Whats happened in Iraq was this:
Intervention of the USA government into another sovereign country Iraq. Replacement of the Sunnies government by Shiites.
My question is if Saddam was evil, dictator who killed a lot of ppl why not just bring him to justice and leave the Sunnie government where it was?
Do you think it was lawfull to change one government by another without asking Sunnies if they wanted that change?
Do you know if the Sunnies were in minority or majority in Iraq?
Or mayby you think that Sunnies are all evil and should be killed and MUST not be in in government of Iraq?
2006-12-31
05:17:12
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Lion
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
Yep I mistakenly asked the same q again I am sorry
2006-12-31
05:23:16 ·
update #1
This fight is about oil. Saddam threatened 60% of the world's oil supply, and therefore he could not stay in office. It's that simple.
If Saddam would've killed 1,000,000 people (like Pol Pot) in an area w/o oil, we'd just talked about doing something. If he'd invaded Syria or Jordan, which don't have oil, we wouldn't have cared.
Yes, it would've been simpler to tell the Baath party that they had 30 days to find a new leader, with the only stipulation that he couldn't invade anyone else, and then leave.
Sadly, I can hear the liberals now... "We left a brutal repressive regime in place!!! Oh, the horror!!!"
Sunni Muslims per se are not good, nor evil. Baath party officials, who were almost all Sunni, were evil, as were the Sunnis in West Pakistan who destroyed East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
2006-12-31 05:28:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by geek49203 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
After the US invaded the country and occupied Bagdad the Sunni Government fell apart - the most organized part of the Government was at the UN - the Government basically desolved.
The Sunni's were asked to participate in the new government and for the most part early on refused. They were asked to participate and their leaders and most of their followers choose not to get involved. They made their own bed there.
Is it lawful to remove from power a regime that commits autrocities against its people and rules by fear as opposed to rule of law - of course it is lawful to remove regimes that do not rule by rule of law.
Unless you count the Kurds among the Sunnis population - Sunnis are the minority within Iraq.
Personally I know most Sunnis are more reasonable than their Shi'ite counterparts and if you look at the killings with bombs and such the Sunnis have been killing many people.
Good Luck (and pay attention a little bit more about what is actually happening)!!!
2006-12-31 13:26:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
OK. The truth about Iraq is that the US, and to a lesser extent UK and other European countries, supported Saddam in invading Iran, even selling him the materials to make chemical weapons that killed tens of thousands of Iranians as well as Kurds. We supported him during eight years of war. We gave him satellite photos of Iranian front-lines. We did this because the US was paranoid about Iran and the Islamic revolution, and because we wanted to keep access to cheap-ish oil and to the markets of oil-rich states.
Later Saddam invaded Kuwait. He stopped doing what he was told. So we kicked him back out of Kuwait. We called on the Shia and the Kurds to rise up against him, but then we betrayed them. We wanted Saddam to be reined in, but not at the cost of revolution or democracy in Iraq.
We imposed the sanctions regime that caused a health disaster in Iraq. We played a pointless game of hunting weapons of mass destruction.
After 9-11, although Saddam had nothing to do with it, he was a handy target. We destroyed him. We put him on trial, but not for anything to do with the Iran war, which might have raised some awkward questions about Western hypocrisy.
Now he is dead, those awkward truths have been sidelined, though no-one in Iraq is likely to forget them.
And we expected them to be grateful??????????????
2006-12-31 13:49:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the Sunni controlled government is not a fair representation of the make up of the Iraqi people. The Shiite's and Kurd's were left out of the Bathe controlled government.
2006-12-31 13:24:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The guy above me must have smoked too much weed in Vietnam. We cannot lose this war. It is more important than Vietnam. We went in to remove Saddam and his party. He is dead his sons are dead and Iraq is a new nation. We are just supporting them until they can govern themselves. And that extra mission is soon to be accomplished too.
2007-01-01 22:51:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The truth about Iraq is this. We (USA ) will lose the war just like Vietnam. It's hard to believe. We made a mistake again.
2007-01-01 04:08:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Shiites are the extremist that are always blowing themselves up, Id rather have the stable Muslims in their government.
2006-12-31 13:24:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by I Hate Liberals 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
it is truly impossible to know the full truth....there are also things that we shouldn't know as it would create full blown panic. the government does a lot of things for us good and bad.
2006-12-31 13:32:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by cheshiregirl0472 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush invaded as a payback for 911 or so the story goes-I thought it was OSAMA that was supposed to be brought to justice?
2006-12-31 13:22:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
You asked this before. Three seconds ago to be exact.
2006-12-31 13:19:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tom Jr 4
·
1⤊
0⤋