![]() |
Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' (/Thread-Trump-praises-Saddam-Hussein-s-efficient-killing-of-terrorists) |
Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - GMDino - 07-06-2016 Fun fact! I actually agree with Trump that the removal of Hussein was a bad thing for the same reason: It destabilized the region. Fun fact 2! I was against the Iraq war the entire time...not just when it became a quagmire or politically smart to be against it. http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/05/politics/donald-trump-saddam-hussein-iraq-terrorism/ Quote:Raleigh, North Carolina (CNN)Donald Trump on Tuesday once again expressed his preference for keeping dictators in power in the Middle East. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Benton - 07-06-2016 Killing Hussein set the middle east back about 50 years. He was a horrible human being, no doubt, but fewer and fewer stable governments isn't helping anyone there. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - BFritz21 - 07-06-2016 (07-06-2016, 08:31 PM)Benton Wrote: Killing Hussein set the middle east back about 50 years. He was a horrible human being, no doubt, but fewer and fewer stable governments isn't helping anyone there. Exactly. Trump's actually right. Killing him would have been a good move if there had been a way to stabilize the country but it just made it even worse. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Rotobeast - 07-06-2016 They should have at least kept Gaddafi in. He warned everyone. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3388533/Colonel-Gaddafi-accused-Tony-Blair-supporting-Al-Qaeda-warned-jihadis-Libya-attack-Europe-series-phone-calls.html More on topic.... This all has to be making Rumsfeld pretty happy about endorsing Trump. ![]() RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - rfaulk34 - 07-06-2016 (07-06-2016, 08:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: Fun fat 2! Since when is fat ever fun? ![]() RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Rotobeast - 07-06-2016 (07-06-2016, 10:27 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Since when is fat ever fun? As if you wouldn't know. ![]() ![]() RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - jason - 07-06-2016 Excellent analysis (as always) Mr Trump. If only we handled more issues the way Saddam did. No "read them the rights" no nothing. Just BOOM!!! "Over". What a clown.... this guy. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Benton - 07-06-2016 (07-06-2016, 09:27 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Exactly. Oh I think trump would have done the same thing as bush. That's the problem. We've had the same people calling he shots since Nixon. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Millhouse - 07-07-2016 (07-06-2016, 08:31 PM)Benton Wrote: Killing Hussein set the middle east back about 50 years. He was a horrible human being, no doubt, but fewer and fewer stable governments isn't helping anyone there. I disagree in large part due to the fact we decimated his military in the first Gulf War. Even though he still enough power to remain in power, he didnt have a security appartus to deal with groups like ISIS and his other enemies like he had prior to 1991. He had anything but a stable government post 1991. What is setting the Middle East back right now is the Syrian civil war, which allowed ISIS to fester and grow like gangrene on a wounded leg. If Syria never imploded like it did, Iraq would be better off post- Saddam and ISIS never would have evolved like is unfortunately has. Regardless though, until those countries learn to separate religion and their governments, they will always be 'set back' compared to the rest of the world. All that said, Trump is a buffoon. Hillary sucks. Worst presidential nominees that I can think of without looking it up going back to the 1910s-1920s. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - GMDino - 07-07-2016 (07-07-2016, 12:07 AM)Millhouse Wrote: I disagree in large part due to the fact we decimated his military in the first Gulf War. Even though he still enough power to remain in power, he didnt have a security appartus to deal with groups like ISIS and his other enemies like he had prior to 1991. He had anything but a stable government post 1991. Stable in the sense that he had control over the country. He was an evil man...but having him there kept a balance in the region. He was more than likely bluffing about everything but no one was going to challenge him to find out. Kind of like "mutually assured destruction". RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - BengalHawk62 - 07-07-2016 Weapons of Mass Destruction! Riiiiiiight. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Benton - 07-07-2016 (07-07-2016, 12:07 AM)Millhouse Wrote: I disagree in large part due to the fact we decimated his military in the first Gulf War. Even though he still enough power to remain in power, he didnt have a security appartus to deal with groups like ISIS and his other enemies like he had prior to 1991. He had anything but a stable government post 1991. Saddam (and a handful of other dictators through the 60s-80s) provided stable governments. Some of that weakened naturally over time, some as those dictators died off or weakened, and some through intervention (like the U.S. invading Iraq). The Baath party (which Saddam was part of) helped force a cooperation between Sunni and Shia. You either did as the government said or — regardless of sect — you were punished. Yeah, Sunni folks had a better end of things, but the system kept going. And with some peace, people were able to go to school or get jobs and potentially move out of the area if they wanted. 2003 changed that. With a pretty limited understanding of the differences in 600ish years of tribal and religious affairs, the U.S. government unintentionally drew more dividing lines between Sunni and Shia. Removal of Baath party members essentially took out local and state leadership, which led to a free for all in Iraq that spiraled out to other countries. Even worse, a good number of former Saddam's Sunni leadership are thought to have gone to groups after 2004 who eventually merged with ISIS, prefering to keep it Sunni and exterminate the majority Shia populations. In Syria , Assad and the Alawaites are Shia. The majority of the country (70% I believe) is Sunni. Again, this is a reflection of the conflict as Sunni groups worked against Shia groups in the 2005-2010 range. The rebels are the majority Sunni fighting against the Shia minority that's in control of the government. There's been talk that Assad has tried to Sunni-fy Alawaites into more a moderate group, but RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - bfine32 - 07-07-2016 I guess that the sentiment that Iraq was better off with Saddam depends entirely on who you are. We simply over-threw him about 13 years too late. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - GMDino - 07-07-2016 (07-07-2016, 01:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I guess that the sentiment that Iraq was better off with Saddam depends entirely on who you are. We simply over-threw him about 13 years too late. HW knew what would happen if Saddam was removed. That's why he didn't do it. https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/169-history/36409.html Quote:We were disappointed that Saddam's defeat did not break his hold on power, as many of our Arab allies had predicted and we had come to expect. President Bush repeatedly declared that the fate of Saddam Hussein was up to the Iraqi people. Occasionally, he indicated that removal of Saddam would be welcome, but for very practical reasons there was never a promise to aid an uprising. While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - bfine32 - 07-07-2016 (07-06-2016, 10:27 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Since when is fat ever fun? You need to get out more. Everybody knows fatties give the best hummers and are quite limber. RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - GMDino - 07-07-2016 (07-07-2016, 02:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You need to get out more. Everybody knows fatties give the best hummers and are quite limber. Thank goodness Lucy isn't here to read that! ![]() RE: Trump praises Saddam Hussein's efficient killing of 'terrorists,' - Benton - 07-07-2016 (07-07-2016, 01:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I guess that the sentiment that Iraq was better off with Saddam depends entirely on who you are. We simply over-threw him about 13 years too late. Depends on what time you're talking about. The Iran-Iraq War was a pretty horrible time for both those countries. But leading up to the First Gulf War and after, except for the Kurds, it was more a stable place. You didn't have this level of sectarian violence. You didn't have millions of people homeless as terrorists take over or destroy towns. You had political abuses, but not the level of corruption there is now. I've seen estimates that the number of government "employees" grew anywhere from 5-20%... even though many of those aren't people, they're just bank accounts collecting paychecks. |