If america sent back Saddan to iraq do you think he could stabilize thecountry?

Question

lets face it Bush has completley failed. its about time the american people took to the streets all over america and protest over the killing of young soldiers. still it seem the american people do not seem to care as long as they get a rolled up american flag as a gift from the pariod goverment

Answer 1

Yes. I would consider in re-establishing a Saddam government minus the Kurds. I would give the Kurds a "Free and Independent" state, and let Saddam govern the Shite and Sunni regions (Central & Southern) Iraq. The Kurds have proved themselves, and have suffered allot under Saddam, therefore I would give them their own state and enforce it by a US Military Brigade. In supporting the Kurd State, we will have a Embassay thus allowing us to have overt and covert intelligence agencies to better monitor the region. These people (Shitte & Sunni) do not care about democracy, they are vicious and strive to do nothing more than kill Americans and other European and Westerners. Under Saddam, they had no choice but to get along, thus supporting the theroy that some people need a dictator and strict rule in their lives.

Answer 2

If you'll remember the first US government failed. And at least we had started our own revolution so we at least had a somewhat united coherent military. Iraq is doing just fine considering an entire government and military was collapsed virtually overnight. Establishing a government and security in an extremely hostile area within a few years just isn't going to happen. And if Saddam was given back rule of iraq it would be civil war. The US army is the only thing holding that country together right now. I don't think this proves that some people need dictators. I think this proves that freedom should be won by the people that are to have it, it can't be given by anyone else. Its Iraqi blood that must be shed as a price for freedom, so it should be their choice. I think this war was wrong strategically and politically(in retrospect, with all the details I know now), but remember, at the end of the day there are people who want to shed innocent blood and stand against the ideals of freedom and democracy, and as long as these are the people we're fighting I can sleep at night.

Answer 3

I am sure that the Kurds and Shiite would like that, since it was their lives that were diminished by Saddam. It has been alittle over three years since his government was taken down and the Iraqi people freed. It may take another 3 years before peace can be obtained, but it will. Are you suggesting that freedom is not worth fighting for ?

Answer 4

Saddam hasn't left Iraq. He is there in an Iraqi jail. I doubt anyone can stabilize the country. Just like when Tito died in Yugoslavia. Saddam was the only one that could hold the diverse groups together.

Answer 5

There was a Sunni proposal to have a diverse group of 5 strongmen rule a united Iraq. I think it's an interesting alternative, and Bush propagandists are so good, they could even spin this into a victory for democracy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2404311.html

Answer 6

Although I couldn't grasp the complete meaning of your question (checking spelling might help in the future), I do agree with the idea that the war in Iraq is a farce. However, Saddam cannot be "sent back" to Iraq, as he is still IN Iraq. Glad to see you are at least thinking about these important issues, though! :-)

Answer 7

Nope, Saddam would need his army of 1,000,000 ands his Bath party security apparatus to watch over the people, he'd also have to start up the killing fields again and putting in lots of fresh bodies, that's how he maintained power in the first place. But my guess is you conveniently forgot all the above because it doesn't suit your political agenda!

Answer 8

quote
"If america sent back Saddan to iraq do you think he could stabilize thecountry?"

Just where is it that your finite mind has determined that Saddam is.

And Yes,,,,,,,,,, forgetting that Saddam is still alive would be a grave mistake

Answer 9

Granted he may have killed over 800,000 of his own, but that was over a period of 20 years. We may have set off conditions that killed over 600,000 in just 3 years. That is if the Johns Hopkins estimate is correct. I say put him back in charge.
So how is this freedom and democracy thing going over there ?
Pretty good, huh ?

Answer 10

THERE WERE PROBLEMS IN IRAQ BEFORE THE AMERICANS MILITARY CAME. THE WAR ONLY BROUGHT THEIR PROBLEMS TO THE FOREFRONT FOR THE WORLD TO TAKE MORE NOTICE. IF SADDAM WAS BACK IN POWER, CONDITIONS MIGHT BE WORST.

I'M NOT FOR THE AMERICAN PRESENCE IN IRAQ, BUT NO WHY DID I AGREE WITH HOW SADDAM WAS RUNNING IRAQ EITHER. IRAQ IS BETTER WITH SADDAM STAYING WERE HE IS.