Quote:
Originally posted by CamChicks
Saddam had to maintain enough military strength, or at least the appearance of strength, to discourage an invasion from Iran. If Iran knew Saddam was weak, they would have gone in and taken over. Infact, if the fundamentalist Iraqis knew how weakened Saddam really was, they might have succeeded in an internal revolution. Either way, Iraq would have reverted to an islamic theocracy. (as it almost certainly will as soon as the USA leaves)
|
I absolutely agree on the statement about Iraq becoming a theocracy, Iran has plenty of influence in Iraq, and that would be in their interest likewise.
However, it seems to me that people blame George W. Bush on this board for everything from unemployment to the medical insurance crisis -- yet a dictator whom spent 2+ Billion dollars on his own palaces when a large portion of his country was dying is excusable?
So far we've heard he couldn't get medicine into the country -- but he could get everything for his palaces, and could still get illegal weapon technology?
Then he couldn't get water pipes? but everyone of his palaces had lots of bathrooms ever courtyard had multiple fountains, swimming pools etc?
Hate Bush, or not logic defies the arguments defending Saddam Hussein, whilst blaming U.N Sanctions for starving the population?