It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Saddham should have been left in charge of Iraq

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:20 PM
Here's an interesting concept. I bumped into an ex-military intelligence officer today. He was in the military for 11 years and then left when Bush started his ridiculous "War on Terror." Why did he leave? He left the military because of George Bush and his politics. Nine more years and this guy would have had a pension, but he didn't care!

This ex-military intelligence guy feels that Iraq is lost without a leader like Saddham. Granted, Saddham did some nasty things, but there was no crime in Iraq before they removed him. This guy feels that the Iraqi people are lost without a leader with an iron fist to lead them. That is why we are doing all the fighting over there and the Iraqis haven't taken over as they were supposed to as we were supposed to leave when they did so. The Iraqi people left to their own devices, haven't a clue what to do.

Also, Bush and his cronies have no plan whatsoever to win this war. They just have a plan to continue it (because they are making lots of money off of this war along with the international banking cabal). Also....Saddham had nothing to do with 9/11 as we all know.....Bush went after the wrong guy in hopes that the American people are morons. Why is Bin Laden still alive and well? Why is Al Queda still alive and well?

We need to put an end to this farse of a war and bring our young men and women home!

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:38 PM
The lack of pre war planning and the reasoning behind the war in Iraq have been covered many times so Im not going to cover my thoughts on those matters again. Excitable_Boy however your not the only one who feels that Iraq needs a leader like Saddam to maintain security. I suggest that you check out this very interesting thread started by Liberal1984.

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:41 PM
Unfortunatly, short of re-installing Saddam (or some other tyrant), it's not possible to pull out of Iraq without causing it to collapse into a true spawing ground for terrorist and human suffering.

Destabalized as it is, those who have a hate on for the US would flock to an abbandoned Iraq even more so than they are now. Ethinic conflict would escalate into genocide. Warlords would emerge and battle for control, catching the population in the middle. Iran, Syria, and/or Saudi Arabia may attempt an invasion in order to secure their borders and their occupation would be vasty more heavy handed than that of the US.

There's no easy way out of this mess and withdrawing troops at this point is likly the very worst option.

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:52 PM

There's no easy way out of this mess and withdrawing troops at this point is likly the very worst option.

I agree...we can't just pull out all at once. But, instead of planning to continue the war with no plan on how to win it, we should start working on withdrawing the troops slowly and methodically......bit it needs to be done!

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:00 PM
Well Saddam was no more of a threat to America,than N.Korea.
And Lil Kim still sits in power w/wepons of mass destruction,but yet nothing to remove him.I dont really believe removing Saddam from power,was for the "people's freedom".Theres a hidden agenda underway.And Saddam's removal was only a move in a game being played out.

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:02 PM
Good thread Excitable boy, but unfortunatly most people don't see it this way. I too agree with what you are saying.

I believe even the Iraqi people would like Sadam back as the Country is now going into civil war. Every day you hear of car bombs going off. They don't want to be governed or lead by the west. What right's does Bush and co have to go marching into someones country, capture their leader and install a new one??? It's a joke! They have probably killed more people doing this than Sadam has done in his life. But it's Bush's rules
so it's alright to do that.

Imagine if it was the other way around. Someone comes into your Country takes your leader and shoots at your friends and family, of course you're going to retaliate. I have no problem with the Iraqi's as they are doing exactly what you and I would do. But it's the people in charge of this whole mess that are the ones to blame!

Also what gets me is the whole weapons of mass destruction thing. It's ok for the US and other countrys to have them but not Iraq? why? because if they have them then we wouldn't be able to threaten them anymore!

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:09 PM
Thanks Dodge...and right on. The US wants war for war's sake. There are plenty of people in high places making money off of this thing and that is what ismost important to the people that really run this country. The whole Weapons of Mass Destruction nonsense was a great way to start a war.....when there were no Weapons to be found...did the war end? NO!

Now...we are there and we can't leave and we have no plan on winning it. It's Korea and Vietnam all over again.

Korea...we were there for 3 years and 30,000 of our military lost their lives for nothing. And how many Koreans died for nothing? Nothing changed by us being there for those three years.

Vietnam...we were there for how long all together? 16 years? and we lost 60,000 of our military for NOTHING. And how many Vietnamese died for nothing? Nothing changed by us being there....

Iraq.....same old same old. all these wars one thing is true: Some very rich people got/get even richer as well as the politicians they had/have in their pockets!!

[edit on 2-11-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:00 PM
Some words from RFK on war...he's speaking about Vietnam, but it rings true for the situation today in Iraq as well:

Excerpts from speech at Kansas State University: March 18, 1968...

"I do not want - as I believe most Americans do not want - to sell out American interests, to simply withdraw.....That would be unacceptable to us as a country and as a people. But, I am concerned - as I believe most Americans are concerned - that the course we are following at the present time is deeply wrong.....I am concerned - as I believe most Americans are concerned - that our present course will not bring victory; will not bring peace; will not stop the bloodshed; and will not advance the interests of the United States or the cause of peace in the world.

I am concerned that, at the end of it all, there will only be more Americans killed; more of our treasure spilled out.....

....If we examine the history of this conflict, we find the dismal story repeated time after time. Every time - at every crisis - we have denied that anything was wrong; sent more troops; and issued more confident communiques. Every time, we have been assured that this one last step would bring victory. And every time, the predctions and promises have failed and been forgotten, and the demand has been made again for just one more step up the ladder.

But all the escalations, all the last steps, have brought us no closer to success than we were before. rather, as the scale of the fighting has increased.....[Iraqi] society has become less and less capable of organizing or defending itself, and we have more and more assumed the whole burden of the war.

And once again, the President tells us that....."we are going to win" and "victory is coming."

This comes from a book I am reading called "The Gospel According to RFK - Why it Matters Now" edited with commentary by Norman MacAfee. Later in the book, RFK gives another speech where he tells the country that we should learn from Vietnam and make sure we never have another one. Well, we didn't learn did we? Or at least, the current administration did not learn from our mistakes in Vietnam. What they did learn from Vietnam, however, is there is a lot of money to be made from such a war and from continuing such a war.....and the only cost is the blood of our own troops.

John Kerry may have screwed up recently when he made his comment about the "uneducated" being the ones fighting in Iraq. What exactly did he say? If you don't go to college, then you will end up in Iraq? Something like that , right? Well...he wasn't far off. Some of this country's poorest peoples (and don't kid yourself...we have a lot of poor people in this country) don't have a lot of choices with what to do with their lives. If they can't afford an education, they have the choice of either working menial jobs for low wages or joining the military and trying to get an education by that route. Most of the people we have fighting over there are from this group...let's not kid ourselves!

No one should be over there fighting this farse of a war that is only happening to make the rich richer and the politicians they own richer as well!

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:17 PM
Your totally wrong if you think that Saddam should have been left in charge, Those people were suffering in and used cruel force. Ya getting a hand chopped off for stealing somthing is OK. And he killed hundreds or thousands of innocent people. Its alright as long it doesnt happen to you. So think again

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:37 PM

Originally posted by TheOne1989
Your totally wrong if you think that Saddam should have been left in charge,

In your opinion, you mean.

Those people were suffering in and used cruel force.

And they are suffering worse now. Atleast under Saddam, the people had electricity, water, access to medical services, and education.

All those things are gone now and the US has done an abysmal job of their promised restoration.

Ya getting a hand chopped off for stealing somthing is OK.

So don't steal.
I often believe that we are way too damned lax on criminals here.
It's their law, it's their way.
It's not up to us to judge.
Their system was undesputably more effective at deterring theft.

And he killed hundreds or thousands of innocent people. Its alright as long it doesnt happen to you. So think again

How many innocent people have died since the invasion? How many US bombs have resulted in civilian deaths?

Try to understand that while Saddam was a tyrant guilty of some nasty things, he was not the monster that mass-media has made him out to be. You have been victomized by the offical line. Saddam had to be deamonized before the US could storm his sovren nation.

In retrospect, yes, the people of Iraq were better off under Saddam than they are now. The only remaining question is; "will things get better for them?". So far, the prospect is not looking good.

top topics


log in