Was Saddam Hussein preferable to the current mess in Iraq?

Question

The greatest constitutional outrage was to launch Britain into a war based on false claims about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. Saddam's Iraq stood as a bulwark against terrorists; now it it a haven for anyone with terrorism in mind. According to a report today Britan is now the country most likely to suffer a major terrorist outrage; simply because of its' collusion in invading Iraq.

Answer 1

Yes, I agree. Predictably the place is now in a state of civil war, with huge numbers of civillians dying.

Tony Blair is to blame.

Answer 2

We are going reap what we have sown. It is our children's children, that will be in the eye of the brewing storm.

Iraq had infighting for generations and the militants amongst them are rejoicing in the fact that the US and the UK invaded. It has given them an extra vehicle and excuse for reprisals against each other.

As you say Saddam was bulwark against iraq's own brand of terrorism and in retrospect I think it was a bad day when he was toppled.

It will take hundreds of years to put right the wrong and at a price that does not bare thinking about.

Oh Tony! Why were you so weak and yet so strong?.


EDIT Studebaker what do you mean "Those people under control"?. What an attitude. Is it anywonder that the Amercians are disliked when morons like you show no respect for anyone

Answer 3

Read the papers or watch the news. U'll c how many people are dying everyday under the regime of 'freedom' compared to the regime of Saddam or the so-called 'Dictator'. Furthermore by removing Saddam, America has just given Iran the chance to start dealing with uranium(which was not the case when Saddam was here). Now America fears that Iran got nukes. Some good reasoning will let us realise that Saddam was better than f@***** Bush.

Answer 4

When President Bush decided to go into Iraq, using specious and totally erroneous reasons, Prime Minister Blair decided to follow, despite knowing that around 90 percent of Brits did not want UK armed forces to embark on such a disastrous invasion. Even when several senior members of the government resigned, the PM still went ahead.

As you say, this was an outrage, no matter how viewed.

Unlike the Americans, the UK had had experience of Middle East ventures and its goverment should have looked at history and realised the invasion would almost certainly end in failure. Which it has.

The irony is that although the mass of British people were not, and still are not in favour of the Iraq war, Al Queda seems not to recognise this fact and has decided (apparently) to target Great Britain. In my view they are grossly mistaken.

Answer 5

I very much agree with SoFarSoGood; even though I have never supported Tony Blair I believed that the Prime Minister had sources he could not reveal which indicated there were WMD. With this subterfuge he has undermined the office. Notwithstanding Saddam was an evil butcher and has got his come-uppance. The biggest mistake was not to plan for the peace and to disband the Iraqi police and army after the war, so that the country fell into lawlessness. Why were the lessons of history not learned? After WWII the British used the Japanese to police their territories under British command until the civil power could be reinstated.

Answer 6

Saddam was definitely wicked and obviously an evil dictator, but the present situation in Iraq is not in any way a lesser evil. The entire world would have been better off without the war.

Answer 7

In the a lot of the other answers above people are citing that Saddam was a bad lot. Well yeh, sure he was. Is that why we went to war though ?

I've never been told a ligitimate reason why, on that particular day, we had to launch a war on Iraq and subject them to years of death.

Any ligitimate reasons for decending the country into civil war ?

If you are in the US then you are unlikely to be able to answer this question accurately. I go to the sates regularly on business and if you watch US news its as if there are 2 Iraqs, you are not being told the truth...and don't bother saying "yes we are", how would you know if you are being lied to, or what the rest of the world is like, when 85% of you have never left the country ?

No doubt you'll rate me down for this....typical US patriot response.

Answer 8

Absolutely. Saddam, with WMD, was a danger to the US and a legitimate target. Saddam, without WMD, was a petty dictator who was a disaster to most of the Iraqi people, but no direct threat to the US. By misstating (ie lying) about the situation in Iraq Bush managed to start a war that he wanted but there was no real justification for. I was fully confident that the WMD would be found after the US waltzed in, and surprised when they weren't. Bush & co. deliberately lied about weapons in Iraq to gain support from suckers like me. I have not believed a word he has said since then - and do not think in doing so I have once been wrong.

Answer 9

You do know there are 30 nations included in the coalition in Iraq? The terrorist are mad because they can't get a foot hold in Iraq, so they are going to try and scare the big guys. You let them push you around and you had better convert now. I will never back down to a terrorist or a heathen Muslim. You ask the Iraqi people and they will certainly tell you that even though times are bad right now, they certainly would not go back to the way things were under Saddam.

Answer 10

He wasn't preferable at the time because the man is a tyrant and he spent the wealth of the country on his whims while half the population were living a pitiful existence, but looking at what is happening there now, every day then you have to search your brain and think was there another way this could have been dealt with and perhaps 700,000 folk would still be alive and sadly it will continue until their own military is able to take control

Answer 11

Hussein grew to become into killing his own people yet no longer something like what Stalin grew to become into doing. Hussein grew to become into preserving his fiefdom from in domicile power struggles. the guy on the line grew to become into incredibly secure. It grew to become into the turning out to be generals and politicians that have been in Saddam's gun attractions for many of the time. specific the Iraqis have been a hell of lots greater effective off with the dictator on the helm. In some years people are going to make certain merely how nicely off the Libyans have been with the nut bar Qaddafi, and Mubarak? nicely a minimum of he gave lower back a number of what he grew to become into stealing and he did save the peace extremely. Syria is going down a similar street the Tunisians began and by way of gum in the event that they at the instant are not likely to be led by way of the nostril on the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. they have Egypt, they have Libya of their pocket, the Tunisian women folk are strolling scared for what has taken carry of their united states now. you will get all sorts of arguments and debates with reference to the so called Arab Spring. yet time will let us know all: the muslim brotherhood is going to be working the full of the Arab worldwide very quickly. How they run issues is thru "Shariah regulation". Ever watch a rustic thrive below Shariah regulation after the freedoms their dictators gave them? look at Iran, you recognize the land Jimmy Carter fvcked up. (ever be conscious how briskly the individuals have been released after Reagan have been given into power?) The Shah of Iran grew to become into toppled and look at what's there now. you are able to anticipate Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria, to be donning the shoes of the muslim brotherhood merely like Iran does at present.