Isn't that true? Look at Iraq before Bush when Saddam was running IRAQ and now look at IRAQ's mess Bush is doing? Bush has no solutions and Saddam did!
2006-12-14 08:51:36 · 14 answers · asked by Believe me 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Answers to some of your answers: Yeah Saddam did kill but he killed the ones who were causing problems to stablelize his country. Bush is killing innocent lives (indirectly) by using his plans that's not working. It takes someone like Saddam to run Iraq cuz that's the mentallity of middle east over there. Bushe's, the American Ideology doensn't work over there, open your eyes! Now that I made my points, Isn't it scary to know Bush is running American when he can't even run Iraq??!!
2006-12-14 09:04:53 · update #1
Iraq is virulently divided between three major populations that historically don't get along - Sunnis, Shias and Kurds. There are theories that just like the former president of Syria, Hafez Al Assad, having a strong-armed dictator was the only way to keep them all in check. I think the results of not having one are becoming pretty obvious.
I'm certainly not arguing that Saddam was a good man, but I think most Iraqis would agree that having jobs, education and running water (just to name a few of the things that are no longer available) were all nice to have.
Many Iraqis have argued that despite how much Saddam may have been hated, everyone knew the system and therefore knew how to function within it. And there certainly wasn't any danger of being blown up, shot or kidnapped on your way to the grocery store.
Democracy is a fabulous idea in places that it actually works - and in many places around the world, it simply doesn't. And you certainly cannot expect a place that has had nothing but single party dictatorships or monarchies for thousands of years to suddenly toss all that aside and implement a system that has no precedence and, in many regards, flys in the face of cultural mores.
Bush = binghaba......
2006-12-14 19:43:57 · answer #1 · answered by tureeza 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As we look at any dictator they have to rule with an iron fist to keep the country together, so Saddam was a great murderer and leader. Bush runs the United States which is governed by laws so one does not get all the power.
2006-12-14 14:43:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't go far as to say Saddam is better leader. Bush don't order to kill entire villagers that hide insurgents. Bush under estimated whole Iraq thing, but that doesn't mean he's bad as Saddam.
2006-12-14 09:40:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mickey Mouse could've come up with a better plan for Iraq than Bush! Simply because Bush had no plans. He only takes wild guesses. He is the poster child of incompetence. Oh, and let's not let Cheney and Rumsfeld off too easily either. There you have it folks, the New Millenium's DVD Uncut Version of The 3 Stooges!
2006-12-14 09:03:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sure, Saddam had a very simple solution for everything. Kill 'em. Problem "solved".
Sure, Iraq's a mess. Perhaps we shouldn't even be in there. But remember, freedom isn't free. War isn't cut and dry, like the old movies. It's messy, dirty, and ugly.
2006-12-14 08:57:23 · answer #5 · answered by Capt. Obvious 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah. Saddam had members of his own party killed by members of his own party. Saddam made videos of prison torture and murders and handed them out to the people so they'd know the score.
He tried to wipe out the Kurds with Mustard gas...YEAH SADDAM, wish GWB would kill and torture us for control.
Just split up Iraq into Kurdish Iraq, Sunni Iraq, and Shia Iraq and I bet you'd see an improvement from the war torn streets now.
2006-12-14 08:56:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why don't you go live in Iraq for about 6 months, and then tell us your opnion. What a nerd you are. I really don't care for Bush, but saying saddam was better, come on! If you think it is so much better, pack your bags buddy, or go enlist in the army.
2006-12-14 09:00:20 · answer #7 · answered by Mrs. SmartyPants 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the people for most part was afraid of saddam therefore they did what he told them.. he had it in order for most part...of course he did very bad things too and is paying for his crimes.. but bush?? he made things far more worse than before and now.. im afraid it will never be corrected... will children have a chance there? what kind of life are they having now?? so much death and destruction.. its very sad for them... bush should have pulled out long time ago from iraq
2006-12-14 08:55:22 · answer #8 · answered by Amira N 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that ANYBODY ON EARTH is a better leader than Dubya. They're both evil. I have no doubt that Dubya would have killed as many people if they got in his way & he could get away with it. Saddam is a dick, for sure, but at least, in his favor, you can say he was a self-made man. If Dubya weren't born Dubya, he'd be working in a bait shop right now! (And I'm sure he'd **** that up too!)
2006-12-14 09:40:31 · answer #9 · answered by rustyreacharound 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
of course
people killed during saddam control: 45
people killed during bush control: 500 000
2006-12-14 09:04:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋