Was the Middle East Better off with Saddam Hussein?

First topic message reminder :

Ironically, Republicans are now beginning to say, yes!  Of course, the Republicans were the ones who spearheaded the second Iraq War, in 2003, so it's difficult for them to admit.

Tommy Monk wrote:http://www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda-in-Iraq


Al-Qaeda in Iraq first appeared in 2004 whenAbū Muṣʿab al-Zarqāwī, a Jordanian-born militant already leading insurgent attacks in Iraq, formed an alliance with al-Qaeda, pledging his group’s allegiance to Osama bin Laden in return for bin Laden’s endorsement as the leader of al-Qaeda’s franchise in Iraq.

Very rarely agree with you Tommy, but you are right.

Captured Iraqi documents and intelligence interrogations of Saddam Hussein and two former aides "all confirmed" that Hussein's regime was not directly cooperating with al-Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to a declassified Defense Department report released yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/05/AR2007040502263.html

Again sassy makes the same mistake.
This is about allowing operative sto hide, not actual cooperation in terrorism with Al-qaeda of what that report is about though it does say he did try to cooperate with other terrorist organisations which sassy clearly avoids speaking of, it also states that this can only go off written records of which there was hardly anh in the lat months of his power.
So again both made the same cardinal mistake.
I mean do you want me to bring up where Saddam refused to extradite known terrorists that were being harboured in Iraq?

Saddam didn't allow al Qaeda operatives to hide...

Tommy Monk wrote:http://www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda-in-Iraq


Al-Qaeda in Iraq first appeared in 2004 whenAbū Muṣʿab al-Zarqāwī, a Jordanian-born militant already leading insurgent attacks in Iraq, formed an alliance with al-Qaeda, pledging his group’s allegiance to Osama bin Laden in return for bin Laden’s endorsement as the leader of al-Qaeda’s franchise in Iraq.

+10000

previously Al-Qaeda had tried to assassinate Saddam, as he was secular leader that removed all legal power of Religion institutions in Iraq.


everyone but the Kurds were better off with Saddam. Saddam promoted Education and employment of women and equality across religion. he was the most successful 'enlightened' middle eastern leader in the past 30 years.

veya_victaous wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:http://www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda-in-Iraq


Al-Qaeda in Iraq first appeared in 2004 whenAbū Muṣʿab al-Zarqāwī, a Jordanian-born militant already leading insurgent attacks in Iraq, formed an alliance with al-Qaeda, pledging his group’s allegiance to Osama bin Laden in return for bin Laden’s endorsement as the leader of al-Qaeda’s franchise in Iraq.

+10000

previously Al-Qaeda had tried to assassinate Saddam, as he was secular leader that removed all legal power of Religion institutions in Iraq.


everyone but the Kurds were better off with Saddam. Saddam promoted Education and employment of women and equality across religion. he was the most successful 'enlightened' middle eastern leader in the past 30 years.

Can't tell you the number of times I have posted the facts and figures on his education policy for both sexes and the health care he introduced for all.

sassy wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

+10000

previously Al-Qaeda had tried to assassinate Saddam, as he was secular leader that removed all legal power of Religion institutions in Iraq.


everyone but the Kurds were better off with Saddam. Saddam promoted Education and employment of women and equality across religion. he was the most successful 'enlightened' middle eastern leader in the past 30 years.

Can't tell you the number of times I have posted the facts and figures on his education policy for both sexes and the health care he introduced for all.

Seriously this has to be the dumbest post so far.
You do realise also Hitler did wonders for the German economy and brought millions out of employment.
That means bugger all considering he caused the deaths of millions. Though if we used your absurd belief on blame on foreign policy, your views would make Stalin 50 percent responsible for all deaths in WW2.
Being that Hitler would have not invaded Poland without the Non-aggression pact, being as he was not ready to fight a  war on two fronts and this was a coalition where both Germany and Russia invaded Poland. Where without this German Invasion, would then the Russian invasion have happened. Hitler gained the confidence of the German high command because of the early victories. Then without an invasion of Russia, and its early success, Japan would not have launched the attack on Pearl harbour.

So Frankly I could care less at his health policies, Saddam was a butcher, who murder not only Kurds but shias too, which clearly veya has never read about the uprsing in 1991, let alone all the others in opposition he murderd and the Iraqi and Iranian dead from their war.,

Never seen the most idiotic defense of a butcher in all my life, but hey both are regressive lefties who have not a clue

Let's remember who was arming Saddam when the actions Didge was talking about were going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Report - Margaret Thatcher.

He did some terrible things, but for the majority of the Iraqi people and for the stability of the areas, they were better off with him.  Everything that has happened since has followed on from the Iraq invasion and getting rid of Saddam.

sassy wrote:Let's remember who was arming Saddam when the actions Didge was talking about were going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Report - Margaret Thatcher.

He did some terrible things, but for the majority of the Iraqi people and for the stability of the areas, they were better off with him.  Everything that has happened since has followed on from the Iraq invasion and getting rid of Saddam.

Bullshit

Iraq's era under President Saddam Hussein was notorious for its severe violations of human rights. Secret police, torture, mass murder, rape, deportations, forced disappearances, assassinations, chemical warfare, and the destruction of southern Iraq's marshes were some of the methods the country's Ba'athist government used to maintain control. The total number of deaths related to torture and murder during this period are unknown. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International issued regular reports of widespread imprisonment and torture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein's_Iraq


Again sassy shows why you seriously do not listen to now an apologist of a mass murderer.

The problem is that it does not matter who is iin power a dictator or jihadi, its no different and again you forget the fact most people when freed from a dictator grasp the chance top rebuild, in Iraq this did not happen and was not allowed to happen because again the Gulf states and Iran fought for supremacy in the country with a proxy was the exact same we see not only in Syria, but also now Yeman. Insugeents flooded the area to commit tot he worst violence and again you ignore this where they are responsible for the vast majority of Iraqi deaths. Not only that there is no doubt the Arab spring would have come to Iraq as well and we would have seen a civil war just as we did within Syria. To claim  and argue two timeframes, which are as bad as each other makes a people better off when hundreds of thousands were butchered by Saddam hussein is about as brainless as it gets. As the reality is in neither situation is it better off for people as they have continued to suffer

sassy wrote:Let's remember who was arming Saddam when the actions Didge was talking about were going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Report - Margaret Thatcher.

He did some terrible things, but for the majority of the Iraqi people and for the stability of the areas, they were better off with him.  Everything that has happened since has followed on from the Iraq invasion and getting rid of Saddam.

As events have proven, he was better than the alternative.

Original Quill wrote:

sassy wrote:Let's remember who was arming Saddam when the actions Didge was talking about were going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Report - Margaret Thatcher.

He did some terrible things, but for the majority of the Iraqi people and for the stability of the areas, they were better off with him.  Everything that has happened since has followed on from the Iraq invasion and getting rid of Saddam.

As events have proven, he was better than the alternative.

Flawed logic, where you have not lived under and thus cannot say, as I stated earlier what was better.
To the Kurd and Shias thay are by far better off, than they were under Saddam.
It was because of the abuses by saddam that was instrunmental in the cause of the insurrections.
This is why people make absurd views to things they have never lived and thus cannot possibly stated what is worse.
They can only guage based on how they themselves view a situation from the outside

Original Quill wrote:

sassy wrote:Let's remember who was arming Saddam when the actions Didge was talking about were going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Report - Margaret Thatcher.

He did some terrible things, but for the majority of the Iraqi people and for the stability of the areas, they were better off with him.  Everything that has happened since has followed on from the Iraq invasion and getting rid of Saddam.

As events have proven, he was better than the alternative.

Exactly

sassy wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

As events have proven, he was better than the alternative.

Exactly

So again a Non-Iraqi saying what is better based off her own perceptions and nopt what is for them.
What is evident is it is this daft narative that claims life is better on a  genocidal manic with the view that foriegn policy ruined this which is abusrd. Shia and sunni hatred of which has been ongoing for centuries just continued the blood letting that had been part and parcel of the reign of saddam. Its this apolosgit view point that plays into the Muslim narative that they use as a grievance but its no surprise that the lefty regressives do not grasp this and fail to understand they aid the daesh popaganda machine