[Rich]

Whose side are you on over Saddam Hussein, Tony Blair or Donald Trump. I'm 100% for taking out Saddam Hussein and with Tony Blair who has said he would do the same again if he had his time over. I support bringing majority Shia rule to Iraq and ending centuries of domination and tyranny by the Sunni minority. I'm for encouraging civil war between Sunnis and Shia and backing the Shia as they are by far the weaker force. It is also the Sunnis who do virtually every attack within the West. Horrible as the Iranian state and Hezbollah are, they are moderate by the standards of the Taliban, Saudi and the Islamic State. I'm also for the empowerment of the secular Kurdish nationalist movement.

Donald Trump like many, many lefties, as well as disaffected conservatives and fascists argues that Saddam Hussein was brilliant at killing terrorists, by which I presume he means Muslim terrorists. Donald Trump says that although Saddam was a bad man, it was in our interests to leave him to run Iraq.

[Godstud]

It should have been in America's best interests to leave Saddam there. They didn't, however. Bringing it up 13 years after the fact, to somehow further your campaign, is stupidity, however. Trump even mentioning Hussein has caused problems for him.

[QatzelOk]

It should have been in America's best interests to leave Saddam there. They didn't, however. Bringing it up 13 years after the fact, to somehow further your campaign, is stupidity, however. Trump even mentioning Hussein has caused problems for him.

Really?

We're supposed to forget all history only a decade after it happens?

How is this voluntary amnesia supposed to help us in the long run?

Have you already erased this thread idea from your memory banks? Will our ignorance about history help impress employers and make them want to hire us "because dumb?"

[Godstud]

I said in America's best interests, not Iraq's. You need to stop flying off on a rant like a whackjob reactionary, and read what people say, and not try to read more into it, than is there.

[Decky]

[Red_Army]

[Decky]

[Godstud]

[ArtAllm]

Trump is right, of course.
Blair is a corrupt criminal.

Then you have traitors like Merkel who invite the enemy in.

Germany can hardly be called an independent country, Blair and Merkel are very dependent from the globalist elites, and these elites are using migrants as a tool to promote their globalist agenda.
So do not blame the puppets, blame the puppet masters!

[N^G]

Don't particularly like either of them, and couldnt care less regarding Saddam.

But I dislike globalism more than I dislike loud mouths who will say anything for the attention, so I guess in this celebrity deathmatch I'm having to pick Trump.

[The Immortal Goon]

Where do you think Saddam got those wonderful ideas in how to put down terrorists?

Churchill was determined to cut spending by reducing British ground forces to a minimum, yet at the same time maintain British control over these areas. He was persuaded that air power could replace ground troops, through the use of a bombing strategy to keep under control any restive “natives” who might attempt to revolt against British authority or those whom the British put into local power. Several times in the early 1920s, when various tribal groups in Iraq rose up in opposition to the British, the air force was put into action, bombing not only military targets but civilian areas as well. Killing and wounding women and children were considered a way of intimidating the population into submission. This included the use of mustard and other poison gases.

In May 1920 Churchill was a vocal advocate of implementing this bombing strategy, telling a cabinet meeting that poison gas “should be definitely accepted as a weapon of war.” On another occasion in 1919, he said, “I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas . . . I am strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against the uncivilized tribes.” And one other time Churchill argued that “Gas is a more merciful weapon than high explosives and compels an enemy to accept a decision with less loss of life than any other agency of war. The moral effect is also very great. There can be no conceivable reason why it should not be resorted to.”

Securing British control and influence over these areas of the Middle East required the establishment of “friendly” governments under British sponsorship.

Obviously, as a Western puppet using Western tactics to defend a state invented by the West, Saddam represented the kind of monstrosity that the West had to put down.

[layman]

If Saddam was a western aligned then why was all his weapons Russian?

Anyone with the slightest understanding of history knows he was unaligned but lying to make your point is fashionable. Ask either Blair or all the ant-war crusaders. They both play the same game.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Saddam was isolated, not only internationally but also in the region. He was a loose cannon as well. What we could have expected from him in terms of stability is anybody's guess, but the arguments I'm seeing seem to amount to he was ruthless and hence would have kept his country stable. That's quite a weak and lazy argument to say the least.

[noemon]

So you guys are seriously arguing that Iraq is better now than it was under Saddam's Baath party? Right...

[Sirius Star]

The question is whose side are you on, neither one says the answer, just because neither one could nor would they even be able to stop what is coming.

It won't be any easier for all those involved even if Hillary Clinton still goes down with the F.B.I. Director thrown in besides her inside that same opinion.

All those involved inside of I.S.I.S. no matter how small it was already all counted just because God can see all things in the universe: is that expansion.

The F.B.I. Director is just as guilty as all those he and all that real estate was left to get away while he covers for Loretta Lynch has another law to firm.

Donald Trump is no safer for America than Tony Blair ever was that the same sort of conspirators are found inside of it that all of the electives are form.

Be not conformed to the world Jesus said was never even his in the first place just because the Bible reads differently from all that they are presuming.

This is so incredibly important it still equals zero as far as real liberals will go or those falsely called conservative saving all of liberal thoughts for a cane.

There are no elective Presidential candidates left anywhere else save for Vladimir Putin is the only one out of it after it is all finally said it is the Russians.

The four horsemen sent by the apocalyptic stage of just more players went to gather on the hill all they had hoped for but when you are refugees plan.

Just how far away from that White House and the same exact place they make all the laws no one even hopes for or does or who knows it is all defining.

Don't worry about Germany the hykster still says those refugees are wanted okay all of that Bubonic plague is right there in full color now be the pining.