I think he was being sarcastic; making a comment on how the propaganda works. Let us not forget all the Iraqis that have died from the US involvement as well. Or the other nations that were in Iraq. None of these people should be dead.

"All of this bloodshed for one man to be hanged," indeed.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)14:43, 19 August 2010

I'm glad no one cares that the impossible happen. Women voting in the heart of the middle east and Al-qaeda and Iran lost an other battle. That what I'm thankful for.

KDP3 (talk)01:43, 20 August 2010
Edited by author.
Last edit: 17:42, 23 August 2010

Al-Qaeda would not have been fighting (much) in Iraq if Saddam had remained. Rights, democracy; these are important, but at what cost?

And should they be arbitrarily imposed upon populaces who may never otherwise achieve it, even at great cost?

That is a question I don't have the answer to.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)01:49, 20 August 2010

I would rather have a democracy in Iraq and the hope of it spreading then having that Socialist dictator. The human cost was very high (and in fact it could of been lower if Bush listen to the English advice of more troops and keeping the Iraqi army in place). But like i said; I would have a democratic Iraq then Saddam's Iraq. At least the men and women can choose their own future now.

KDP3 (talk)02:19, 20 August 2010

Forgive me, but what has socialism got to do with it? Wouldn't a better argument against Hussein be that he was a war criminal?

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)02:24, 20 August 2010

Saddam was the leader of the Ba'ath party. Which believed in "Arab socialism". Not a jab at all socialist.

KDP3 (talk)02:41, 20 August 2010

Arab Socialism == National Socialism != socialist

Hussein was essentially a fascist, not a socialist. Believe it or not, there is a clear and distinct difference.

64.195.2.114 (talk)01:50, 24 August 2010
 

"War criminal" and "socialist" are interchangable words. 206.74.178.104 (talk) 06:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

206.74.178.104 (talk)06:54, 21 August 2010

I disagree.

KDP3 (talk)18:59, 21 August 2010
 
 
 
 

Actually, the Iraq War helped Iran a lot, because it removed their main regional counterbalance. It'll take a long time for the Iraqi army to regain its pre-war strength, and even then, the Iraqi government will almost certainly be more pro-Iranian (or at least least less anti-Iranian) than the Hussein regime. So, good news, Iraq has a democratic government (assuming they work out the political standoff). Bad news, we just handed Iran a victory on a silver platter.

BTW, you do know that the Islamic Republic of Iran and Al Qaeda *hate* each other, don't you?

64.195.2.114 (talk)02:11, 24 August 2010