All he did was kill shia terrorist making machines, in a way did he provide a nessasary balance between the two sects? He kept Irans attention off of us for a while? And finally was his trial most likely bias?
2007-01-04 15:17:07 · 19 answers · asked by Demon_Hunter 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I don't think it. I know it, and so do you.
2007-01-04 15:19:49 · answer #1 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think he was "that" bad. What about the Kurds he killed? Men, women and CHILDREN!!!! Gassed to death for nothing more than their nationality. He was a real bastard, but he was also "our" bastard for a long while. He just got to thinking he was too important to us and that we would never really challenge him. Guess he was wrong, eh?
I will say this, though; Under Saddam the Iraqi people knew what they were faced with. Now, every day brings a new horror, a new terror. We may call it a "War on Terror" here, but there it is a "War of Terror". When will we ever leave that country in peace, instead of pieces??? What we are doing there now is certainly not giving the Iraqis any solace or peace of mind to raise their children and to have meaningful lives.
2007-01-04 15:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
NO! Saddam Hussein was a cowardly weak guy picked up as a scapegoat by the west in the name of dealing with Al Quaida! Having invaded and found no signs of weapons of mass destruction, and after his capture and arrest, he was no longer a threat and so he should have been left alone! Digging into his past actions which were part of governing a chaotic country with divisions was a cowardly act and hurrying the trial, judgement, appeal and final execution - all that was totally unwarranted!
2007-01-04 15:32:01 · answer #3 · answered by Sami V 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'm sure the trial was biased, however, this is a purely evil being that has raped, tortured and murdered his fellow countrymen for the last thirty years. Entire villages, towns and communities were destroyed by him & his regime, and he admits to the murder of hundreds of thousands of human beings. That is wrong regardless of their sect, religion or any other discriminatory factor. I'm glad the freak S O B is dead, gone and rotting in hell.
2007-01-04 15:25:09 · answer #4 · answered by jonhammer69 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'd say yeah, he was that bad. Hanging was too good for him, in my opinion. He would have his driver pull over and pick up random women off the street if he "wanted" them. When he was through with them he would have their bodies chopped up and sent to their husbands or fathers in grocery bags. He ordered his henchmen to go find someone for him, if they went to the person house and the wife or mother would say they didn't know where the guy was, they would start with her youngest baby and hurl them at a wall and keep going through the children until they got the info they wanted. Yeah, he was bad!
2007-01-04 15:38:04 · answer #5 · answered by Cinner 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No... when he rules Iraq.. Iraq is in order even he kills people.. when America invade Iraq.. the bombers started to come.. If American don't want their soldiers dead then just go home.. American soldier is not a JEDI or what so ever..
American!! hah!! a self proclaim peace bringer, land of the free.. suck this!!
it's like watching STAR WARS... Darth Vader = Bush, Emperor = Olmert, Obiwan = Arafat, Osama = Luke Skywalker........ Hamas and the bombers = The Rebellion, American soldier = Clone Army...... finally in the end of the story.. Bush will accept Osama and kill Olmert and nuke Israel.... i like this!! hmmm.. wanna make a movie like this...?
2007-01-04 15:36:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
He tried to annihilate an entire race of people called the Kurds. Killing 180,000 and 50,000 living with the results of mustard gas. I had many problems with the results of hanging him. I seen a tired old man, but his legacy followed him. How sad to live in such a cruel world, but their culture is different that ours in the western world.
2007-01-04 15:22:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
seems like you have some reading up to do. What about the mass graves, all the people he had killed, put into shreaders feet first while they were alive, tortured, etc. etc. He was punished for "only one" of the things he did....many people were unhappy because of all the other things he did, those people didn't get their day in court.
2007-01-04 15:21:04 · answer #8 · answered by sophieb 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The guy was a total douchebag. Why would you even ask this question? When you should be asking if was worth sacrificing the lives of thousands of soldiers in two wars to get him?
2007-01-04 15:21:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, he was. He killed thousands of innocent people because they believed differently than he did. He was Hitler-bad. He needed to go and the USA was once again the country who had to clean up the messes of the world.
2007-01-04 15:26:02 · answer #10 · answered by rockstar_style 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Nahh- he was the US and UK's plan to self-destruct while destroying Iran- that's where he originally obtained his nerve gas & some 2nd rate military equipment.
Trial?- biased for sure.
Besides, that he's got that cheeky grin and jaunty beret! How can he be bad- he's always saying "Relax Guy!"
2007-01-04 15:25:16 · answer #11 · answered by Ministry of Camp Revivalism 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋