He was a good guy when Reagan armed him and then he was a bad guy when Bush Sr. attacked him... He was a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when we couldnt find Osama... So what kind of guy was he?!
2007-05-14 12:43:32 · 17 answers · asked by Ronnie 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Even knowing it is impossible to see clearly through the fog of misinformation we are constantly exposed to, I feel confident Saddam was a very bad man. Not the worst perhaps, but certainly very, very bad. I don't think any of our leaders ever thought of him as a good guy. Sometimes they act as though the ends justify the means. A morally dangerous position to be sure but let's give the ex-presidents the benefit of the doubt. The were dealing with some sticky situations. As for Mr. Cheney, I think he is just an amoral being. There is no right or wrong, just profit. That's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
2007-05-14 13:02:11 · answer #1 · answered by Mac 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam Hussein was never a good guy. However their were times when we both shared the same enemy. Namely Iran, during the Iranian revolution Americans were captured and held for a little more than a year. Furthermore Iran was distibuting a Anti American-Israeli propoganda and supplying Terrorist groups with arms and money. At this time Saddam on his own decided to attack Iran and seize some oil fields. Iran retaliated ferociously. Virtually an entire generation of Iranian men were lost to this war. The Iranian goverment did not care about casualties and declared any Iranian who died in the conflict was a martyr. Even after the Iraqis withdrew from Iranian soil and sued for peace the Iranians pushed on. The US saw this war as useful since it distracted both nations from creating further conflict in the middle east. However at one point it became obvious that Iran would win the war and that was a scenario the US and the West could not accept. This would have resulted in Iran having even more influence and tremendous oil reserve. So the US and Western Europe secretly helped Iraq develop WMD's of a chemical nature to hold off the Iranians. This worked and for time it was peaceful while both nations licked their wounds. This also fostered a better atmosphere between Iraq and the US until Iraq invaded Kuwait.
2007-05-14 13:01:10 · answer #2 · answered by levindis 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was an Iraqui dictator hired and empowered by the pockets of the Reagan administration. He was a power-hungry dictator who was portrayed as good while the US of America had him on payroll even after he killed hudreds of Iraquis.
When he no longer wanted to benefit the US of America with Oil Deals, he was framed for attacking a sovereign country called Quwait, which was originally part of Iraq but was brokered away by U.S./British Inrerests because of strategic geographical location to the sea for entry and exit of oil and arms trade. Saddam being a power-hungry dictator decited to take back Quwait but was vanquished by the U.S. Military Industrial complex while the American people where incorrectly told that we were fighting for Democracy. In the end he was a victim of the vengance of his own master and the enemies he made along the path of his iron fist rule.
2007-05-14 13:11:32 · answer #3 · answered by Nash77 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look, the reality of the situation is this: Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is entirely good or entirely evil.
Hitler loved children and dogs with a passion. Does that mean he was a good guy? No, he was responsible for the deaths of 6 million Jews and millions of other people, but you cant say he was entirely evil.
Saddam, for all his faults, kept Iraq stable, kept the Sunnis and the Shiites from killing each other, kept Iraqs economy as strong as he could, gave Iraq the best education system he could, respected womens rights and refused to cater to terrorist groups and wouldnt let religious extremists get any wiggle room in Iraq.
BUT, he was also a dictator who did kill people and had rape rooms and tortured people who didnt agree with him.
Do you see what I'm saying? No one is entirely good or evil. And the decision to ally with him was made so that the US would have an ally against the Soviet Union in the middle east, now that the Soviet Union is gone, the decision was made for various reasons to go to war with Iraq.
2007-05-14 12:52:27 · answer #4 · answered by Jesus W. 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
extremely this isn't a political argument. maximum people knew earlier this warfare in Iraq become all started that: a million. Our efforts needed to be in Afghanistan. 2.We also knew that civil warfare in Iraq become the inevitable outcome of yank interference and Iraq become no longer linked with Osama Bin encumbered. Now, each and every American knows that militarily we are so stretched in Iraq, Iran can now flex it muscle mass contained in the middle east and North Korea will be as menacing because it needs......the USA of a can not do a darn difficulty about any of it in the course of the globe and we purely made it worse by utilising going into Iraq.......................what a mess for all mankind!!
2016-10-18 07:57:19 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was a bad guy when the US supported him in a devestating war against other bad guys in Iran, he was a bad guy when he invaded Kuwait, he was a bad guy when he gassed the Kurds, he was a bad guy when numerous coporations paid him kickbacks under the hopelessly corrupt UN 'Oil for Food Program,' he was a bad guy when he obstructed UN inspectors and postured like he had WMDs, he was a bad guy when he called for jihad against the coalition, he was a bad guy when he was eating mars bars in his spider hole, he was a bad guy when he stood trial for being such a spectacularly bad buy and he was a bad guy when the Mahdi Army lynched him.
He was one bad guy.
(And that's all without going into anything /before/ the Iran-Iraq war, like his rise to power within brutal fascist Baath party).
2007-05-14 13:06:16 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was a horrible guy since his governing reign ever began. He gassed his own people and couldn't care less for his own people. He was a horrible dictator. He would have sit downs at meetings with officers and anyone who disagreed with him would be shot! sound like a good guy to you? i don't know where you get your info from but thinking that he was good is obviously a lie!!
2007-05-14 12:53:53 · answer #7 · answered by melissaaaa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Place your finger in the air and say saddam,if your finger remains wet after 20 seconds -then he was a bad guy.Dude your attempt to be provocative is somewhat lame.
2007-05-14 12:49:10 · answer #8 · answered by dumbuster 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
FDR choose Stalin, one of the greatest mass-murderers of the 20th century, as his ally too, to fight Hitler.
Sometimes you have to ally yourself with a snake to fight a worse snake.
The world's a tough neighborhood.
2007-05-14 12:52:47 · answer #9 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well he was definately not to be trusted, now ain't that just typical of the anyone from the middle east??
2007-05-14 12:49:41 · answer #10 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋