Can anyone argue we have made Iraq worse than during Saddam's reign?

Question

Outright Civil War,
Turkey now invading the North,
850,000 deaths,
Abuse of Women,
Poverty,
No clean water,
No electricity,
Rampant Inflation,
Destroyed education system,
Abuses by occupying forces,
Stolen Oil,

Please tell me what good has come from the invasion.. please.

Answer 1

Extremely worse than before - Iraq is doomed for generations to come

What is even worst is that a lot of people still cannot see this.

Answer 2

Through out history, when in war, a fighter is looked at as a patriot on one side and a terrorist from the other side.

LQQK at this analogy.
If a father or a male figure (Sadam) is beating up and raping his children (people of Iraq) and a powerful neighbor (USA) comes in and kicks the @$#! out of the abusive father and throws him out, I am sure his family would be very appriciative of such act.

However, they wouldn't want the powerful neighbor(USA) to come and live with them and start telling them how to live their lives.

After a while, the people living in the house want to fight back and kick the intuder out. And since they are not as powerful as the neighbor who came to their home (USA), they retreat to unconventional ways of achieving their goals.

We must realize and understand the world and not be so arrogant to think that "we don't need the world" but the world needs us.

Until this attitude changes, we will see the same things again and again for the next 100+ years.

One more thing, as you know all good things must come to an end. This is a law of GOD and NATURE.

Look at the Roman Empire (800+ years of supremacy)
Egyptian Empire (500+ yrs)
USA ( a super power really since world war I, before that see Britain)

Now if those great powers came and went, we must realize that the US time would come and another power (China?, Japan? who knows) would take over the US role.

This is a fact that we must accept. If we don't we are showing our ignorance.

Answer 3

Nothing good has come from the invasion.And less women's rights and very possible another theocracy in that region.Even in their"logic" how can they call this a success?The first answerer gives it a try and that deserves an answer.He should be aware Saddam,like all people know who did understand his regime,would never sell WMD to Muslim fanatics.When he was on the run from American troops he wrote a letter to "his resistance" not to cooperate with the yihadi's.Saddam was brutal and very much so against terrorists.It's totally illogical to think he would sell (BTW nonexistent)arms to terrorists.The same can't be said about whoever comes out on top in the chaos that is Iraq now.No one can based on reality claim this was a good idea and it worked out well.There is no upside besides for Halliburton and the military industrial complex.

Answer 4

The hate for to U.S has strengthen since we invaded Iraq. Al Quaeda is getting stronger. Also, many believe that the invasion in Iraq is the worst strategic mistake in the history of the US. Seriously, look at the way the war is being handle we had no clear objectives, no exit strategy, few allies, and trying to impose a western ideology on one of the most eastern cultures in the world. Anyone who believed at the outset that we would not have created exactly the environment we find ourselves in today, needs to learn how to look at the world through perspectives other than their own, or we will surely be making much bigger mistakes than this one in the future.

Three ostensible motives for the Iraq War:

1. Fighting extremist Islamic terrorists: Nope, Saddam was the enemy of and therefore a counterweight to the real state-sponsor in the region, Iran.
2. WMDs: This is either incompetence or cynical manipulation of public opinion.
3. Democracy for Iraqis/Domino effect: You've got to be kidding me. That didn't work for Vietnam.

Now here's a hint on the true motive: in the first 24 hours of the war, US special forces secured almost all assets related to oil production and export in Iraq, before the tanks even rolled out of Kuwait.

Answer 5

I cannot argue that we have made Iraq worse.
What good has come from the invasion: dead Muslims and watchdog/sherrif America being judged by fun-loving countries like Sudan.

I thought the oil belonged to all of us.

Answer 6

It depends. It depends on what your definition of WORSE is.

Is it worse that your husband, boyfriend, or school mate will no longer be thrown in prison never to be seen again just for disagreeing with Saddam? He may be thrown into a grinder head first. All these "bad" things you state MAY be the effects of a society throwing off the shackles under which it lived for more than TWO generations.

Be patient. These people destroyed the "education system" because it was something that Saddam "funded" and it had "goods" the people could confiscate and sell on a market after his removal from power.

You really shouldn't be SO quick to judge here. What seems like a travesty to you is PURE FREEDOM to someone else.

Answer 7

Considering the mortality rates in Iraq before and after the invasion, you might be able to argue the war has saved lives. It all depends on which studies you read, but its not cut and dry one way or the other. The sanctions regime of the 1990s caused untold death, poverty, and starvation and fostered a culture of international corruption.


The Dujail Massacre of 1982
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/06/22/iraq16230.htm - HRW questions the legal standards used to convict Saddam, but they seem to argue Saddam should have been tried for something they had better evidence for.

The Barzani Clan Abductions of 1983
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/iraq/

The al-Anfal Campaign
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/

The Campaign Against the Marsh Arabs
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/marsharabs1.htm

The Post-Uprising Massacres of 1991

"Although most of Hussein's large-scale atrocities took place during the 1980s and early 1990s, his tenure was also characterized by day-to-day atrocities that attracted less notice. "

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/p/saddam_hussein.htm


Life under the sanctions was no picnic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions
"Critics of the sanctions say that over a million Iraqis, disproportionately children, died as a result of them, [5] although other researchers concluded that the total was lower. [6] [7] [8] UNICEF has put the number of child deaths to 500,000."
5 http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/cps/public/index.html
6 http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011203/cortright
7 http://www.reason.com/news/show/28346.html
8 http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2001/0510ina.htm

Answer 8

George bush and Tony Blair seem to be giving it a go. To listen to them you'd think all that was needed was a couple of antisocial behaviour orders against a few yobos and then the rest of the country can get on with mowing the lawn.

Answer 9

You forgot to mention Al Qeda cells. Iraq didn't have 'em under Sadam. He just threw those Al Qeda fellas in with the regular political prisoners. Couldn't be bothered with special housing.

Answer 10

America has offset a perfect balance of mad dictators and extremists. There is nobody left to fight Iran, but America again oh boy.

Answer 11

I have lost my voice screaming about your perfect examples above... Seems that the Democrats are in bed with the Republicans, no matter what they are saying in public. They are too weak to go against the nation's addiction to oil and the corporations that reinforce our habit