I am Greek. After WW2, we had a civil war in greece between supporters of communism and supporters of capitalism. People were very divided. This age of turbulence resulted in a cruel dictatorship. When the dictatorship fell, the dictators, like Saddam, were condemned to death. But the execution would probably cause more division and civil war. So, it was decided that the sentence remained as such, but the executions were abolished ever more. So the dictators remained in jail for the rest of their lives to remind that awful period and to help us avoid it in the future, and democracy was well established, as well as national reconciliation. I believe, as always, Greece gave a lesson of democracy and respect for human rights then and is still doing the same. Don't you think Iraq should follow this lesson, in order to avoid the -otherwise inevitable- violence and civil war?
2006-12-29 04:06:01 · 21 answers · asked by cpinatsi 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
To those who stated there is a civil war already in Iraq, yes, you are right, I wasn't very accurate in my question, I meant that the civil war will take huge dimensions and escalate and generalise after the execution, won't it?
2006-12-29 04:15:48 · update #1
I agree with other posters that civil war is already occurring in Iraq. But putting Saddam to death with only make the Sunnis reject any efforts at strengthening the coalition government. If Iraq is ever to be at peace, the Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds need to have a coalition government in place which they can all trust as just and equitable. It will be near impossible for this coalition government to accomplish that if the Sunnis' former political leader is put to death.
2006-12-29 04:23:52 · answer #1 · answered by Dave of the Hill People 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There already is a Civil War, but yes Saddam's execution will not only fan the flames but likely spread the violence and hatred towards Americans and between the Sunnis and Shiites to other countries in the Middle East.
2006-12-29 04:31:29 · answer #2 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The civil war in Iraq will probably get worse.
The war in Iraq isn't about learning lessons from history, it is about big corporate profits. The longer the war goes on, the more money some people will make.
2006-12-29 04:16:24 · answer #3 · answered by sudonym x 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Iraq is at the brink of civil war already, but since the execution time was just announced, lets all hope the attacks arent as drastic and big.
2006-12-29 10:34:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Will cause a civil war? Where have you been? They're already in the middle of one and have been for some time. They're going to keep fighting each other until there's only one person standing. And you ain't seen nothin' yet - wait until they execute Saddam.
2006-12-29 04:10:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope, because I believe they are already fighting a civil war there. I do believe it will make things much worse. Once they have executed him the reality of the mistake of making him a martyr will set in. Eventually we and the Iraqui government are going to learn that basic truth. You can kill a person but you cannot kill a ghost. Wonder how many people will be willing to kill in the name of Saddam after he is dead? Ghosts can be powerful.
2006-12-29 04:11:33 · answer #6 · answered by toff 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No WMDs found in Iraq (the pretext for the US and UK invasion was totally wrong) = no execution of Saddam.
I'd guard Saddam at my house in exile (with books, newspapers, tv and 3 meals a day) rather than see him executed. Save Saddam !!
2006-12-29 04:51:10 · answer #7 · answered by Narky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The civil war has started already, Saddam was the only one who held everything togeather.
People feared Saddam but they also respected him.
2006-12-29 06:13:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, Iraq is already immersed in a civil war and has been for several months.
2006-12-29 04:10:23 · answer #9 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In answer on your chief question, the conflict on terror isn't over, and heavily isn't over for fairly a whilst. the difficulty is using terror as a gadget of conflict and the folk who think of that's ok. till that's under administration (finished eradication may well be effective yet isn't likely), the "conflict on terror" heavily isn't over. The Bush administration has tried to sell the thought the conflict and occupation in Iraq is asserted to the conflict on terror. they are asserting that Iraq grow to be a breeding floor for people who use terror as a gadget of conflict, so our troops are form of like exterminators attempting to kill the leftover colonies the place those vermin conceal, breed, and reproduce. provided that terrorists and terrorist agencies originate in many diverse places, it truly is perplexing to argue that the conflict and occupation in Iraq will ever have the outcomes of ending the conflict on terror.
2016-10-28 15:38:23 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋