No one would argue that Saddam Hussein was a brutal, murderous dictator. However, not every issue is clearly right or wrong, left or right, black or white. In life, real everyday life, we must deal with decisions that are the “lesser of two evils”. Looking at the facts—not the subjective perspectives of Conservatives and Liberals—all things considered, is Iraq better off now or under Saddam’s rule? Was Saddam’s leadership, as cruel and inhumane as it was, the “lesser of two evils”?
2007-04-23 02:48:00 · 6 answers · asked by Hemingway 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It is and it isn't
saddam pros -
kept relative stability in a nation that is divided by a long long standing struggle.
kept realigious nuts (al-sadr) from having too much influence in his country
saddam cons -
gassed his own people
ruled by oppression
psychotic sons
In a way Iraq was more stable with him. considering it takes a tyrant to keep the peace between three groups who want to massacre each other!
2007-04-23 02:55:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
600,000+ iraqis are now dead. How is death an improvement for them? The rest live in a bombed out, war torn, devastated economy. The average Iraqi family income is now less than a quarter of what it was under Saddam. How is that an improvement for them? Saddam kept Iraq completely secular. Now a third of the govt. is run by islamic fundamentalists. How is that an improvement for either them or us?
2016-05-17 04:52:56 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's like asking, if it were possible, do the Jews want Hitler "going for the gold?" My "thing" about Saddam Hussein: He, to me, was the modern day answer to Hitler. No one needs two. I normally don't say this about a human being, but I'm GLAD he's dead because of all he put innocent people through.
2007-04-23 03:11:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
America is better off without Saddam. The Iraqis are in their own hands as to whether or not they can make better lives through the new government.
2007-04-23 02:53:01 · answer #4 · answered by Amer-I-Can 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just compare how it is today as when Saddam was still around, he kept things in check in the whole region for the most part.
2007-04-23 02:53:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unless you are of the opinion that Iraqi's are a subspecies of human that needs to be controlled by a dictator in order to behave themselves I would say yes
2007-04-23 02:53:06 · answer #6 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋