"You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)
Probably not. Saddam was a brutal dictator, but to some extent he kept order. And I think if the people of Iraq had gotten rid of him like nearly every other country in the world got rid of their tyrannical government, with a bottom-up peoples' revolution, we wouldn't see alot of the instability we see there today. Having the United States World Police swoop in and yank him out of his seat before the people of Iraq were ready for that really did them a disservice. It left a power vacuum...which was happily filled by ISIS.
He who knows the least obeys the best.
After all the Syrian tyrant wasn't taken out by the World Police or anyone else, and yet during the "people's revolution" ISIS and other terror organizations have taken control. I don't see any possible way to determine for certain that if Saddam had stayed in power there wouldn't be a people's revolution that involves a terror organization similar to ISIS.
I think it's very easy just to blame the US for everything.
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."
It's a fair question. I voted "Other" only because I can't speculate on what might have happened, and since militant extremists predate Hussein, who knows?
Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields