Bearing in mind that the ex dictator was nowhere near as violent and murderous as the troops now there. Dont get me wrong, i dont blame the troops, they were SENT by a drooling dribbling idiot.
2007-05-02 07:02:42 · 15 answers · asked by Old Cynic 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Why is it that you can't spell when there's a spell check right there? And then you have the audacity to call somebody else a drooling, dribbling idiot.
2007-05-02 07:07:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Saddam had an advantage , he could careless about the Iraqi people.. Over a million dead at his hands proves that , same with the Insurgents, they target the Iraqi people ( not the coalition forces) to gain sympathy around the world and It seems to work well... Look who gets blamed for all the deaths....as your statement proves, NOT the insurgents ... Also the US is not out to "control" Iraq or its citizens, but to help its government and people gain control.. In NO way are our troops as violent or as murderous as Saddam... the only drooling dribbling idiots are the media droids who bow down to all the garbage they are fed and believe if its anti-American or Anti-Bush, it must be true these are those same Americans which hold nothing but contempt and hatred for this country..
2007-05-02 08:13:47 · answer #2 · answered by bereal1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we dont use death as a answer for every thing.We dont torture people and there EX DICTATOR killed hundreds of thousands of people he was the dribbling idiot. And dont you think these troops have seen enough to make them do things they wouldnt normally have done? There are bad seeds every where but that guy was a whole garden of bad seeds on his own and im glad hes gone. ( I have a 19 year old nephew over there and i am very proud of him and he feels like he is making a difference) So dont forget about all of our us soldiers that are missing and have lost there own lives because of all the idiots over there. Google Matt Maupin he's from my area and has been missing for a long time maybe our troops are trying to find him!
2007-05-02 07:19:31 · answer #3 · answered by bigmommanova 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
they have no understanding of the people. All they can really do is shoot things. They don't have any skills with the information machine. The people at centcom only know how to use patriotism and fear to control Americans. So, when they go waving the flag in Iraq, they don't understand that these people have not been preprogrammed with buzz words like paul revere nor does intimidation bother them cause they're more likely to be hit by a stray RPG than an accurate one. And anyone smart enough to be afraid already left Iraq years ago.
2007-05-02 07:11:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, in this war, like in Vietnam, we aren't allowed to do all of the things that help us control countries. We have to give them a lot advantages, we dont want to seem violent in a war do we? But don't get me wrong, Saddam was extremely violent. It's pretty ignorant to think that we are more violent in Iraq then he was. Maybe your forgetting the hundreds of thousands of Kurds he gassed. In any case, he was able to control a country of violence only because he used violence. It is not out of our range of capability to control Iraq, but with the guidelines we have now, we're never going to see that happen.
2007-05-02 07:41:57 · answer #5 · answered by joe w 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1 dictator can keep pretty firm control of a country - of course, hundreds of thousands of police, secret police, elite military and paramilitary forces, and a huge standing army really helped, as did the systematic campaigns of oppression that included mass murder, rape and torture.
Adopting even a fraction of those tactics probably would allow the US to bring Iraq back into line - but, given the reaction to Abu Graib, that doesn't seem like a desireable model to follow.
2007-05-02 07:24:07 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if you supose that one iraqi may control the usa you will say (no) >> that is bacause the americans don't want a stranger to control them even if the country man is not good for them> so the iraqi people don't want the strangers to control them too even if saddam is bad for them so they fight americans with all thier forces > youm should know that noonw will allow a stranger to control them > believe that the true is waht i have said
2007-05-02 08:05:30 · answer #7 · answered by boymog 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uhh... Saddam wasn't as violent? How do you think he kept order? Giving out flowers?
Saddam tested chemical weapons on people causing disease and killing many many people. I think you need to look up Saddam's rule.
Think of it this way... If you talked about Saddam like you may talk about Bush, you'd be dead.
2007-05-02 07:16:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Actually, he was MORE murderous and thats why he could control the populace. They feared him and toed the line. Too bad we removed the nutball from power, he could have kept the Mid East stable much better than we can.
2007-05-02 07:08:48 · answer #9 · answered by Melanie J 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If they were both idiots it seems like the end result would be the same.
2007-05-02 07:20:01 · answer #10 · answered by Me 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋