Hussein is kind of a chump compared to these guys, our history books better not place him on such a prestigious pedestal. hell if it were not for the USA's helpful hand he would not have been able to do half as much as he actually did.
2007-08-08 05:24:26 · 23 answers · asked by igvin 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Would all the folks who are under the impression that the USA "armed" Saddam or sold him the gas he used on the Kurds and Iranians please go to Sipri.Org and educate yourselves. There may be some issues with the USA turning a blind eye to events in the 80s, or enabling Saddam to finance some less than savory purchases a little easier, but in no way did the USA sell him the chemical weapons used in the 80s, nor did the USA contribute in any significant manner to his convential armament.
And yes, Saddam was as evil as that bunch. He just never got the opportunity to achieve results on the same scale as them. That was not for a lack of effort, just a lack of appeasers like Neville Chamberlain who would allow him to advance his schemes.
2007-08-08 05:43:26 · answer #1 · answered by thegubmint 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What made him a "chump" compared to these guys is he didn't have a strong military to back him up. He may not have been as powerful as those other three but just as evil. Yes like many of our enemies now we gave "a helpful hand" back when he didn't appear to be so evil. If the liberal left (Eyota) would pick up a history book and learn a little bit about WWII they will know what hitler really was about and maybe not toss that name around when referring to Bush
2007-08-08 05:33:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Stalin was killing his own as was Hussein. Hitler was doing the same thing but also wanted to take over the world. Damn near succeeded too. Evil people deserve what they get, a proper hanging.
Remember, at one time Iraq was an ally of ours. When Iraq and Iran were at war we supported Hussein and armed him. Then Kuwait was invaded and all that changed.
2007-08-08 05:32:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Same level of evil, yes... same capibilities to inflict such evil, no...
Good vs. Evil is black vs. white... there is no grey scale... either what he did was wrong, or it was right... one must make that distinction...
For instance, is it evil to kill 300,000 people, but perfectly fine to kill 299,999 people? What is you're threshold? What about killing only 1 person, is that ok? Evil is evil, wrong is wrong... sometimes killing may be justified by circumstance, I'll grant you that, but I would say that any unjustified, intentional killing is murder, and murder is an inherently evil act! So yes, it doesn't matter the scale of the crimes, Hussein is on the same level as Hitler, Mussolini, Satlin, or even "small time murders" like Bin Laden, Ted Kasinski, or Charles Manson!
2007-08-08 05:34:43 · answer #4 · answered by Schaufel 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I admire the Christians who said that Christ loves evil people, and the do too, However I am not a Christian, but an agnostic, therefore I do not feel any obligation to love them. However I am opposed to capital punishment, so I was very disturbed that the Americans executed Saddam Hussein.However I don't hate them either, because hate is a very ubhealthy emotion.
2016-05-17 05:56:51 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I didn't read any of the answers before answering this myself , but I strongly suspect that you've been given a good as$-whippin on your notion .
Saddam killed millions , and he's nothing more than a chump to you ? Are you ok ?
And just because we help someone and then LATER they do crazy things , does not mean we are responsible for those actions .
Wow man , this has to be one of the least informed questions ever .
2007-08-08 05:49:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, Saddam Hussein commit a very small act of Genocide, less than even our own Andrew Jackson (7th President who uprooted southeastern Indians), and the invasion of kuwait was nothing compared to the 2003 invasion, so I would put Hussein on the same alongside a number of U.S. Presidents but not Hitler
2007-08-08 05:33:41 · answer #7 · answered by I dont know 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't put him on the same level with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, et al, but that's only because he never had the opportunities they had. He was the same obsessive megomaniacal personality as the others.
2007-08-08 05:32:14 · answer #8 · answered by texasjewboy12 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Mussolini, while a jerk, didn't kill nearly as many people as any of the others you mentioned. He didn't kill many of his own people (just Communists and Socialists) and didn't cooperate with the Holocaust (large numbers of Italian Jews weren't deported until the Nazis took over in 1943). As far as murdering despots go, Mussolini was minor league.
2007-08-08 05:36:18 · answer #9 · answered by Lavrenti Beria 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I put him in the same category and Fernand Marcos of the Phillipines. Definitely a strong arm guy, but oddly enough, the right leader to keep a divided population from turning on itself.
As for those who go on about his gassing the Kurds: a) we sold him the gas, so you might hesitate when you bring this up, and b) the Turks massacred the Kurds in greater numbers, but we consider them allies.
2007-08-08 05:35:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋