the atrocity committed in ir ak.

[Chaco Dundee]

In the late 70th I worked in Dara irak outside baghdad.Sadam had just come around.the irakis and we contractors never felt threatened by anything.the irakis were content with The politics and women Had freedoms. It is not the same today. 25 years later some guy who had never been to irak had a vision.and only he knew how to really and permanently fuck irak up.he is gone.but we are still doing his bidding.

[newfie11]

1. And moving on to destroy more countries

This needs to stop !!!

[badtoworse]

2. You must have been to a different Iraq than I was.

I worked in southern Iraq for about a year in 1979. The Iraqi people were terrified of Hussein. Myself and a coworker wanted to organize a social event with the Iraqis that worked onsite - not a single one would come because they were afraid of being arrested by the secret police. Typewriters were tightly controlled with each user having to sign for a specific machine - sample of the type for that machine were taken by the secret police and you would be arrested if they saw something they did not like in type that matched your machine. Hussein was known to throw people off tall buildings and commit other atrocities. The people had good reason to fear him.

Iraq should have been a rich country with its oil resources, but the Iraqi people, for the most part, lived in poverty. The reason? Hussein spent all the money on weapons or himself and his friends. Your delusional if you believe the Iraqis had it peachy while he was in power.

[pampango]

3. Dictators are loved by the people they rule - or else! The secret police are not there to make sure

the streets are safe for pedestrians at night. They are there to keep the dictator in power. And there aren't many rules they have to follow in achieving that goal.

Nice post, badtoworse.

[badtoworse]

4. Thanks. Seeing how Hussein ruled Iraq makes you appreciate the freedoms we have here.

[Scootaloo]

5. And of course, Hussein acted completely alone, had no international backing...

Oh... oops?

[badtoworse]

6. So what? Hussein was what he was and Rumsfeld visiting didn't change that.

[Scootaloo]

7. US support, both political and monetary, was absolutely a factor in Saddam's reign

Yes, he was a psychopath with or without US backing. But that backing gave him resources and shielding to engage in his psychopathy. Against Iran. Against the Shia, Kurds, and Turkmen. Against Kuwait. We supported it all. Paid him. Armed him. Cheered him.

[badtoworse]

10. The OP was implying that things were fine for the Iraqi people under Hussein

I am pointing out that he is wrong. Hussein did not need our backing and in fact, when I went there, we did not have any relations with Iraq. I had to get my visa through the Indian embassy.

Hussein was a tyrant and a scumbag. I think we agree on that.

[Chaco Dundee]

11. agreed.

No doubt.

[MADem]

8. My experience in Iraq was tense at best.

Many soldiers, none of them friendly.

Here's the bottom line under Saddam--if you were Sunni, you were in a much better position than people who were Shi'a. Shi'a who wanted to get ahead in Iraq made sure to not name their children after figures who are revered in Shi'a Islam--it simply made life easier for the children. Like any enclave in a society thus structured, you always had to serve somebody. You had to pay your tithes to stay out of trouble and preserve what you owned.

The poor were poor, but if you were an al-Takriti, a member of the Revolutionary Guard, or a Friend of Hussein, life was good.

[badtoworse]

9. I worked near Basrah, which was mostly Shia.

I agree with you - life was a lot better for the Sunnis.