershot UK
Insurgents will use this as an excuse, that is true, but they will find an excuse no matter what happens. These extremists care nothing for the Geneva Convention nor for Human Rights, they only care that the world becomes Islamic at all costs. It's just an irony that they will use Saddam, a pretend Muslim at best, to promote their cause.
I've seen a lot more chocking pictures than an old chap in his underwear in the Sun.
Does it REALLY matter? It's a photo of someone in their pants. They take photos of stars in the nude, lying on boats without permission. Would you start screaming about your human rights if someone took a photo of you in your pants? I doubt it.
David, Motherwell & North Lanarkshire
The foundations of any modern, progressive democracy are rules regarding how people can be treated (including prisoners). Saddam has committed many atrocities but democratic nations must follow their own rules to promote democracy in a wider context.
David Harris, Glasgow, Scotland.
If we don't insist on adherence to the Geneva Convention, then we cannot demand that hostile nations do so. The only thing these pictures do is undermine the future safety of POW's, for the benefit of the Sun's circulation figures, and doubtless a "kick-back" for whoever sold them to the Sun. How noble.
Tim Huff, UK
The pictures are irresponsible and offensive, and are not made any less so because Saddam Hussein is a brutal murderer. The publication of these pictures, along with so many other crass and degrading acts, only leads to the conclusion that we are no better than those that we condemn.
Nicholas, London, UK
This man is innocent until proven guilty, no man should be subjected to this, it is illegal and immoral, no matter what he may or may not have done.
Kyle Walkley, Durham
Since when did our sense of justice include humiliation. The pictures will only serve as a recruitment aid for the insurgents and further endanger our troops.
David Bayne, Darlington, UK
Any prisoner of war is entitled to be treated with decorum, and any justice meted out to Saddam must be done by a court of law, not The Sun. The vigilantes who have suggested that he has no rights may as well be arguing that he should be lynched, because they seem to have no conception of the values we, as people fortunate enough not to be under a dictatorship, hold to be fundamental.
Enid Slop, London, UK
Either we obey the law or we don't. But if we ignore the law we can't complain - let alone invade - when others do the same.
Norman Paterson, Anstruther, Scotland
I do not think the Sun should have published the photos. However I do not believe the public should be feeling sorry for this breach of the Geneva Convention, because he breached millions of Iraqis' human rights during his reign.
Leanne, Burton, England
I thought the picture of Saddam in his underpants was hilarious, and as far as breaking the Geneva Convention, he didn't seem to care what he did to thousands of innocent people and prisoners.
Michele Dunstan, Redruth, Cornwall
I wish the Sun had not printed the pictures. I think it gives ammunition to Saddam and his many apologists through out the world.
Martin Smith, London
I hope this is the first of a series of tyrants exposed! How about Mugabe in his undies next?
Saddam slaughtered over 400,000 Iraqis. The U.S. took a picture of Saddam in his underwear. Those Western extremists who even attempt to compare the two actions as some kind of "pot calling the kettle black" hypocrisy should take a serious look at themselves and wonder how they've allowed themselves to become so hateful towards America that they ally themselves with a murderous dictator.
Christopher Skeet, Chicago, USA
Absolutely despicable, but it probably appeals to the typical reader of the sun.
Doug, Wokingham, UK
I seem to remember when Saddam was captured, American troops pinning him to the floor looking all smug and smiling. America was quite happy to have these pictures shown to the world. So why not Saddam in his Y fronts!
Matt, Lincs, England
Who cares? Did Saddam take pity on the thousands he killed? If we are so focused on the rights of a mad man, there is something truly wrong with this world. He deserves no better treatment than he treated his countrymen.
Mark , Knoxville, TN
Who cares? It's not as if he deserves to be treated with respect, as he was a terrible person. More shocking to me is President Bush's idiotic statement that the insurgents are "barbaric" and that Westerners could not understand them. Wanting to create division is no way to go forward and it only serves to justify the mess that continues to be made by the US.
Gareth Evans, Reading, UK
I wonder how much attention Saddam gave to the Geneva Convention during his wars with Iran and Kuwait? By all accounts he simply murdered prisoners of war. Let's try to maintain some sense of perspective here.
Vincent Coles, London
Well done to the Sun: thanks to the tactlessness we've come to expect from this tabloid it is surprising to see the editors have managed to sink to further depths. Saddam was a brutal dictator, responsible for heinous crimes which can never be forgiven, and now thanks to a British tabloid his plight has been humanised. These pictures will help to bring about empathy for him not only in the Muslim world but in the wider world. I'm disgusted.
Jon Slack, Oxford, UK
I have yet to be convinced that the man in prison actually is Saddam. His own wife says it is not him.
Michael, Manchester, UK
Nice to see the British press can continue to do whatever it likes. Time to stop it behaving like a spoilt child perhaps?
Matt Whitby, Hampshire, UK
I think it's inevitable that if the sensationalist press gets hold of such pictures, they are going to be printed. The Americans should be looking at their own security - not criticising the British press. As regards Saddam's right to sue, when did any of his victims have human rights?
John Botting, St Gallen, Switzerland
How can the UK and US claim to be a defender of human rights and the moral high ground, when we can't even maintain the appearance of moral high ground at home? Congratulations to his US Captors for undermining their country's claim to moral superiority.
Once again The Sun shows there is no depth to which it is not prepared to sink. If the editors did not realise that the publication of the pictures will increase sympathy for Saddam in the Muslim world and damage community relations in the UK then they should be sacked for being ignorant.
Peter Simons, Harrogate, UK
The ultimate irony, a man who is responsible for the deaths of millions and the torture and rape of thousands more, is suing because a photograph of him in his underwear is published. Poor baby.
Jerry, Sherwood, OR USA
The photos are a journalistic necessity: the Sun should be commended for publishing them. They should be on the front page of every newspaper worldwide. A (former) leader with the omnipresence of Saddam Hussein cannot possibly be protected from "public curiosity", no matter what is written as the rule or the law, who wrote it or where. Let's certainly not shed any tears for Saddam - he's got food, clothing, shelter, medical care; these are things that millions across the globe do not have.
John H Rasmussen II, Middletown PA USA
These photographs of Saddam Hussein have utterly disgusted me and are of a markedly crude nature. Still, I should not be surprised it is The Sun in question.
Mohammed Gul, Hornchurch, Essex
On the one hand, given what Saddam Hussein has done to others, I marvel that the man has the gall to complain about this. If he had been imprisoned under a regime such as his own, humiliating pictures in the press would be the least of his worries. On the other hand, what is the point? The Sun is an irresponsible scandal rag and always has been.
Max, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Let's get real here. This man was a mass murderer and nothing else. So what if he has been photographed in his pyjamas? If it was Hitler what would be the big deal?
Typical sleazy tabloids will use anything for self-promotion and with no regard to any damage that could be caused.
This "violation" of Saddam's rights are incomparable to his horrific crimes against the people of the Middle East, which are still causing pain and death despite his incarceration.
Samir Hussein, Bournemouth, UK
Much as I hate to find myself in agreement with the Sun, their representatives have a point when they draw attention to the fact that every major media outlet has now broadcast these pictures. I'd have preferred not to have seen them at all, but some hope of that in this morbid, voyeuristic day and age.
Anthony Burns, UK
I recall during the first Gulf War when British airmen were being paraded on TV and the outrage the Sun newspaper cried. Well isn't this a case of pot calling kettle black. The Sun should be ashamed of printing these pictures, the man has been captured and will face his punishment in a court of law and the last thing he needs is the gutter press humiliating further.
S Lyons, Peterborough England
The photo is definitely offensive, but it's two pages less offensive than one of a page three girl.
Ivon Katz, Athens, OH, USA
I think that bringing humour to such a terrible figure can only be a good thing. As for the Geneva Convention, does he deserve to have any sort of human rights after the number of innocent Iraqis he had killed in cold blood?
Tom Stewart, Lancaster, England.
Dreadful abuse of his human rights, no matter what his crimes he should not be ridiculed. I wonder if the Sun would like his potential execution to be televised. This dehumanises us all.
Dr Gareth Bryant, Edington, Wiltshire
A prisoner has rights even if guilty of heinous crimes, and certainly if not yet convicted of any crime. The publication of these pictures is disgraceful and indicative of the arrogance of the US/UK axis.
Nick, London UK
Does the US really want to win the hearts and minds in the Muslim world? Nice words from top politicians, but on the field we just keep seeing amateurism.
Marc, Querro, Mexico
I think the Sun was wrong to publish the pictures. When you print photos like that it demeans not only the subject but those responsible for the pictures. The Geneva Convention should be upheld and not disregarded as seems to be the case all too often lately.
Mary Ellen Bennett, California
These pictures provide an interesting look at the aging dictator. The pictures serve no meaningful purpose other than to sell the tabloids. I doubt they will have any effect on insurgency in Iraq. However, I do think they might be used by liberal do-gooders as a way to criticize US and Britain.
Why is it such a big deal? Who cares if these pictures were published? The Sun, BBC and other news organizations ought to write more about and show how insurgents are murdering their own people.
Joe Montanez, Imperial Beach, CA, US
I am sad to see these photos, because this will give Saddam's defence team an opportunity to build a stronger case for Saddam. Let's no forget what Saddam did to the Iraqi people. He robbed Iraqi resources, invaded other countries, and denied many ordinary people their rights. He shouldn't get away with his crimes.
It is disgusting to see Saddam's pictures. The person who is responsible for this must be charged. We must respect all human beings not treat them in this way. The Sun newspaper must be charged for breaching the human rights of prisoners.