2006-09-03 16:35:02 · 25 answers · asked by madmax 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I would say yes even if my fellow American's disagree with me. The cops that patrol the bad parts of New York and Los Angeles can not act like the cops that patrol Beverly Hills. Saddam was a mean SOB but maybe that was what it took to keep people in that part of the world in line. I don't know, I never lived or been there. What I can say is that we are damn sure not doing a hell of a lot better.
2006-09-03 16:55:59 · answer #1 · answered by choyryu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do agree but the scenario get worse because of the influence of the mass media and the misbelief of people. It's not on the USA's blame nor on Iraq's fault, but both countries stand the major role of the great conflict. I just really don't know why these 2 nations are fighting with each other for nothing, considering that it has great effects on 2 nations: security for both countries against the vengeance of each other, and the economic and livelihood situation of people living in this nations.
2006-09-03 23:43:42 · answer #2 · answered by jay 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq has been in a civil/sectarian war for years. What else would you call 2000+ deaths per month?
Refusing to call it a civil war doesn't change the reality of the situation.
2006-09-03 23:42:54 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well....kind of. Apparently, that hate has been there for centuries. Saddam may have kept it in check, but at what cost? Is one evil better than another? Ultimately, they have to come to terms like those who fought each other after Yugoslavia broke up. I think a civil war in Iraq may have been inevitable; the U.S. just sped the time table up.
2006-09-03 23:42:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
To an extent, but that's really just the latest in a long series of people deserving blame.
How about Reagan for his support of Saddam? (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/)
How about the U.S. overthrow of a democracy in Iran in the 1950's?
How about the British for the somewhat arbitrary national boundaries established after WW1?
Heck, we could keep on going back to the schism between Shiites and Sunnis - which is what, about 1400 years old?
So yes - to an extent Bush is to blame for the very real civil war that is occuring there now, but let's not pretend he turned a peaceful paradise into the war-torn country it is today.
2006-09-03 23:43:15 · answer #5 · answered by Steve 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Anything bad that's coming out of Iraq is the terrorist's fault. Those that want the Iraqis oppressed the way Saddam oppressed them. It's our fault if we leave the Iraqis in the lurch. If cut, and run Libs get into office in November, you'll see what I'm talking about.
2006-09-03 23:43:31 · answer #6 · answered by K S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq has always been at civil war. Believe it or not we are helping them. DO some research away from the liberal news media.
2006-09-03 23:41:30 · answer #7 · answered by Emily E 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Iraq was born with a civil war. Quite a while ago too.
2006-09-03 23:38:19 · answer #8 · answered by Pancakes 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Iraq IS in a civil war, brought on by Bush and his stupid policies.
a
2006-09-03 23:44:07 · answer #9 · answered by arejokerswild 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the entire middle east has been in some type of civil war for hundreds of years. it's just starting to get good now.
2006-09-03 23:55:48 · answer #10 · answered by Vodka 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋