US Citizen. Not satisfied. No sir, not satisfied at all.
I want to know how we could go from having the worlds sympathy and support on 9-12 to pissing off almost all of the people who once supported us and alienating most of our Allies. Only England IMHO has stood side by side with us through thick and this and even the English people are not happy with the turn of events.
Is the world safer now? No if anything we have pissed off a number of countries and encouraged others. And still terrorism is a as big aa threat as ever.
the actions of the US government have made terrorism a much greater threat;owing to the invasion and some other aggressive US policies it has bolstered support worldwide for th guy who should have been dead years ago.It's not safer,more dangerous.
Non-US citizen not satisfied.Afghanistan was the right place to take the war.at least deploying a 60 to 80 K troops there initially and taking down all hidey holes and mountains would have saved a lot of lives.
Saddam could have been removed through another way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Matt
You want to unite the world? Create a global alliance whose entire cabinet consists of porn stars. That'll do the trick.
Saddam and sons would have been replaced by similar persons if anybody noticed at all, he had many doubles and any one of them could simply take his place after his death without anyone really knowing.
there are other dictators like him across the world.He just happened to have been in power for a long time.I am not saying removing him was a bad idea though.He should have been taken care of a long time ago,right after the fall of the Soviet Union when IIRC the west was ready for new world ordering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Matt
You want to unite the world? Create a global alliance whose entire cabinet consists of porn stars. That'll do the trick.
He should have been taken down then, but he wasn't, so we did it now instead; as towards the rest of the worlds dictators, how many do you think we'd have such an easy time toppling as Saddam? The unexpected aftermath of course doesn't look good in hindsight, but from the perspective of 2002?
He should have been taken down then, but he wasn't, so we did it now instead; as towards the rest of the worlds dictators, how many do you think we'd have such an easy time toppling as Saddam?
Tyrants in Pacific island nations, Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, other African dictators, Bashar al-Assad in Syria? After all Saddam had relatively powerful armed forces from the point of view of developing countries in highly sensitive area where religion plays a major role.
Returning back to good ol' Pub, at least for some time
Which of those mentioned did the US specifically place into power?
That's not the point, the question you asked was which dictators could have been more easily overthrown than Saddam Hussein. Besides did the USA place Saddam into power?
Returning back to good ol' Pub, at least for some time
Well you never know, the US might have suddenly gotten a hard-on for empowering Pan-arab ultra nationalist with a heavy Anti-Israel slant and extensive terrorist connections. you know, for kicks.
CANNON, n. An instrument employed in the rectification of national boundaries. - Ambrose Bierce
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
The Pub 
Linear Mode
