It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Was Saddam a brutal dictator for a reason?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Well this will probably piss some people off. Obviously Iraq has been full of corruption for decades looking at the massive amount of weaponry found there. And being a oil rich rich saddam could have made his country one of the greatest in the world. But....

Saddam as brutal as he was maintained control of a very hostile population for decades. I don't agree with a lot of what he did don't get me wrong. We have 135,000 troops there who cannot control the population there and we can't even control our own troops as shown with the prison situation.

Iraq will have a better future but I feel the best thing the u.s. could do now is admit they are wrong and hand over control as they did in falluja. The hostility there came to a halt. They don't want a government set up by the U.S. and I don't blame them. They are a different people and a different culture.

I recently talked to a infantryman who came back from Iraq and he said the only thing that you can do to the violent iraqis to make them understand who's in charge is to throw lead their way. Their religion has many fanatics and those fanatics if they were in our society would be strictly even hostilly treated sometimes.

Saddam was wrong in alot of ways but I thing you gotta be a brutal nut when you have a coutry full of religious fanatics armed to the teeth. Well thoughts will be appreciated.

EDIT aug 28 2004
This post has been inactive for awhile but I would like to see if anyones opinon on this has changed and also would like to get the opnions of the many new members. Now the situation is even worse there and these individuals heading groups of rebels and each is vying for power. It has been a power struggle in iraq for decades and will continue to do so after the u.s. is gone. The culture is full of extremists and they only understand extreme measures.

[edit on 29-8-2004 by Hoppinmad1]




posted on May, 8 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Your View is basic to understanding why we can never win in Iraq. Hussein is no worse than other Mideast leaders, and actually provided his compliant citizens with many benefits that they will never have under the psuedo democracy of the Bush Crime Family. The only reason the Bush Crime Family invaded Iraq was that they were on a personal vengance mission and used the US treasury to do so. The super rich never use their own wealth.



posted on May, 8 2004 @ 11:20 PM
link   
This...assumes the Iraqis are less human then we, in "1st world" nations are. Look at the American population. We have people living here from every nation in the world. We also have every ideology in the world, and are creating new religions daily. America has far better potential for having the most violent uprising the world has ever seen, neighbor killing neighbor because to some degree we all disagree with eachother.

Typically, however, we do not. Not because we have a dictatorial government, not because we have a petty despot who likes to torture, but because we are free we don't feel the need for violence.

Of course there are exceptions. Look at the abortion debate, we've got people screaming baby killer while murdering doctors, and we have people screaming it's the woman's choice as they bash the brain in of someone who feels differently.

Those people are the exception, not the norm. I've become, lately, very anti-abortion, but my mom is extreamly pro-choice. Yet I have yet to take a bat to her head. We talk, discusss, and agree to disagree.

So my biggest problem with this belief that Iraqis need someone torturing and terrifying them just seems bigoted to me. We can have freedoms, but the Iraqis aren't good enough, they're less human, and will react violently to freedom. Hey, so did we when we first got it, look at the whiskey rebellion.

The other arguement is that Islam won't allow freedom. Well, if that's the case, why aren't all the muslims here in america killing everyone since they don't have a heavy hand killing their children when they do wrong?

No, the Iraqis are just as human as we are, and are just as capable of having peaceful democracy as we are. It's something they've never experienced before, and therefor don't know what it entails yet, but they will. It took our nation almost 70 years for the major violent rebellions to stop. Did you know that in congress in the 1800s one entire party in the senate tracked down a senator they disagreed with and started clubbing him? Now, the democratic party has gone so far as to elect a former member of the KKK and put him in a position of power!

So in short, it took America a long while to get used to their freedoms, why should it only take the Iraqis a year, when they lived in a far worse dictatorship then we had before we cast off England's yolk.



posted on May, 8 2004 @ 11:45 PM
link   
This is why I said Iraq will have a better future. I am discussing the current situation. In the united states we have laws in place keeping weapons like rpg's and artillery weapons out of private hands. Untill these things are taken away from the iraqis they will be rebellious.

Is a future forced on them by the U.S. any better than one forced on they by Saddam. He at least kept them in control. There have been an estimated 70,000 iraqis killed in this war. Let them make their own government.

Ending I never said they were sub human. Your putting words in my mouth. Many Iraqis are more inclined to violence due to religious extremist and thier leaders. Their basically brainwashed. I wasn't talking about 70 years from now. I am talking about now.



posted on May, 8 2004 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hoppinmad1
This is why I said Iraq will have a better future. I am discussing the current situation. In the united states we have laws in place keeping weapons like rpg's and artillery weapons out of private hands. Untill these things are taken away from the iraqis they will be rebellious.

Is a future forced on them by the U.S. any better than one forced on they by Saddam. He at least kept them in control. There have been an estimated 70,000 iraqis killed in this war. Let them make their own government.

Ending I never said they were sub human. Your putting words in my mouth. Many Iraqis are more inclined to violence due to religious extremist and thier leaders. Their basically brainwashed. I wasn't talking about 70 years from now. I am talking about now.


I wasn't refering to you in particular, but rather the whole case that the Iraqis can't have democracy. And the future being forced on them by the US is (I pray) one of self rule, so they will choose their own government, and the people of Iraq will be able to have revolutions just as we do here in the US every 2 years.



posted on May, 8 2004 @ 11:55 PM
link   
I think it is easier to understand when you not consider Iraq as one country, but a serveral nations, forced to share the same borders.

The merging of the three provinces of Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra into one political entity and the creation of a nation out of the diverse religious and ethnic elements inhabiting these lands was accomplished after World War I. Action undertaken by the British military authorities during the war and the upsurge of nationalism after the war helped determine the shape of the new Iraqi state and the course of events during the postwar years, until Iraq finally emerged as an independent political entity in 1932.

From a page that tells the history of Iraq
HERE.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Saddam was a good man.
Never did anything wrong worth mentioning in world opinion.
He didn't invade Kuwait, Kuwait invited him.
He never had WMD, the world and the UN made those stories, reports, and documentations up, even before and after the 1st Gulf War.
Those mass graves steadily being found and dug up today were not from his doing.
The Kurds are liars.
The Shi'ites are liars.
The Sunni are lairs.
He treated everyone with kindness and mercy.
The sanctions were illegial.
He was really a swell guy and should be put back into his position of authority.
The US and Coalition should repay all the war damage caused within 'his' country.
Reparations should be payed.

Saddam is the man and is the man that Iraq needs back today.



seekerof



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by curme
I think it is easier to understand when you not consider Iraq as one country, but a serveral nations, forced to share the same borders.

The merging of the three provinces of Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra into one political entity and the creation of a nation out of the diverse religious and ethnic elements inhabiting these lands was accomplished after World War I. Action undertaken by the British military authorities during the war and the upsurge of nationalism after the war helped determine the shape of the new Iraqi state and the course of events during the postwar years, until Iraq finally emerged as an independent political entity in 1932.

From a page that tells the history of Iraq
HERE.


So nice to see someone refer to Iraq's history for a change. The problems in the Middle East did not spring full-blown from the desert like Athena from the head of Zeus.

The West helped create these problems many years ago. Before Palestine became an issue.

We forced foreign governments on a lot of the Arab world, giving rulership to Arab families we had been playing footsie with. In many cases the Arab royalty are of an entirely different ethnic group than the people in the country they are ruling.

We pushed for Iraq to become a single united country. And we treated the Iraqis like children who couldn't rule themselves for many years.

The MiddleEast is not all our mess, but the West sure has a lot to account for.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Saddam was a good man.
Never did anything wrong worth mentioning in world opinion.
He didn't invade Kuwait, Kuwait invited him.
He never had WMD, the world and the UN made those stories, reports, and documentations up, even before and after the 1st Gulf War.
Those mass graves steadily being found and dug up today were not from his doing.
The Kurds are liars.
The Shi'ites are liars.
The Sunni are lairs.
He treated everyone with kindness and mercy.
The sanctions were illegial.
He was really a swell guy and should be put back into his position of authority.
The US and Coalition should repay all the war damage caused within 'his' country.
Reparations should be payed.

Saddam is the man and is the man that Iraq needs back today.



seekerof


Get out of here. You make it seem as if Bush and the United States are holy.

You want to talk about liars, start with Bush.

And who placed Saddam in charge of Iraq in the first place. Enough said.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67
And who placed Saddam in charge of Iraq in the first place. Enough said.


GWB? Really? Last time I checked Saddam put Saddam in power during the Baathist Coup. Talk about biased misinformation.

Now I will let that slide though because your 19 and such an Ol G member.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I believe what you and others believe....I have seen the light.
Saddam should be removed from his cell, given a formal world apology from the US, given the 87+ 25 billion dollars, rearmed, and placed back into power.
That doesn't sound fair to you?


seekerof



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

GWB? Really? Last time I checked Saddam put Saddam in power during the Baathist Coup. Talk about biased misinformation.

Now I will let that slide though because your 19 and such an Ol G member.


Don't get be a #ing wise ass.

First of all, did I say GWB? Where did I say GWB? Don't put words in my mouth.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67
First of all, did I say GWB? Where did I say GWB? Don't put words in my mouth.



You left your words up to interpretation when you railed against GWB and then said "Who put saddam in power. Nuff Said". Some may have connected dots that you didnt intend.

Oh yes I musnt display sarcasm because "no one can touch Illmatic" or however you put it in that thread.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I believe what you and others believe....I have seen the light.
Saddam should be removed from his cell, given a formal world apology from the US, given the 87+ 25 billion dollars, rearmed, and placed back into power.
That doesn't sound fair to you?


seekerof


Yea, you are right.

He should be freed right now and given a apology from Bush himself. We should even throw a parade for him in New York City and let him be the guest speaker at the opening of the new Towers in the old WTC site.

"Cruel leaders are replaced only to have new leaders turn cruel" -Che Guevara.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

You left your words up to interpretation when you railed against GWB and then said "Who put saddam in power. Nuff Said". Some may have connected dots that you didnt intend.

Oh yes I musnt display sarcasm because "no one can touch Illmatic" or however you put it in that thread.



Then next time why don't you ask me what I meant instead of assuming it.

And this whole reference thing to my post is so stupid I can't believe they gave you that award.

Your probably mad because I ignored your u2 you sent me a while ago and I kept you in the dark you fake.

Stick to the topic at hand. You got something to say, say it in my old post.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I believe what you and others believe....I have seen the light.
Saddam should be removed from his cell, given a formal world apology from the US, given the 87+ 25 billion dollars, rearmed, and placed back into power.
That doesn't sound fair to you?


seekerof


Good call, Seeker! We should also let Osama know that we're sorry we've been hunting him down, get rid of all our national security, and let him know, "attack us, we deserve it". Maybe after we've lost as many Americans in the attacks as we've killed TERRORISTS we could go back to trying to protect our nation.

(I know you were being sarcastic, so was I
)

Oh yeah, and don't forget to forget 9-11! Those familys who lost someone should quit their frickin' greaving and whining, they only lost Americans. What about all those poor terrorists who died in the aftermath?


(in case anyone didn't realize, that statement was sarcastic, too.)



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67
Then next time why don't you ask me what I meant instead of assuming it.

Your probably mad because I ignored your u2 you sent me a while ago and I kept you in the dark you fake.


Then...Why would he assume you would clarify something for him if you won't even respond to his U2Us?

EDIT: Oh, yeah. you seek clarification, too, Ill.

[Edited on 5-9-2004 by junglejake]



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67

Then next time why don't you ask me what I meant instead of assuming it.

And this whole reference thing to my post is so stupid I can't believe they gave you that award.


Try not to be so vague. This is the WOT forum not the Predictions forum last time I checked. And furthermore, why would I ask to clarify political misinformed spew and subject myself to a biased explanation?


And another thing, your whole post was idiotic and moronic. You railed on for about a page on how super cool you were because you have been here for a while. Then you attacked seeker of and anyone else because your so cool no mod has anything on you.

Cant believe they gave me WATS eh? Are you jealous we all dont kiss the ground you walk on?



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake

Then...Why would he assume you would clarify something for him if you won't even respond to his U2Us?

EDIT: Oh, yeah. you seek clarification, too, Ill.

[Edited on 5-9-2004 by junglejake]



Jungle, you don't even know what happened so I don't know why you are speaking of it, with all due respect.

And I was referring to him assuming I meant Bush put Saddam in charge of Iraq which I didn't.

The u2 is a whole separate thing entirely.



posted on May, 9 2004 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67
=Jungle, you don't even know what happened so I don't know why you are speaking of it, with all due respect.

And I was referring to him assuming I meant Bush put Saddam in charge of Iraq which I didn't.

The u2 is a whole separate thing entirely.


Id have to agree on him with this JJ this is a two man fight and I dont think you wanna get drawn in.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join