then tried the Democracy later on when more order was restored? And is it too late to try a US friendly autocrat if he is better at rebuilding Iraq and stopping the terrorists than the current joker?
2007-02-04 08:42:34 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It would have been better if if would have listened to the experts and went in there with 300,000 of more troops.
Yes, he did rush the new government and elections before it was ready to be.
2007-02-04 08:49:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Isn't that what he has tried to do ? I don't think a US Friendly Dictator would have a very long or productive rule if we DID create one. More likely he'd be taken out in a sectarian raid.
And what makes you think " democracy" is all its cracked up to be ? Under "democracy" we had one presidential election stolen outright in 2000 and a country so divided that there is no willingness to develop a national consensus.
2007-02-04 08:50:31 · answer #2 · answered by planksheer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually it would have been much better to have allowed the Iraqis to exercise their right to popular sovereignty. Let them choose a system of government.
2007-02-04 08:48:36 · answer #3 · answered by taa 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes, i also thikn if he declared martial law and put down an iron fist for a while it would have been much more peaceful than it is now.
2007-02-04 08:45:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no i dont. this way its clear iraq elected their own people and forged their own future, contrary to the pelosi diatribe.
2007-02-04 08:45:46 · answer #5 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋