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 81 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391131 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 810 of 1513

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

  1. #801
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    The U.S. Navy SEAL team took care of Bin Laden long ago
    Thanks to President Barack Obama who refocused our efforts back on the people who actually attacked us after almost a decade of the previous clown who took his eyes of the prize.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  2. #802
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,435

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

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    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
    You equate democracy and "rampant consumerism"? Please, let's not pretend that only democracies buy stuff. Dictatorships buy stuff, it's just mostly cronies and military. Your entire post is an indictment of the western world and not democracy. Conflating the two is nothing more than common haterism.

    There is no way around the obvious: those without a voice in the authority of their common resources get screwed by the state.

    Look at China... Oh, wait, that's the US's fault isn't it. hah


    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    are you seriously suggesting that Iraq is safer for the average Iraqi now than what it was under Saddam?
    Safer for Kurds, Marsh Arabs and women? Definately. The state no longer slaughters and rapes them wholesale, and such is not legal. If you want to pretend that things are more dangerous today, think for a minute about Saddam's reporting of incidents involving his rape squads.

  3. #803
    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 Boo Radley View Post
    No, it isn't. Do you know what a strawman is? With no evidence they were working together, you claim they were. You simply can't. And with as much effort put not trying to find such evidence only to fail, you have to conclude they likely weren't.
    In what post did I claim that? Oh, gee that's right, I didn't. So you flat out lied. Not only that, you were challenging an argument that I never made in the first place, therefore it's a strawman.

    You made an assertion and when challenged to back it up you lied and tried to shift the burden of proof via a strawman argument.

    You are stacking logical fallacies.

  4. #804
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    Stop making excuses, they all voted for the Iraq Resolution.

    Hillary Clinton Iraq War Vote Speech - YouTube
    No excuses. I'd fire them all. However, misrepresenting is proper either. Report exactly what they said, and not the misleading version.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #805
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

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

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    justifying the invasion of a country under false pretenses and then claiming that there will be suffering afterwards IS callousness
    Look lady, I'm just acknowledging that OIL isn't the main reason why we attacked Iraq. To actually believe that is stupid and naive. It's obvious that YOU think we live in a Kumbaya kind of world. That is just ignorant as hell. Keep burying your head in the sand and crying over dead murderous tyrannical dictators. Seems that's what you're good at.

  6. #806
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Yes, it was, which was one of the problems. Fighting a "war on terror" is fighting a strategy of warfare. We didn't really know who our enemy was, at least not specifically. Fighting a war on Al Qaeda would have given us more focus.

    Better yet, we could have gone after Bin Laden and his cohorts and gone home.
    I don't deny that narrowing the targets would be a better idea and that it would be virtually impossible to wipe terrorism off the face of the earth. However, like you yourself acknowledged, we really don't know who the enemy is that we are fighting. This is not your typical war.

  7. #807
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Notice the comment "impossible to accomplish."
    I think the point was to disorganize them and keep them on their toes so that they don't have the means to get together and plan large-scale attacks. Not to wipe them out completely.

  8. #808
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,580

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    I don't deny that narrowing the targets would be a better idea and that it would be virtually impossible to wipe terrorism off the face of the earth. However, like you yourself acknowledged, we really don't know who the enemy is that we are fighting. This is not your typical war.
    No, it's not a typical war. In fact, I'm not sure it's really a war at all, except perhaps in the same sense that the war on drugs and the war on poverty are "wars."

    A war is when you're attacked by an enemy, or attack an enemy, and fight it out with no holds barred until one side or the other is destroyed. After it's over, the victors write the history of the war, making the losers evil and the victors good in a classic good vs. evil struggle. That's a war.

    Trying to wipe out terrorists, or jihadis, or Islamic nutters, or nutters of any sort, or drugs, or poverty, or idiocy is not a war.

    That's not to say that wiping out terrorists, or jihadis, or Islamic nutters, or nutters of any sort, or drugs, or poverty, or idiocy wouldn't be a good thing were it possible to do so.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  9. #809
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,435

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Look lady, I'm just acknowledging that OIL isn't the main reason why we attacked Iraq. To actually believe that is stupid and naive.
    Some memes just will not die.

    Luft said he didn’t see Chinese development of Iraq’s oil as a case of China enjoying the spoils of a war for which the U.S. had paid dearly both in lives and taxpayer dollars.

    It’s a myth that U.S. energy security relies on Middle Eastern imports, he said. Oil from the region makes up just a small percentage of what America uses. The U.S. will benefit if China or anyone else can get Iraqi’s huge reserves developed and onto the market, he said. Since oil is a global commodity, he said, more oil on the market brings down prices.

    “Energy security is about not only the availability of the resource but also about the cost,” Luft said. “Anything that brings down global oil prices is positive for U.S. energy security.”

    Read more here: WASHINGTON: Iraqi oil: Once seen as U.S. boon, now it&#x2019;s mostly China&#x2019;s - World Wires - MiamiHerald.com

  10. #810
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    I think the point was to disorganize them and keep them on their toes so that they don't have the means to get together and plan large-scale attacks. Not to wipe them out completely.
    Only the "them" wasn't really based in Iraq. All we did was make it easier for "them" to reach Americans. There was 8 years between the two Tower attacks. This implies they could not easily attacked us, and considering the time between 9/11 and we invaded, with no attacks in the states, it was a bit confusing as to why some thought they could do it at will. But by going into Iraq, a minor player at most, who largely fought those most a threat to us, allowing a target, a target more easily reached, did not hurt "them."

    Iraqi people? Yes. US troops? Yes. But the "them." They got training on the job, killed Americans, and inflicted a financial cost. That was more than they could have ever done had we not invaded.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Posting Permissions

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