Iraq. Is it better now?? (AKA ISIS/ISIL/IS/name-of-the-week-here) (8 Viewers)

[IrishZebra]

Of course not. Why would we be?

Well you seemed to be being a bit too kind towards old Saddam, which made me wonder if the elder members of your family had influenced your attitude towards such situations, unless of course this has happened to the Iraqis you've met.

It's not uncommon, all the Serbs I know are a similar way about Tito and Yugoslavia even though the didn't experience it.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Fred]

Well you seemed to be being a bit too kind towards old Saddam, which made me wonder if the elder members of your family had influenced your attitude towards such situations, unless of course this has happened to the Iraqis you've met.

It's not uncommon, all the Serbs I know are a similar way about Tito and Yugoslavia even though the didn't experience it.

I'm not too kind to Saddam mate. You obviously don't know what i think of him. But when i see someone saying something that isn't true about him, i will point it out. He was a mass murderer, a dictator and a cold and terrible man. We all know that.

The Iraqi's i know, and i know a lot, there is a very big number of Iraqi's living in the UAE. They all hated Saddam to death before American occupation, after American occupation, a lot of them preferred the lesser of two evils, which a lot of them thought was Saddam.

I don't think Saddam was a good ruler, but if forced to choose between Saddam and American occupation i'd take the former without question

 

[king Ale]

It's impossible to make a comparison at the moment. Saddam was at power for almost 25 years, now it's only 7 years since his overturn. Of course the US didn't think about Iraqi people when they invaded Iraq but the regime under Saddam had come to a point which couldn't have changed for better without the help of a foreign military force. There was no freedom at all whatsoever, the minority groups were oppressed, I even remember how their football players who had moved to Iran were talking about the way Saddam regime treated them after their defeats. No place on the other hand suddenly becomes a better one after a fast revolutionary change takes place so it's not wise to wait for an immediate and obvious change in the people's lives after the quick and massive change within the regime. Sometimes you have to pay greatly to have a better life and you might well receive it back many years later. I know that the situation in Iraq has been sad since the 2003 invasion but I'm hopeful it will become much better than it was under Saddam, for the next generations.

At least when Saddam was around there was law and order, there was safety and security, now the place is a mess. I have several friends who have lost close relatives in Iraq in the past few years.

While it was terrible during the Saddam period, at least you knew that you won't be gunned down in the middle of the street because of your religious beliefs.

The security which tells you "shut up" if you want to stay alive means nothing.

I don't know if the US government achieved anything (in accord to their intentions before they attacked Iraq) or if it was a huge failure and I don't care about them to be honest but I think the outcome would be very good for Iraqi people.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

I am originaly from Iraq and I lived there until I was 18. I am visiting Iraq once a year and I can say it is better now or it will get better..

Thanks, but I am sorry to hear about your homeland...

:cough: Vietnam :cough:

Yes, huge amounts of profit. You did it before, it would not be a first time to interfere again.

WRONG!

I'm Libyan, Libya is almost like former Iraq.

...and if you'd have ever lived there, that would matter.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

The security which tells you "shut up" if you want to stay alive means nothing.

I don't know if the US government achieved anything (in accord to their intentions before they attacked Iraq) or if it was a huge failure and I don't care about them to be honest but I think the outcome would be very good for Iraqi people.

 

[Fred]

It's impossible to make a comparison at the moment. Saddam was at power for almost 25 years, now it's only 7 years since his overturn. Of course the US didn't think about Iraqi people when they invaded Iraq but the regime under Saddam had come to a point which couldn't have changed for better without the help of a foreign military force. There was no freedom at all whatsoever, the minority groups were oppressed, I even remember how their football players who had moved to Iran were talking about the way Saddam regime treated them after their defeats. No place on the other hand suddenly becomes a better one after a fast revolutionary change takes place so it's not wise to wait for an immediate and obvious change in the people's lives after the quick and massive change within the regime. Sometimes you have to pay greatly to have a better life and you might well receive it back many years later. I know that the situation in Iraq has been sad since the 2003 invasion but I'm hopeful it will become much better than it was under Saddam, for the next generations.



The security which tells you "shut up" if you want to stay alive means nothing.

I don't know if the US government achieved anything (in accord to their intentions before they attacked Iraq) or if it was a huge failure and I don't care about them to be honest but I think the outcome would be very good for Iraqi people.

Well ya of course, its a terrible situation to be in. But still, people went about with their everyday life and as long as they kept their mouths shut, they'd be ok.

Is that not better than the risk of being killed no matter what you do, just because you're a shiite or you're a sunni.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Well ya of course, its a terrible situation to be in. But still, people went about with their everyday life and as long as they kept their mouths shut, they'd be ok.

Is that not better than the risk of being killed no matter what you do, just because you're a shiite or you're a sunni.

Isn't it okay for Muslims to die because of their religion?

And you just said it was better when Italy had Moussolini.

 

[king Ale]

Well ya of course, its a terrible situation to be in. But still, people went about with their everyday life and as long as they kept their mouths shut, they'd be ok.

Is that not better than the risk of being killed no matter what you do, just because you're a shiite or you're a sunni.

Yes, if you look at it that way. But by that logic, you should never stand against oppression, dictatorship and discrimination. I agree that the first right for anyone must be the right to live but there are also many examples in history where people had to sacrifice so that the other generations could have better lives. You can't expect to see the results immediately after overturning a very strong central dictatorship which was at power for many years. After Saddam there was no other group or party being strong enough to win all the groups of people's trust (a sign of the long dictatorship in Iraq which was solely running by Saddam's family) and it's why you see now how people of different groups are killing each other in Iraq. It will take time but it will become better I'm hopeful.

 

[Fred]

Isn't it okay for Muslims to die because of their religion?

And you just said it was better when Italy had Moussolini.

If after Mussolini people were killing each other and nobody was stopping them, the country was in chaos etc, ya it would have been better with Mussollini.

 

[Fred]

Yes, if you look at it that way. But by that logic, you should never stand against oppression, dictatorship and discrimination. I agree that the first right for anyone must be the right to live but there are also many examples in history where people had to sacrifice so that the other generations could have better lives. You can't expect to see the results immediately after overturning a very strong central dictatorship which was at power for many years. After Saddam there was no other group or party being strong enough to win all the groups of people's trust (a sign of the long dictatorship in Iraq which was solely running by Saddam's family) and it's why you see now how people of different groups are killing each other in Iraq. It will take time but it will become better I'm hopeful.

I wish i was as hopeful as you Hoori, but i really don't see that happening. I just see the sectarian conflict getting worse and worse. Shiites feel they have been opressed in their own country for a long time now, perhaps rightfully so, but that has made them extremely hostile towards sunni's, sunni's feel the same animosity towards shiites, the hate you see in them is really scary. How exactly the new Iraqi government is going to put a lid on this, i don't know. It doesn't look promising at all.

Oh and i agree that sacrifices have to be made for democracy and freedom to prevail, history tells us as much. I don't think American invasion is the solution though. The choice has become between the stability yet extremely restricting conditions of a dictatorship, or the chaos and killings that will erupt because of the sectarian conflict. Its a hard choice to make, but i think i'd go for the former.

Iraq is going to pay a very expensive price for the strong sectarian feelings of its people though.

 

[king Ale]

I wish i was as hopeful as you Hoori, but i really don't see that happening. I just see the sectarian conflict getting worse and worse. Shiites feel they have been opressed in their own country for a long time now, perhaps rightfully so, but that has made them extremely hostile towards sunni's, sunni's feel the same animosity towards shiites, the hate you see in them is really scary. How exactly the new Iraqi government is going to put a lid on this, i don't know. It doesn't look promising at all. Oh and i agree that sacrifices have to be made for democracy and freedom to prevail, history tells us as much. I don't think American invasion is the solution though. The choice has become between the stability yet extremely restricting conditions of a dictatorship, or the chaos and killings that will erupt because of the sectarian conflict. Its a hard choice to make, but i think i'd go for the former.

Iraq is going to pay a very expensive price for the strong sectarian feelings of its people though.

You are underestimating Saddam's regime powers if you think it could have done by Iraqi people themselves.

 

[Fred]

You are underestimating Saddam's regime powers if you think it could have done by Iraqi people themselves.

I don't think that. I don't know how you made such an inference.

 

[king Ale]

What was the solution to the pre-invasion conditions in Iraq you think?

 

[Fred]

What was the solution to the pre-invasion conditions in Iraq you think?

I don't have one

On a more serious note, my point was that American invasion is worse than Saddam's regime.

 

[Enron]

If after Mussolini people were killing each other and nobody was stopping them, the country was in chaos etc, ya it would have been better with Mussollini.

You're probably not a fan of the French Revolution either.

 

[Enron]

What was the solution to the pre-invasion conditions in Iraq you think?

Fred doesn't like violence and conflict. I think that's his biggest issue.

 

[Seven]

No muslim would be a fan of the French Revolution TBH.

 

[Enron]

No muslim would be a fan of the French Revolution TBH.

Why not? I figure they'd be a fan of Vendee.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Probably because the French people overthrew a king, and kings in those days represented "God" on Earth.

So the Muslims would probably have followed such a person into the depths of hell.

 

[Maresca]

It's impossible to make a comparison at the moment. Saddam was at power for almost 25 years, now it's only 7 years since his overturn. Of course the US didn't think about Iraqi people when they invaded Iraq but the regime under Saddam had come to a point which couldn't have changed for better without the help of a foreign military force. There was no freedom at all whatsoever, the minority groups were oppressed, I even remember how their football players who had moved to Iran were talking about the way Saddam regime treated them after their defeats. No place on the other hand suddenly becomes a better one after a fast revolutionary change takes place so it's not wise to wait for an immediate and obvious change in the people's lives after the quick and massive change within the regime. Sometimes you have to pay greatly to have a better life and you might well receive it back many years later. I know that the situation in Iraq has been sad since the 2003 invasion but I'm hopeful it will become much better than it was under Saddam, for the next generations.



The security which tells you "shut up" if you want to stay alive means nothing.

I don't know if the US government achieved anything (in accord to their intentions before they attacked Iraq) or if it was a huge failure and I don't care about them to be honest but I think the outcome would be very good for Iraqi people.

Agreed..the situation currently is a temporary. In order to get Irak to complete freedom it will still take some years. may be 5, 10, but still better than being under Saddams regime, where even more people were killed but no information were provided in the media. I can telly o that after Saddam, his son was going to take the lead and so on.. what happend to Irak will be helpful for the courtry in the long term. I am very optimistic that it will turn to better.