English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Here' the question :

After the war, Iraq fell into anarchy, with extremists stirring up trouble, Shiites and Sunnis killing each other.

While Saddam was in charge - EVEN WHILE THE COUNTRY WAS SUFFERING FROM A 10 YEAR SANCTION - none of this occured.

Neither Syria nor Iran dared send suicide bombers in to disrupt his country.

Saddam was a bastard, to be sure, but Iraq is a country that needs bastards in charge, or else they would face the problems today. America simply did not take into account anything like that.

My question : Should we have reinstated Saddam as a puppet dictator under U.S. control, along with the former Iraqi army, in order to keep peace in Iraq?

As for the WMD crap, that's just it - crap.

As for Israel's security - SCREW THE JEWS.

2007-07-12 20:44:03 · 5 answers · asked by weeab002 1 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Apparently the words "puppet under US control" seems to fly right past everybody.

2007-07-12 20:52:14 · update #1

billybuysky :


Lol. 'seen the light'. Yeah, you can 'see the light' in ground zero of a suicide bombing all right.

2007-07-12 20:54:14 · update #2

brkshandilya :

Those are very good points - and Iraq can stabilize, but only if American troops were committed to stay for longer periods.

Unfortunately, they are pulling out early next year, and Islamic hardliners seem to be gaining the upper hand in control.

2007-07-12 21:25:46 · update #3

5 answers

oh yes why not ^-^ then the past god knows how many years after war making him lose power would be for nothing! yeah great plan. and your last bit was a little rascist.

2007-07-12 20:49:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

An interesting Academic question.Firstly what was the point to remove him if only to be re instated?Secondly,he would have been able to stabilize Iraq by using the same old methods of oppression,torture,suppression and mass punishment.That would have been what is called back to square one.As a puppet dictator,he would have been a total disaster.People may view Iraq situation differently in short term but the world at large shall be thankful to America in initiating a process which would prove to be of immense importance to world peace and progress in the decades to come.As for now,as the largest functional democracy in the world,America is doing more than its share to spread democratic norms in this troubled world by paying a heavy price.Historians are bound to remember it for the sake of posterity if nothing more.Lastly,Iraq shall stabilize,albeit slowly but surely.[I am not an American]

2007-07-13 04:17:28 · answer #2 · answered by brkshandilya 7 · 0 0

It wouldn't have worked, he lost his power once we drove him out and captured him. If we put him back he wouldn't have been able to control the country because they had already seen the light without him.

2007-07-13 03:47:46 · answer #3 · answered by billybutsky 4 · 0 0

We should have never invaded Iraq, we should have just kept up the no fly zone, and the embargo

2007-07-13 18:04:49 · answer #4 · answered by jean 7 · 0 0

no, surly that would make it even worst.

2007-07-13 03:49:14 · answer #5 · answered by guitar fool 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers