View Poll Results: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

Voters
124. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    87 70.16%
  • No

    37 29.84%
Page 80 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3070787980818290130 ... LastLast
Results 791 to 800 of 1513

Thread: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

  1. #791
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    It wasn't just Bush, it was Hillary, John Kerry, Joe Biden.....but you knew, in hindsight, there were no weapons and that's what counts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    You would have a valid point if there were no weapons inspectors in Iraq.

    But there were. And had Bush let them finish their job, we would know what we know today, but without the high cost of some 35,000 American casualties. At least a trillion dollars, probaby way more. And the moral price of at least 100,000 Iraqi deaths.

    Bush did not have to deploy troops to Iraq.

  2. #792
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Stop making excuses, they all voted for the Iraq Resolution.

    Hillary Clinton Iraq War Vote Speech - YouTube

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Of course the response of three you listed we're a little more nuanced. Kerry for example explained his speech in the vote that Saddam's threat didn't warrant an invasion outside the UN. So the word threat is not equal to supporting Bush's actions.

  3. #793
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muhammed View Post
    Got any proof to back up that contention?
    got any proof to back up the claim that Saddam and Al Qaeda worked together?
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  4. #794
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Mecca
    Last Seen
    01-14-15 @ 07:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,426

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Saddam Hussein: Secular or Religious Ruler?
    From the 90's on, most definitely religious.

    The canard that Saddam Hussein was secular is just another huge lie being foisted on the ignorant by traitorous Democrat Saddam Hussein apologists in the USA. The fact of the matter is that Saddam Hussein declared jihad (holy war) against the USA, claimed to be the direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammed and institutionalized a return to faith campaign in Iraq. This included the banning of alcohol, painting huge murals of Saddam praying, religious lessons in public schools, religious programs on government operated radio stations and building mosques, including one that featured a Quran written in Saddam Hussein's own blood.

    Secular my ass!
    Last edited by Muhammed; 03-28-13 at 08:22 AM.

  5. #795
    Sage
    Medusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Turkey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    38,020

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muhammed View Post
    From the 90's on, most definitely religious.

    The canard that Saddam Hussein was secular is just another huge lie being foisted on the ignorant by traitorous Democrat Saddam Hussein apologists in the USA. The fact of the matter is that Saddam Hussein declared jihad (holy war) against the USA, claimed to be the direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammed and institutionalized a return to faith campaign in Iraq. This included the banning of alcohol, painting huge murals of Saddam praying, religious lessons in public schools and building mosques, including one that featured a Quran written in Saddam Hussein's own blood.

    Secular my ass!
    maybe the desert climate in mecca makes you think this way
    "Sovereignty is not given, it is taken." ATATÜRK

  6. #796
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Look, it's very simple:

    When those directly affected by environmental degradation have NO VOICE in its authority and management, things are bad and get worse. The "education" and "awareness" comes from the fact that these people must LIVE with the degradation and are, in fact, acutely aware of it.

    Simple. Logic. Reason. Fact.

    I'm not gonna find the thousands of academic references to such.

    Good luck and good day.
    Reality demonstrates that for many, "democracy" is synonymous with having what the west has - ie rampant consumerism.

    Does the larger environmental footprint of the average American/Canadian/Australian/brit demonstrate that democracy is good for ecology?

    does the reliance of people in democratic countries on the destruction of rainforests and other habitats around the world to meet their consumer demands provide evidence?

    how about the destruction of environments within the world's largest "democracy" - India?

    Is rampant consum,erism goof
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  7. #797
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Do you have any idea how little violence was recorded under Saddam? Or has that factor completely escaped your analysis? Could someone really be that blindly committed to a position.
    are you seriously suggesting that Iraq is safer for the average Iraqi now than what it was under Saddam?
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  8. #798
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    First you have to understand the world.

    Our terrorist problem was that we were facing an exponentially growing and festering religious cess pool of radicals tat were breeding extremists between Cairo and Islamabad. This is why the hundreds of terrorist organizations throughout the Middle East held members from all countries. Your argumentative response here will be to point out that the 9/11 terrorists held no Iraqis. This is true, but it avoids the issue. Hussein did fund terrorist organizations in an attempt to call religious fanatics to his side and he did represent everything that is wrong in the Middle East. The degree of oppression and brutality that ditators like Mubarak, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Gaddafi, and Bashar al-Assad created the environment that left religious people only one avenue to effect change and bring about the social justice they have always wanted. That avenue was God. And in that avenue we know from history in every single culture on earth that fanaticism and extremism is manifested. The fact that Hussein's brand of oppression and brutality maintained good behavior within his borders is not something we should celebrate. This is, however, exactly what people do when they bring up that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Regional change menas regional change. Starting with the very dictator that constantly caused us to maintain a UN mission of starvation and a never ending escallation of troops in Saudi Arabia (among Osama's excuses for 9/11) was necessary. A better complaint was how the White House handled it and made it messier than it had to be.

    This Arab Spring, where Muslims rose up against their dictators throughout the Sunni world (Iranian protests were brief and useless in Iran), hasn't cried out for a new dictator. Not a religious theocracy. They cried out for Democracy. This is exactly what needs to happen throughout the region if we are to use the word "peace" more sincerely than we did when we celebrated Saddam Husein's talent fo forcing good behavior amonst his population. What you see in Iraq today is a direct result of a people struggling between the past the inevitable future. Why else do you think fighter from Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt rushed to thwart Iraqi Democracy in those "civil war" years? Why else do you think those governments did nothing to seal their own borders to prohibit Muslims from traveling to slaughter other Muslims? This is a historical changing of a region for the better before your very eyes and you can't see nothing except a bomb in Baghdad that the American invasion is to blame?

    If you shake up a can of soda for a few minutes and then pop the top, what do you think will happen? This regin has been shaken from colonization to dictator for so long that popping the top caused the inevitable explosion that was always going to happen. Focusing on Iraq as if it is some floating island where "our" dictator was doing his job apart from the region does not help to understand the world.

    This Middle Eastern issue will settle down eventually. However, the sooner peope accept that this has always been generational the better. This isn't as simple as having Japan and Germany fall to their kees in surrender. This is bigger, yet we treat it like its a small inconvenience and only about a single country. Even Afghanistan has proven to be about more than a single country. See what Pakistan's feelings are on the matter, where Al-Queda found support. This region reeks of confusion because of bad European made borders that carved up tribes or forced tribes together. With nuclear power on the way and finding its way into religious hands, how much time did you think we had to address this escallating problem?

    The events since the Iraqi invasion througout the region (women driving in Saudi, Arab Spring, Syrians rebelling, etc) shows that the world is headed to a better place. It was the one region on earth left unhealthy after World War II. It also happens to be the one region on earth where religious fanaticism was becoming an art form.
    you need to understand people too.

    I don't disagree that there had been a rise in Islamic fundamentalism - which had begun in the fifties, but you also need to look what factors have contributed to the spread of this.


    I agree that old colonial carve ups of borders have had an impact on a number of countries, and western interference has also shaped the lie of the political/religious landscape in other ways.

    are you aware that women were allowed to drive in KSA in the sixties?

    the changes in the ME landscape now and the directions these will take are not all that clear ...

    we may not like the direction it heads in.
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  9. #799
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    No...no. That is not what happened. Most of the Iraqi army didn't even see an American tank when we took down Baghdad. This was yet another Rumsfeld blunder who insisted that we avoid cities. Upon reaching Baghdad, the immediate American forces (1st Marine Division) witnessed an orgy of violence from the citizenry. There was great celebration for a couple weeks as people pulled down statues of Hussein, walked on paintings of him in the sidewalks, and even had cars run over artful reminders of Hussein in the highways. At the same time, people were burning every single building that had anything to do with the former government (to include the Olympic training Building). Amongst these people were former criminals that Hussein released before we got to Baghdad. There was looting, rapes, and murders for which the military was ill equiped or trained to deal with. Once again, the military found itself in a situation it was not prepared for (Bosnia, Somalia, Cuba). There was no plan from the Rumsfeld coven after taking Baghdad apart. Shortly after the Marines left. The Army rolled in with an extreme minimum of numbers (as permitted by Rumsfeld). Within months Islamic warriors from all over the region began swarming in on a mission to support the Al-Queda's mission to disrupt any sense of peace and democracy as they ignited the tribal hatred between the Sunni and the Shia. This was inevitable without Al-Queda's and the rest of the region's support. They merely sped it up. Baghdad was a caliphate seat of Sunni power for over six hundred years in the past and seeing it fall to the majority of voters (Shia) was unnacceptable then as it is now. The reason the tribes are so screwed up in these countries (Iraq being the worst because of the distinct separation between Sunni/Shia/Kurd) is historical and is another post - thank Europe though.

    The simple fact of this region is that religious fanaticism and extremism cannot find salvation in an enviroment where people have a choice. Without oppression, brutality, economic disaster, and a lack of social justice, religious fanaticism cannot take root. It cannot grow into a festering reality where hundreds of thousands of people now see violence as their only means to an end as they blame the Jews in their midst, the foriegn devils in the West, or the Muslim in a different tribe instead of looking in the mirror. This is why Al-Queda (to name one organization) has shifted from Sudan to Afghanistan to Iraq (where the lack of Hussein's brand of brutality offered opportnuity) to Pakistan to Yemen and finally to Mali until it finds a new home when chased out of there.

    Anyway, this is what happened to Iraq. It wasn't as simple as some Iraqis missing their beloved dictator. The only thing local Sunni Iraqis miss was the power they held over the majority (which democracy exposed). The overwhelming rest of the violence was and is from foreign Muslims frou around the region that see Iraq as the pivotal point between the past they want and the future they are going to get.


    it really is more complex than that.
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  10. #800
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Is the world a better place without Saddam Hussein?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    No one is disregarding the suffering. Acknowledging that there will be suffering after war is not disregarding the suffering. Your statements make no sense.
    justifying the invasion of a country under false pretenses and then claiming that there will be suffering afterwards IS callousness
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •