"Is the world better off without Saddam?"

[Dawgs]

How should we answer this question? I've heard it twice today. Once by Sean Hannity, and once by Bush. It really pisses me off, because they use it to excuse anything regarding the Iraq war. :banghead:

How bout'

- ~Rosie's answer, 'America does not attack soverign nations without UN approval', or

- 'America does not go to war with a nation that is not a threat to anyone', or

- 'then why not attack North Korea, Iran, Cuba... they all have evil dictators', or

- 'why not go to war with Africa... there is more death, genecide, destruction there than anywhere', or

- 'Ask the Iraqi people if they are better off now...', or

- 'FUCK YOU HANNITY... America does not go to war based on lies' :mad:

[bpilgrim]

1. not if we're goin by the number of TERRORIST attacks

:crazy:

Hannity-n-rosie.mp3...
http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/Hannity-n-rosie.mp3

peace

[Pacifist Patriot]

2. Easy answer.

Obviously not.

Clearly Hussein was a brutal and evil dictator, but placed in a global perspective I'd say the world was a tiny bit better off before the U.S. illegally invaded his country.

It's all relative. And begs the question "How is the world better off?"

Mr. Bush, don't you meant to say that "You are better off?" Oh and while we're asking questions, "What exactly did you do with that $8.8B?"

[Bluerthanblue]

11. reading your post....

.... it just dawned on me, that 'we' made Hussien- WE (the US) enabled, and encouraged him-

Now, i'm wondering when the govt' will admit we are just 'cleaning up' after a 'mistake'- or should i say 'misunderestimation' of what Raygun and Co. was creating-
Mary Shelly could write a good book about this?

He didn't have any WMD's- but the nations who felt emboldened to invade an already devestated populace, have plenty of them, and according to our 'leader' we aren't 'afraid' to use them to 'stamp out terrorism'-

oxymoron? sure seems like it to me- bad trade.

(edited in an attempt to make sense)

[Pacifist Patriot]

13. Yep

[Missy M]

3. I would say the world is pretty much the same without Sadam...

maybe a little worse.

[applegrove]

4. They are just using a 'truism'. Of course the world is better off without

a murderous monster. But is the world better off with 'neocons'? No.

[Solly Mack]

5. Only if Bush' lying, faking intelligence, engaging in torture, and

abandoning everything America is supposed to stand for can justify it...

and if it can, America is beyond help.

Saddam was a bad man....but that in no way excuses or justifies America's actions.

[Just Me]

6. The world was a much better place before the neoCONs' waged war.

More people alive, fewer people hating Americans, 300 billion dollars still where it belonged, fewer families confronted with horrible loss.

Ever since the neoCONs waged their illegal war, the world has been a much sadder and more conflicted place.

[Bluerthanblue]

7. no,-his ouster coroneted King *- the world is now WORSE off

because the new menace to the universe has innumerable WMD's and the insanity to use them-
paid for by me, and you-

and i fear we'll be charged interest- regardless of our wishes.

[tallahasseedem]

8. The actual question is...

How much better would the world be without the Bush family?

[Bluerthanblue]

9. and the other

'less visible' powerful, greedy, and EVIL (in the actual sense of the word) comerades.

(meaning the movie was great, but it took more than the leading 'actors' to pull it together-)

The rot runs deep- it ain't 'surface mold'-

[Raksha]

10. Yeah...and it would be better off without Bush too! n/t

[jzodda]

12. The world is a better place

Of course the world is a better place without him, but the means do not justify the ends.

1. The cost in american and Iraqi lives has been high and it looks like there is no end in sight
2. the cost in money is in the hundreds of billions so far, a staggering amount that we could have put to good use here at home

So the question should really be is it and has it been worth the cost? Then the answer is no.

Hussein is not a young man, so what does he have left? 10-15 years? With a policy of containment that was more or less working would not that have been a better option?

Thats how I look at this issue. Bush and his friends would like to use the "world is a better place" thing to cut off debate and I guess in places like south carolina thats all the zombies need to hear. With people who have half a brain though, that statement only leads to more questions.

[Bluerthanblue]

14. how?

i cannot for the life of me see how this sad planet is 'better off' with SH in 'custody' and being put before a 'mock' trial for crimes we not only enabled, but encouraged in many instances-

Because, in doing what 'we' did- and the american populace ALLOWING to be done, and in many cases 'rejoicing' in what we did, we have dropped to a new low- where John Doe american, thinks it's ok to do the self same kind of evil we accuse SH of? We have become more calloused to the reality that an Iraqi man, woman or child bleeds just like us-
And what 'we' call 'colleratal damage' is when you come right down to it, what Bin Laden could call all the victims of 9/11-

When we become what we claim to detest- everyone looses- shoving 'freedom' (or our lame excuse for it) down other peoples throats is hardly something i'm 'proud' of, or would EVER chose-

this world would be a 'nicer' place without alot of people- should we just go kill em all, so that only us good guys are left?

if so, start with me, please, i'm sick of this mess- sick to death of it all.

(whatever 'trust' i had in this nation is dead- or at least in it's last days at hospice-)