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

I am utterly clueless....

2007-10-14 14:49:33 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

16 answers

The reason was that he was an enemy of Israel, he had oil and humiliated Bush senior.

The excuse was that he killed some thousands of his citizens who tried to fight him. But as we are finding ourselves, you cannot govern Iraq the way you govern US, even if you shower them with money, as we are doing. We are learning a very good lesson.

2007-10-14 15:07:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

In the early 21st century, Saddam Hussein was the President of Iraq, a country which had the third largest reserves of oil in the world. The United States government, under the George W. Bush administration manipulated faulty intelligence to build a case for war, so that the U.S. military can invade the country and secure access to this precious natural resource.

2007-10-14 15:06:41 · answer #2 · answered by David 3 · 2 1

Hussein was true enough a brutal dictator - but since when has that been a problem for US and UK? Basically, he was in the way of their imperialistic and neocon plan for the Middle East. Bring democracy there, at the point of a gun, to protect Israel and, most importantly, secure Iraq's oil for the West.

2007-10-14 14:59:33 · answer #3 · answered by gortamor 4 · 1 1

the authorities hasn't ever been waiting to promptly connect Bin encumbered with making plans or funding the 9-11 attacks. in truth, he denied involvement in the starting up. i don't think of he might want to have denied it if he become in the back of it. He might want to were satisfied to take the credit. Bin encumbered is in basic terms the significant image of terrorism international wide. We attacked Afghanistan because the Taliban allowed him sanctuary there and helped to fund his activities and practise camps. maximum terrorists were educated there or in Pakistan. Bin encumbered did declare warfare adversarial to the US contained in the overdue 'ninety's.

2016-10-21 04:24:21 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Saddam was no doubt a very bad man, even though he had nothing to do with 9/11. He killed huge numbers of his own people, ruthlessly tortured anyone he considered a threat, wiped out entire towns of suspect ethnic groups, and plundered the wealth of Iraq for his personal use. He will not be missed.

2007-10-14 15:07:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

He killed thousands, if not millions of this own people over the nearly 25 years of his power. He started two unprovoked wars with two of neighbors. He had WMD (i.e. poison gas and biological weapon programs).

He also had a documented nuclear weapons program as late a 1997 that was not accounted for prior to the US liberation of Iraq. If he had the chance to develop these weapons, he not only have been able to threaten Israel, but would have spun the entire middle east into a Nuclear arms race.

2007-10-14 15:14:21 · answer #6 · answered by MARK M 3 · 1 2

Well it depends on who you are asking. Besides being very sucssesful at keeping the different sects in line, ( by fear, intimidation, and mass murder) he allowed and funded camps that trained extremests to commit crimes aggainst humanity including siucide bombs, patiance and the fine art of blending in with westerners and in following orders without questions. The evidence that even in the 91 war, there was evidence that a nuclear weapons program was in the works.His frequent resistance, and disallowment of NATO to inspect facilities, passing deadline after deadline made the assumption that he had something to hide. He and his children lived in the luxory of kings while torturing others at will. But with the fact well known to all that he was a very bad man, his predictable badness kept his country from civil war. So, now without that predictable madness, and the new predictable US presence of restraint, the factions and sects are free to kill each other in the name of Alah. The only people that they hate more than each other are Americans and Isreali's. He was a paranoid liar. He lied to his masses while the US troops were entering the gates of Baghdad. His crime was of putting himself on the level od GOD, reponsible to nothing or no one. I think our delusion was that the country would be stable and rational after the removal of the brutal dictator, not fully understanding what his 10 pound thumb was keeping at bay.

2007-10-14 16:07:40 · answer #7 · answered by gardigarden 2 · 0 2

no one can ignore the fact that sadam was a bad leader who killed his own people. but bush also killing innocent people. if u read the news everyday there is number of killed and injured people.
bush and sadam and osama are all in the same boat.

2007-10-14 15:49:21 · answer #8 · answered by Student 2 · 2 1

Saddam wiped out thousands of his own countrymen just so he could stay in power. Any threat to him was wiped out brutally. The man was evil all of the way through and met the right end. Mugabe should be next.

2007-10-15 03:16:56 · answer #9 · answered by david c 4 · 0 1

well sadam wasnt part of osama's plan. he was just the president of iraq who would kill his own people for living like hilter. Sadam killed over 1million+

2007-10-14 14:56:23 · answer #10 · answered by egg 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers