thehackercat wrote:And Saddam Hussein had very agreeable views on women's rights and secular government. Mustard gas attacks against the Kurds canceled all the good out - as do most of Q/K/Gadhafi's actions.Scarlet wrote:Okay, here, I found something interesting
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/column ... a_media-0/
The dude increased literacy rates from 10% to 85%. So, it's not all bad. He's no worse than many Western leaders. ^^
Saddam was very good for Iraq. You gotta ask yourself what was saddam up against. He was in charge of a joke of a country that should never have been built. An authoritarian government is the only sort of government that can hold that thing in place - it barely functions today, and that's thanks to a foreign presence. Would any other government have done something different? The Kurds have always wanted to break off. I think they should, but as a president one has the responsibility to keep the country intact. At any rate, Turkey has done far worse things to the Kurds, displacing millions and killing several times as many as Saddam - yet the US praises and aids those efforts.
One can say that this regime is bad, that regime is bad, or whatever you want. One thing however is certain, and that is that stability is better than chaos.
edit: and yo btw, your avatar's too wide.