Should we consider the human tragedy in Iraq a vindication of Saddam Hussein?

Question

One undeniable element of the human condition is bias. The American People rely on their news media and their government for their information, so they naturally convince themselves that this information originates from unbiased sources. But this is surely delusion, given the propensity of all of us toward bias.

Given the timing of events, it appears that there is considerable objective evidence that the presence of Saddam Hussein as Ruler of Iraq held many extremely murderous elements within Iraq in check. It does appear that America's overthrow, not through reason, but through force, of Saddam Hussein caused the current growing tragedy in Iraq.

What do you think? (I expect plenty of Lemming responses.)

One who disagrees with a conclusion typically prefers to focus on a single phrase that he or she finds puzzling, rather than consider the argument in its entirety. This is because to do otherwise would be to consider an opposing viewpoint.

Answer 1

Considering the current anarchy, it's logical to wax nostalgic for the days of Saddam. Evidence shows his territorial ambitions and weapons programs were controlled by sanctions and inspections. Foreign policy realists would have left him alone, or pursued covert means of regime change.

Answer 2

Not by a long shot! When this epic draws its conclusion, history will name the heroes and villians. Hisory is written by the victors.

Answer 3

The phrase "through reason" stands out for me. Are you kidding? You have a nice vocabulary but your content is stupid.

Answer 4

F*ck Saddam but he had nothin' whatever to do with 9/11-that was just another neo-nazi-con fu*kin' lie!

Answer 5

NO