Sadamm Hussein??

Question

Does anyone else feel like the Iraqis were safer with Sadamm in power? He instilled so much fear in the people that they would never act they way they had, I am not saying he wasa great leader, but my God..the ust found 65 people tortured around the city of Bahgdad...What the hell is going on over heri now...These Sunni's and Shi-ites would have never pulled this stuff with Hussien in power!!

I love the troops...I have nothing but respect for any person who has put on a uniform. Ir cognize the freedom that I even have to typ ethis message..., my question is one based on a hypothetical situation. My fear is that we have bitten off mor ethan we can chew. I do not want to see anohter american life lost in a war that we can not win or even make a dent in. This ahs been going on since they translated the Quran...this war will continue until one side commits complete genocide on the other...we have very little business in iraq anymore so why are we still their???

You cannot tell me that you have not questioned our presence there??

Answer 1

Its a question that coems to my mind too. But now what do you do? there is a civil war, when he was ruling there was one too, but he quickly supressed it. Lol yeah. Were in a position where we can't leave or stay. And thats Horrible.

Answer 2

Here is what some human rights organizations have said, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, that Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"

Now do you still think it was safer with saddam. Ask the Kurds, Oh wait a minute he killed most of them.....

Answer 3

If the attraction technique works in his choose, Hussein will get away the dying penalty because of the fact Iraqi regulation prohibits anybody over the age of 70 from being positioned to dying with the help of the state. Of the 5 maximum evil tyrants interior the previous 75 years, in user-friendly terms one has confronted a court docket of regulation: Joseph Stalin killed 10 million of his countrymen and died peacefully in his sleep; Adolph Hitler killed 6 million Jews and committed suicide; Idi Amin killed 2 million human beings in Uganda and retired to France in luxury exile; George W. Bush has killed 655,000 Iraqis and 3,000 American infantrymen (so far) without taking any accountability or assuming any accountability for such murderous movements; Saddam Hussein grew to become into sentenced to dying for killing 148 human beings in a small Iraqi village. Too undesirable Bush can't be tried with the help of a worldwide tribunal and, if convicted, draw close right alongside Hussein. -RKO-

Answer 4

Yeah, i think the iraqi's preferred their torturer to be Sadam himself... since he tortured with such raw efficiency... instead of a mere 65, he could have tortured 5,000 rag heads in one swoop.... better yet, how bout we hold a sayonce (sp?) and bring Hitler back... I am sure he could teach Sadam a thing or two about torture... Sadam Hussein was a psychopathic killer with way too much power... of course Iraq is better off without him.... That's like saying America should never had fought the revolutionary war cuz some people had to die in the fight for freedom... and the revolutionary war should have been averted cuz, god forbid, we **** with the status quo.

Answer 5

I agree with you that Saddam is a guilty in Iraq. but your troop need to control the safety of the people in Iraq after the Saddam era. There is a lot of killing among the Iraqi people themselves. You need to maintain the law. A lot of innoncent people was killed there. Why dont you pull your troops out from Iraq and let the United Nations send their peacekeepers there.

Answer 6

What's going on over there? There are 65 less potential troublemakers in the world. And there will be retribution that will eliminate even more. Under Saddam the problem was festering - now the troublemakers are coming out and being dealt with.

You sound like the typical Saddam aplogist. Bet you're also one of those who whines about how we backed/supported Saddam. Typical loony lying lefty loser - tries to have it both ways. Saddam was bad, Saddam was good.

Saddam had to go. Iraq is better without him. Sunni and Shiite troublemakers have to go. Iraq is better without them too. Clear enough for you or do I have to put it in Dr. Seuss language so you can understand it?

Answer 7

You cannot force democracy unto an authoritarian society. Only force can rule under these conditions. It seems as though more people die under the current reign than during the Saddam reign.
Saddam did it with a smaller budget and less American lives, though.

Answer 8

Of course! During the Husseins regime, life is safer than now. How many people do u thing are dying now? Saddam is trialed for killing fourty three people in one village. I think that Bush too should be trialed for killing more than hundred of thousands of people killed/being killed in Iraq.

Answer 9

if us didnt invade iraq ,then 10 y later saddam will die as any other human and the civil war will broke up with much devastating form cause the iraqi army still intact

Answer 10

Those Sunni's and Shi-ites who are no more than Isalmic animals with no morals, values or regard for any lives whatsoever, albei Muslim or non-muslim, are only fit for the refuse pile. Take them back to the days of Rome. Put them in pits with knives to face and kill each; or have them face wild animals, like they are, and when its finished - let wild animals have whats left!