2007-02-16 09:56:41 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Under Saddam, an Iraqi had to run his mouth to get killed. Under George, they just need to go to the store.
2007-02-16 10:01:22 · answer #1 · answered by yaahoosuxdix 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I'd say George. But for some iraqis it may have been a trade-off. The Shias are happy that saddam is gone, but for both sects the american army is a foreign army coming into their country and destroying it and taking their resources.
I mean, during the initial invasion, things like painkiller factories and water sanitation were bombed.
Sunfun has it exactly right. Exactly right.
*is also a chomsky fan*
Look at george as a foriegn president coming into their country, destroying it, and deciding how things are going to be done.
2007-02-16 18:30:17 · answer #2 · answered by meikai_derushie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haha! Good question. I'd have to say they hate dub-ya more. For all of his brutality, Saddam was actually able to prevent the Shia and Sunni from instigating the kind of crap we see now (and for a long time, too). He'd have these people chained to walls with battery wires hooked up to their testicles. Do the ends justify the means? Maybe in some places they do.
2007-02-16 18:15:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That is a really ignorant question. Of course it's Saddam. Regardless of what you hear from the media the people of Iraq are grateful to the American soldiers! I have had many friends & my brother serve in Iraq to come back & tell stories of how the people would thank them beg them to stay invite them in to eat!
2007-02-16 18:12:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Under Saddam, you had to fear the government killing you.
Anyone remember the Oil for Food scandal?
Saddam pocketed the funds meant to be used to supply his people with food.
Outside Baghdad, things are actually fairly calm.
2007-02-16 18:24:08 · answer #5 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
perhaps we'll see if the iraqis celebrate in january 09 when bush leaves office the same way they absolutely went nuts when saddam was hung?
beez is a moron. saddam squandered the countries resources to the likes of the third world. who destroyed who's country?
2007-02-16 18:02:26 · answer #6 · answered by alex l 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I see on TV that the iraqis love george.. they treated him like a king and thanked him for his efforts for their country
2007-02-16 18:01:25 · answer #7 · answered by road runner 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe that would be reserved for the people with the bombs strapped to their chest. Remember them? Probable not. I hear Trolls have very short memories. I bet the Iraqis remember though.
2007-02-16 18:01:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
George. The U.S. invasion has wrecked havoc on the entire country. Millions have been murdered, fled the country, the infrastructure is in shambles, it is a country in utter chaos thanks to our invasion. No good whatsoever has come from it. You would think we would learn our lesson. There are no winners in War. The U.S. has made this mistake over and over again directly and indirectly by meddling in the affairs of other countries by supporting them with weapons ie: Viet Nam, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Israel against the Lebanese, Iraq against Iran. Watch Noam Chomsky's "Distorted Morality". You can rent it on NetFlix. Our current administration is an embarassment throughout the globe. We must elect new leaders who will stop the bullying aggression upon the other nations of the World. Vote for those who are completely committed to getting us out of Iraq and who are not in the pockets of the defense contractors. It is time to seek peace through constructive dialogue instead of this outright aggression.
2007-02-16 18:09:52 · answer #9 · answered by SunFun 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Well Iraq is no more monolithic than anybody else - and less than most.
The Kurds and Shiites would clearly tell you Saddam.
The Suni's probably give George the nod.
2007-02-16 18:08:37 · answer #10 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋