What would the situation be like in Iran if Saddam was still in power in Iraq?

Question

Hussein was an enemy of Iran. Do you think he would want Iran to have nuclear power and perhaps the possibilities of make the "Bomb?" Do you think the USA lost a valuable ally when they ousted Hussein? Remember, Iran and Iraq fought a bloody war in the 80's and Hussein is Sunni while Iran is Shi'a.

Answer 1

I think you hit the nail right on the head. The big winner in the Iraq War has been Iran--a far more radical fundamentalist Islamic gvt. than Saddam Hussein's secular regime. Iran's influence is now pretty much unchecked thanks to the US taking down Saddam Hussein. This war is the kind of mistake people will be reading about a thousand years from now.

Answer 2

I would say that using the belief that "the enemy of your enemy is your friend" we lost a "friend" when Saddam Hussein was ousted. In terms of balance of power in the Middle East, Iraq kept Iran in check. So with Iraq in turmoil Iran no longer has to worry about its neighbor attacking like it did during the 80's. Remembering that neither country is an true ally of the United States, Iraq under Hussein made the M.E. more stable.

Answer 3

That part of the world is ancient and always warlike, I think the U.S.A. is loosing allies the world over.The United States was founded on Christian principles , by masons, like Benjamin Franklin and look at the confusion in the states as of now with the liberals and their gay and lesbian allies trying to turn what has worked for thousands of years into a most destructive way of living, and this will be the downfall of the United States.Read, Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible.

Answer 4

You hit the nail on the top! The killing of Saddam will basically accentuate the civil warfare in Iraq. It in simple terms is greater data that Bush et al do not supply a rip on the subject of the risk-free practices of our troops over there, that each and every person they care approximately is making an attempt to fulfill their insatiable thirst for blood and violence.

Answer 5

I am sure Iraq would've had a thing or two to say abt Iran enriched Uranium and nuclear power aspirations... I truly believe Hussein would've prevented Iran from obtaining nuclear power. Now is going to be up to Israel and the US to deal with those lunatics...

Answer 6

The same as it is now, if not worse. Saddam and Iraq didn't have the strength to do anything after their military was decimated during the first Gulf War. He also would probably aid them in their quest for Nukes. As the old saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Answer 7

Most idiots can't tell the difference from Iran or Iraq, to them every one in the area is a "terrorist" and there is no possibility at strategic thinking to beat the problem. It is too complicated to divide them up into groups, just attack the whole region and don't ask where it would be more effective to attack, typical conservative thinking.

Answer 8

Yes, this is undoubtedly true. Saddam was not an Islamist ruler - Bin Laden himself did not support his rule. When Bush went after the wrong mideast country and gave them the option of "democracy" he opened the door for them to democratically elect another islamic fascist government. Nice going.

Answer 9

If Saddam was still in power this action would most likely have never happened....He governed his country with fear and I think everyone would have been to fearful, also we would still have our young people alive and well if we had kept our nose out of the middle east business...They have been fighting for centuries

Answer 10

Even though Saddam was an evil dictator, he did seem to be a stabilizing force in the region.