2006-11-24 04:42:12 · 7 answers · asked by A BOY 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Sadam's Obviously. He had his nation under control regardless of his methods.Less people died.The American invasion has resulted in the deaths of more people than any weapon of mass destruction used by Sadam...ever!
2006-11-24 04:51:16 · answer #1 · answered by Dinasor76 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, based only on what I have read from all spectrums of viewpoint, combined with what I have been told by those serving there, I would say things have gotten better for the most part. The people may now hold free and open elections and not live with the knowledge their leader/s could send troops in the night and remove their family to bury them in the desert for voicing an opinion. If you watch the videos of Saddam moving among the people, you see real terror on their faces, paranoia ran rampant among the citizens knowing they could be killed just because the big man didn't like their face.
Still a ways to go yet but my belief is that it has improved.
2006-11-24 12:49:57 · answer #2 · answered by Rich B 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Saddam's. It was stable, prospering, progressive. Education was free to everyone, women included. His government was secular. Women were free to become well educated, hold jobs, and walk around without having their bodies covered head to toe. Despite the efforts to portray Saddam as merely reaping his countries wealth (he did, obviously) he also poured money into schools, hospitals, other infrastructure. Iraqis had a good standard of living. There were no WMDs, no threat.
The religious tensions that are out of control now were controlled while he was in power. His methods were harsh, no doubt, but no harsher than those we are employing. The difference is, he was effective, we are not. He had the recipe. Iraq was stable, NOT allied with Syria or Iran, and not a base of operations for the terrorists who have flooded into it since our invasion.
2006-11-24 12:59:52 · answer #3 · answered by functionary01 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
People are still dying over there, everyday. But now they are killing each other, which is a choice they are making. Under Saddam they were dying as well, but it was he who was doing the killing or having it done. They could, if they were smart people, stop the killing but I believe it is part of their heritage and religious views to kill, so it will just go on and on.
2006-11-24 12:53:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Current Iraq is better, the MSM just fails to focus on anything but blood. Old media saying "If it bleeds it leads"
2006-11-24 12:43:59 · answer #5 · answered by netnazivictim 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Saddam's. Hate to say it.
2006-11-24 12:51:57 · answer #6 · answered by planksheer 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Simple, Iraq is lots better under the US CONTROL, no question about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-11-24 13:14:22 · answer #7 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋