at least iraq was stable and now its destroyed with anarchy and violence every where there was no terrorists but now there is
is Bush a dumbass or what
2006-11-26 21:22:06 · 7 answers · asked by raul b 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
You cannot get legitimate and truthful answers by answering your own question, too biased on your part.
2006-11-26 22:39:10 · answer #1 · answered by Mr.Wise 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think Saddam should have stayed in power. He developed Iraq, and, ordinary Iraqis could live under him in a relatively free atmosphere (in comparison to the fanatic absolute monarchy of Saudi-Arabia, for example).
2006-11-26 21:26:51 · answer #2 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they preferred Saddam over Bush.
2006-11-26 21:37:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes. look at nicaragua, columbia, panama, rwanda, north korea, iran, afghanistan and countless others (especially in Africa and Asia). Those people were much better off before foreign armies came about ousting leaders and taking sides.
2006-11-26 23:00:53 · answer #4 · answered by AJ F 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he is a sadistic murderer. Our president did the right thing, but all the Arabs in the surrounding countries want to keep the war going.
2006-11-27 02:37:36 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if only the bush administration had done its homework better.
2006-11-27 14:24:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no he needed to be removed too bad we went so far
2006-11-27 00:55:59 · answer #7 · answered by love Rizzo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋