Do you agree with Kofi Annan that the Iraqis were better off under Saddam?

Question

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N03431252.htm

Or should we just repeat the mantra that anyone who thinks so is a "liberal traitor" and refuse to seriously consider the question?

tell us neo deo - how many genocides?

Rick N - if you want my opinion, ask that question and you'll get it.

Answer 1

yes as a matter of fact Iraq was under a much better government when saddam was in place and if you look through the history it was the U.S CIA that put saddam in power in the first place .Iran would never have been allowed to infiltrate the country and the deal the sheites struck with this administation shows exactly what type of people saddam was up against. think about it even though he ordered the deaths of 148 people involved with the failed assasination attempt on that dictators life show me another dictator who would not have done that very same thing under those same cercumstances and I show you a dictator who's spin nachine is better than the U.S.A's
(no small feat).

I have no likes for the overthrown dictator but I can see that his way in his country worked for keeping the peace.

what this administation fails to see is that Iran has been playing the Inteligence community for fool's and this administration now wants war with them for reasons that are not on the front page .

if you could take weapons of mass destuction in volume you would see the stock piles in the middle east all reside in U.S."friendly"demacracies why because the U.S> has made sure they were their to protect their intrests.

now we fear we are at risk under new alliances that those weapons will be used against us ,I think they should of thought of that before we threw the support of the U.S on the side of the minority in the middle east and let them live any way they choose to live there ,just don't allow them to come here without intence imigrational screening.

but that probably only makes sence to me and will probbably be called a racest for the statement.but heck I have to wait 6 months for an F.I.D. card in order to buy a rifle to go hunting with and a very intence background check is done and I am 17 generation desendents from imigrants.my neighbor got his the day he got his working visa and does not even pay taxes .so go figure .oh yea forgot to mention he is from syria .

so to say that this country is truely screwed up is an understatement.

What freedom ?

Answer 2

I don't agree with Kofi Annan about anything.

I also think that only the Iraqis are qualified to say whether or not they were better off under Saddam.
Considering the way they celebrated when Saddam was executed, I don't think they want to go back to that way of life.

Answer 3

Most Iraqis believe that they were better off under Saddam. Its not that they liked him, it just that now they are being blown up, shot and kidnapped every day.

I don't agree with Coffee on anything. I think the world would be a better place without the UN.

Answer 4

Yes I agree with Kofi Annan that Iraqis were better off under Saddam then now under Bush.Saddam kept peace among his peoples and Saddam gave more prosperous to his peoples
.Bush gave misery to the people of Iraq and Bush stealt their oil and destroyed their historical buildings and also their houses
.Bush is making civil war in Iraq between Sunni and Syiah
..Bush made more widows and more orphans and more disable people with a dark future life.Bush killed more innocent Iraqis than Saddam did.Saddam has been hanged to death but Bush is still in his office as the president of US.

Answer 5

Absolutely.
Kofi Annan, the moral authority from the UN - that stood by and didn't lift a finger as hundreds of thousands were slaughtered in Rwanda - is the perfect beauracrat to comment on all this.

Iraq was definitely better off under a genocidal thug that killed on a whim and razed entire towns and villages on same.

What twilight zone are you and Kofi Annan living in?

Answer 6

Actually they WERE better off under Saddam.

It was a ferocious police state dictatorship but the streets were safe, crime was low and most of the male nonsupervisory labor force had a job - either with the goverment or the state owned businesses.

The 'New Iraq' is still a police state, but it's a foreign army and it's local puppet police force that are doing the polcing! And, unlike Saddam's Muhkabarat and Saddam Fedayeen, the US Army, US Marine Corps and their puppet Iraqi Police, Iraqi Army and Iraqi National Guard cannot keep the streets safe!

Answer 7

Never was impressed by Kofi.


"Annan's departure from office has not come soon enough. His 10 years in power have been a monumental failure, and he leaves behind an institution whose standing could barely be lower and a legacy that is a testament to mismanagement, corruption, and anti-Americanism. Over the past 12 years, the U.N. has been dominated by scandal, division, and failure. From the disaster of the U.N. peacekeeping missions in Rwanda and Bosnia in the mid-1990s to the U.N.'s slow response to the Sudan genocide, its recent track record has been spectacularly unimpressive. His successor will inherit a U.N. whose image has slipped to an all-time low."

http://www.nowpublic.com/kofi_annans_legacy_of_failure

Answer 8

It's hard to say, I'm not Iraqi and neither are you, so it's unfair for us to make the call. It's unfair for Kofi to make that assumption too. Kofi is angry cause he lost his oil deals with Saddam that were lining his pockets, so I'm sure Kofi liked it better when Saddam was in power.I bet the Kurds and Shiite's feel like they're better off. The Sunnis probably like it better before.

Answer 9

SURE

The Iraqi's were doing much better; But Bush was a mess before he attacked Saddam.

Go big Red Go

Answer 10

No,and I did not no anyone agreeded with the scum-bag on anything except those who were stealing with him.He was the poster child for how useless and corrupt the U.N. really is.