It seems every day there is more bloodsheed. Everyone knows how much Madass was hated yet he managed to maintain some kind of stability. There were few car bombs etc then although torture was common. What could Madass husein do that we can't?
2007-01-22 06:59:11 · 49 answers · asked by Bailey P 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Most of the world turned a blind eye to the atrocities that Saddam carried out, so the stability you talk about was brought about by fear, like most dictatorships the people are kept under tight control with an iron fist, any talk of dissension was put down immediately and with extreme brutal force, Saddam like all dictators was very streetwise and cunning, but also obsessively paranoid and would go to any measure to to bring down any one who he thought was against him innocent or not, and at the end of the day he was one of their own and moreover a Muslim.
The Americans and British on the other hand are there to bring about a change in the system, to introduce democracy, there are many elements opposed to this, the Sunni's after being under Saddam's partial protection for so many years, and the Shiites wanting revenge for the years of Sunni domination, and also you have the outsiders from extremist groups who just want to cause the allied forces as much trouble as possible, any change in a country's system of government after so many years nearly always brings about violence from the different factions, look what happened in the Balkans after the fall of communisam.
The Americans and British intentions for the people of Iraq are good, and are trying to desperately bring about stability, Saddam on the other-hand could do this very easily, you either shut up and be quiet or you would die (painfully) it was as simple as that, and it is that controlling factor that the Americans and British do not and most certainly can not have.
2007-01-22 08:02:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because Hussein was willing to take extreme measures such as murdering thousands of his own people that chose to disagree or whom he thought chose to disagree with him to maintain complete control and semi-calm. There was some "stability" because the Iraqi people eventually became too scared to speak out against the gov't, even though it was vile and wrong. While we have lost American and Iraqi casualties in Iraq, it is the result of a war; not a genocide of all Shia Muslims in the area. The U.S. gov't hasn't stated their goal in Iraq as being "we're going to kill all that disagree with us". Bush might not be the best president we've had by far, but he isn't a cold-hearted murderer like Saddam Hussein was. Simply put, Saddam was able to control Iraq through intimidation and fear. Bush isn't trying to do that.
2007-01-22 07:08:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Well since it was his country and he spent most of his life there he knew the people and the problems.
He knew how to rule the various peoples who hate each other, he climbed the political ladder and became president ruling with Iron fist.
OK so he was a ruthless bastardo, but he knew that is what it takes to rule ruthless people.
If they were not ruthless people who need ruling ruthlessly the American and British forces wouldn't have a problem.
But since George Bush threw Saddam to the lynch mob who hated him I guess thats that.
The US and GB have two choices, Get tough like Saddam or get out. and until you decide I predict more casualties.
In hindsight, Sadam would have been the best man for the job under US supervision. But I guess thats a burned bridge.
2007-01-22 07:17:05 · answer #3 · answered by Cassina R 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Saddam ruled with an iron fist , you disagreed with him -You died or watched your family die or just your whole village.
Do you want the USA and the British to control Iraq like that?
The peace keepers, win the hearts policy makers and the politically correct crowd won't like it much.
Now if we can sale it as your idea - it does have promise.
Or have you changed your mind on that approach?
2007-01-22 07:08:09 · answer #4 · answered by Akkita 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Well Hussein was on the side of the bad people so when all the violent people rule a country the good people tend to not fight back because of fear of what could happen to them and their families. Now that the good are stepping up the bad doesn't back down.. they have to be put down. Probably does not make much sense, but it is the only way I can think to explain it.
2007-01-22 07:10:27 · answer #5 · answered by 2007 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is what happens when you have a nation with the freedom of speech. Do you think that all of these anti war protesters would be able to protest if Saddam was in charge of the US. They would all be shot and have their heads placed on top of every flag poll to show everyone what would happen if they spoke out against his policies.
This is how Saddam was able to control Iraq. Fear that he would kill them for speaking out. He tested his WMD on his own people to see if they worked (sorry, we all know he didn't have WMD). He must have farted and killed the thousands of people, because that is why he was sent to the gallows.
2007-01-22 07:11:47 · answer #6 · answered by El P 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because we have fallen into the fatal trap of trying to convert a fundamentalist government into a western republic/democracy. This has been truly successful a bare handful of times, but we keep trying. Our modern examples came out of total destruction, Germany,Japan, and South Korea. The simple fact is we don't listen to people and haven't since Truman.
2007-01-22 07:29:00 · answer #7 · answered by cessna0518 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
he was a copy book of Hitler who ruled by fear as did Saddam and he actually did kill people on the spot if he took a dislike to you so is it any wonder unless you had a death wish you kept your head down! I read a short while ago he literally was an actual murderer he ordered a woman to entertain him and because she didn't fulfil fulfil his requirements he personally threw her from a five storey building to her death//however the Iraqis are taking a long time to understand democracy but when they do i think the country will be peaceful again but not through fear
2007-01-22 08:19:22 · answer #8 · answered by srracvuee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The law of the land there is different than the law of the land here. saddam placed himself right in between Sunnis and Shiites and used brutality to get what he wanted. just like when a couple of shiites tried to assinate him, he ordered the slaughtering of over 160 men women and children just to scare them straight and keep them in line. he also oreder public hangings in town square for every one to see so they would know the consequences of breaking his rules. a government based on Democracy is far different than the people there are used to and isn't something that gets better over night. It will take several generations of Iraqis for this to happen. When kids grow up in a democracy, they will be accustomed to that. Right now, Iraqis aren't accustomed to it. this is just the start of a long struggle, but I would like it to succeed.
2007-01-22 07:06:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well because everyone was in support of Saddam Husein killing everyone, but everyone is not in support of the USA helping the people of Iraq. Go figure....
2007-01-22 07:07:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋