Didn't the American occupation allow it to happen? Weren't most Iraqis safer under Saddam than under Amreican occupation? Not to say that Saddam deserves medals, but the average Iraqi was in much better shape before the Americans attacked. Can you see that?
2006-12-26 03:44:57 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
why do so many of you pretend to care about the Kurds?
2006-12-26 04:06:55 · update #1
Noone should live in that kind of fear.
To overcome a bully you have to be willing to endure 'til the end. The reason there is so much violence surging now is because they are in a panic that their way of life is being changed. Noone likes change and especially forced change. However, I still believe that to make things better for everyone the changes have to be made.
It is like kids on a playground- there is always gonna be a bully and until someone stands up to the bully and says " enough " then the bully rules. But once the first person stands up then another and another stands up and finally you have peace. It does not happen overnight and years of oppression and fear will not be overcome in a few days ( or a few years in this case )
Once the Iraqi people start standing up for their rights as human beings and stick to it without cowering down again when the violence kicks back in then they will see the change start to " stick " and their lives can become better.
As far as their lives being better under Saddam- it may seem like that to them now but keep in mind that is the only life they knew. They had no other reference to go by. Now that they have a reference point then maybe they should decide which way is better. And that is what they shall do once their troops are trained and ready to take back over their own country.
2006-12-26 04:01:34 · answer #1 · answered by bootsjeansnpearls 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Disagree. The WORLD is a lot safer place without his rule. He is a tyrant. Ask the kurds. Civil war is their own making. The Iraqis fail to see the good that happening around them.
Try telling a terrorist what he should not be doing. They think their cause is paramount. The same way the Iraqi civil war is something they have to come to grips with. It has nothing to do with what happened over the past few years.
2006-12-26 03:56:01 · answer #2 · answered by Nightrider 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree!! Saddam knew what those people needed to maintain order! Tough Love is right! The bad one got the dungeons and their was peace throughout the land! Any uprising was met by the iron fist of rule! Iraq was definitely a safer place when he ruled! Long Live Saddam!!
2006-12-26 03:56:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
of course it was a safer place for a majority under saddam. people from west have trouble understanding this. mebbe wilfully blind. the kurds were discriminated against. but there were other solutions to that proble. but then we just needed excuses to bomb them back to pre mesoppotamian period. like the senior bush's fake kuwaiti girls story came to his aid, so did the human rights violations, the kurdish massacres and last but not least the WMD came into play!
2006-12-26 04:29:12 · answer #4 · answered by irumporayar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the on the spot the U. S. pulls out iraq would have an finished blown (extremely of the now "secret" one) civil conflict. btw. Iraq is a procedures faraway from beeing "reliable" inspite of US troops in there. edit yet iraq isn't even the important difficulty. the superb "shaggy dog tale" (if there does not were many human beings killed for not some thing) in historic previous will be freedom and democracy for afghanistan (a rustic the position most of the human beings don´t even understand a thanks to jot down "because 70% are illiterate ;-) the note freedom or democracy now to not indicate get what it ability.
2016-12-01 04:41:20 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam's control over Iraq kept it from going into civil war and from being controlled by fanatic Islamist dictators.
2006-12-26 04:11:44 · answer #6 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've seen how he treated people over there. We got hold of a CD with some awful footage to the tortures they did, putting explosives in the pocket of one victim,slitting the throat of another, beating people unconcious, and other horrific scences. So im glad the SOB is out of power but i disappointed that what we did might be affecting the people in Iraq.
2006-12-26 04:38:13 · answer #7 · answered by Phenix 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are right, Saddam just gave them a little tough love and it the is Bush's fault for Iraq's civil war.
2006-12-26 03:53:35 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well i suppose you could argue that, except of course for the thousands of people that dissapeared, the 100,000 or so men women and children killed during the Anfal campaign and the poor bastards that ended up in his torture cells.
2006-12-26 03:53:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you should be asking the Kurdish people that question.
2006-12-26 03:52:28 · answer #10 · answered by evildragon1952 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋