English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Should we of left Saddam Hussein in power...? to stop all these lovey-doves from protesting about war. And just left him to carry on killing his own people. after all they don't seem to want us to help them.?

2006-08-21 10:14:50 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

32 answers

@Dogzilla
Quote
“…to drive up the price of oil. It's made him hundreds of millions of dollars off all his oil investments.”
Forgot that congress voted for an invention in Iraq? Do they make hundreds of millions too?

@Steve
Quote
“…Reagan and Rumsfeld were backing him with weapons and cash?”
And where did you heard that lie? Please name weapons delivered to Saddam and/or Iraq.

@Kreen
Quote
“The CIA put him there...they could have got rid of him a lot quieter than sending in the cavalry......”
You made that up yourself? Seems that you forget about some U.S. laws.

@Shell
Quote
“More have been killed by Americans than Saddam killed.”
Get your facts straight.

And that goes for Mama Gretch, spook 1073, t3h1, mido and Peace@Iran

People seem to forget to name the countries that are really supported Saddam and the Bath party. The same countries who didn’t wanted to overthrow Saddam and his henchmen. Those countries who called us war mongers made deals with Saddam that if they would vote for an stop on the embargo and not siding with the US, that they would get cheaper oil deals, etc. For those who forgot maybe the words France and Elf refreshes the memories. And don’t come with CIA this and CIA that, even the German Bundes Nachrichten Dienst (BND) wrote a report on Saddam’s WMD’s.

2006-08-21 12:40:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

George Bush and Tony Blair have killed far more Iraqis than Saddam ever did. There was no terrorism in Iraq there were no weapons of mass destruction Saddam Hussein had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks on America in 2001. The real enemy were and still are in Afghanistan. Its a bout time Bush and Blair admitted it and did something about it.

2006-08-21 15:27:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Saddam wasn't killing as many people as are dying every day (100/day) in the current Iraq civil war (yes, folks, it's a civil war!) Saddam was a horrible, evil man, but he was able to keep the lid on the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds centuries-old hostilities. Americans shouldn't die for Iraqi "freedom!" It's not freedom, it's not a democracy.

Remember, the U.S. put Saddam in power because he hated Iran and started a war against them. Now we pay for our crimes, I guess.

2006-08-21 10:24:11 · answer #3 · answered by Mama Gretch 6 · 2 0

Apparently his rein of terror is all that kept his people from killing each other in a civil war. More have been killed by Americans than Saddam killed. I say let him out restore him to power and why was his torture chambers any worst than the ones the USA is using? Give him back his torture chambers and get out of Iraq.
so they can have some peace.

2006-08-21 10:24:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Freeing Saddam means nothing important. He should not be release so that he can continue killing his own people, it is better to keep him off so that you will continue killing his people for him. That is to fulfill his mission. It is the same thing or evern worth than saddam regime the presence of Americans in Iraq. More violence is present, more civilians/women/children are being killed.

2006-08-22 02:10:00 · answer #5 · answered by muzyne 3 · 0 0

OK let's say Saddam was killing his people..I agree he did....What did you do there? You killed more people I guess, you made an ivitation to terrorist to gather from allover the world in Iraq, every day more than 30 Iraqis are killed in terrorist attcks and by American troops' hands. Did you give democracy to Iraqis?Can we say Abougharib prison was a part of that democracy? Or Guantanamo which was built outside the US to escape the rules which may limit your desire in slaying the prisoners?
You made Iraq worse than Saddam's days..You created civil war there between Sunna and Shiaa...Beside that there was no evidence of mass destruction weapons "the main cause of your invasion" . Wake up, this war is completly illegal. It's a crime against Iraq....Saddam is not the only dictator in the world...but he was not an ally for the US anymore unlike the other Arab dictators who totally obey to the US orders..Mubarak keeps thousands of Egyptians in prisons....AL Saud family kills any opposing person or group in KSA...why don't you invade Egypt and Saudia? Because they are obeying.....KSA gives you the oil and search for the commercial relationships between Al Saud family and Bush family "who are old oil buisinessmen"..Egypt plays an important role in keeping the American buiseness going well in the region since the 1980s.....Saddam's only mistake was when he said that his missiles could reach Israel...Then America turned from an ally to Saddam to an enemy...Yes the USA gave saddam chemical weapons to use them against Iran in the 8 year war"1st gulf war" and he used them all up against Iran and the Kurds in Northen Iraq...Dam Saddam, Mubarak , Al Saud and Bush..They are all alike..Running their countries for their business.

2006-08-21 10:49:39 · answer #6 · answered by mido 4 · 0 0

well since liberals are always talking about basic human rights we should have kicked him out of power, he killed millions of his own people. he tortured children in front of their parents and used chemical and biological weapons against his own people, he drained the marshes in the north part of iraq so france could drill there and he killed all natives in the region so it would be safe for french workers. he seems like a model of human rights violations, but since syria sits on the UN human rights commitee, and their a model of human rights, iraq wasnt doing anything wrong in their opinion. if saving tens of thousands of lives isnt worth a war were weve only lost a little over 2,000 isnt worth that, then we dont care about human rights. also saddam did meet with officials in nigeria to discuss trade, nigeria's only major export is uranium, but hey maybe it was just a hobby. by the way for all you idiots, uranium is enriched to make nuclear weapons. and the general public in iraq does want us to help, terrorists sneak over from iran to demoralize us, its not the iraqis attacking us, its the iranians

2006-08-21 10:27:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

How might want to helping a common assassin ever be "moral" (except, of direction, in the eyes of politicians who stood to line their wallet suited from such institutions)? I heard there became a photo circulating on youtube quite a few years in the past that confirmed a photo from 1991 of Osama bin encumbered sitting at a picnic table at Bush's Crawford Ranch in Texas. Ten years later, he's international Enemy #a million. If that image became authentic (i might want to by no skill discover it), what the hell fairly is going on?

2016-11-26 21:49:14 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Yeh why not give him back to the Iraqis. They would not dare go around setting off car bombs and kidnapping and beheading people then. He kept order in Iraq.

Saddam was also no threat to the rest of the world.
You think he has hidden weapons? Why did he not hide with his weapons then instead of in a hole in the ground?

2006-08-21 10:24:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The CIA put him there...they could have got rid of him a lot quieter than sending in the cavalry......

the American Empire is beginning to crumble...stretched too thinly, attacks and plots every week....only a matter of time before it collapses into obscurity....

We should never have let the place go....

2006-08-21 10:23:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers