Carsten “I am not condoning Saddam in any way. But there are reasons for what he did.”

And Ted Bundy was simply misunderstood!

As for the conditions of Iraqi’s. If you look at anywhere which has seen the removal of a despot a backlash of inappropriate, including criminal and violent venting occurs. Part of that is individuals testing their personal opportunities to aspire to be dictator themselves, part of it is the settling of old scores.

That, unfortunately, is human nature. Following a period of excess things do settle down. The speed at which they settle depends on many factors but what is important to understand is the backlash is unavoidable.

If Sadaam were in power today and the USA and UN agreed to remove him tomorrow, the Iraqi’s would still face the same turmoil which they have experienced over the past 4 years or so. The only difference, they would have suffered additional years of horror from the Sadaam Hussien clan.

I note Ceausescu of Romania was similarly dispatched I guess you miss his passing equally?

Maybe we should have prayer vigils for Hitler and Stalin?

Oh as for “(especially with strong US support until ~ 1990).”

I have said it before and will say it again, a common enemy makes for strange bedfellows.

Supporting a bestial dictator is a tactical expediency when faced by Iran, busily fomenting their crazy version of world revolution and USSR (pre 1990), exporting vile communism wherever they can, remember Afghanistan?

Sadaam was playing both sides anyway, that is why he ended up with a soviet airforce and soviet tanks, not that it did him much good.

People who look down their nose at the tactics used to prevail in war and say “oh someone has dirty hands” need to remember that famous George Orwell quote

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”

What was the ‘common enemy’? Iran? I realise there, popular revolt removed the US friendly Shah, much to the displeasure of the US. Even now Iran is a poor country, incapable of exerting any serious influence anywhere – let alone ‘world revolution’. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spouts some (crowd-pleasing) rhetoric now and then, but it is empty – there is no capability. I don't have enough space to argue why the nuclear issue is a non-issue.

With the death of strongman Tito in Yugoslavia, the country descended into civil war and anarchy. It did not settle down – it divided into separate countries. I predict Iraq will go the same way.

Did you read the Tom Paine article a few posts earlier? “...Saddam’s slaughter of tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of Shiites in Southern Iraq following their uprising in 1991. They were answering the repeated public calls for rebellion by President George H.W. Bush. They didn’t realize Bush and James Baker didn’t really mean it. When it looked as it the insurgents might actually succeed, the American president turned his back. The White House and its allies wanted Saddam replaced not by a popular revolt which they couldn’t control, but by a military leader, more amenable to U.S. interests. So, as the United States permitted Saddam’s attack helicopters to decimate the rebels, American troops just a few kilometers away from the slaughter were ordered to destroy huge stocks of captured weapons rather than let them fall into rebel hands. How enlightening it would have been to hear Saddam recount his ...that President Bush père was actually going to help him stay in power.”

Saddam could easily have been deposed a decade ago. Just not the way the US wanted (ie the stable democracy they have now), but something less certain.

also

The US knew of the Kurdish attacks, after the Iraq-Iran war had ended, and continued to support ‘bestial dictator’ Saddam. Why? Read the article.

If you give someone a gun, watch him shoot someone (non-strategic Kurds) with it, and then hand him more bullets – have you no culpability?

carsten
"If you give someone a gun, watch him shoot someone (non-strategic Kurds) with it, and then hand him more bullets – have you no culpability?"

How about the Islamic States lending Saddam 75Billion to fight the Iranians.

The majority of Saddam's Iraqi Army was fitted out by the Russians.

# Main battle tanks

* T-72: (2003: 700; 1990: 1000)(Russian)
* T-62: (2003: 500; 1990: 1500)(Russian)
* T-54/T-55: (2003: 500; 1990: 1500)(Russian)
* Type 59/Type 69: (2003: 500; 1990: 1500)(Russian)
* Chieftain: (1990: 30) (British)
* M47 Patton/M60: (1990: 20)(American)*

# Tactical ballistic missiles

* FROG-7: (1990: 50)(Russian)
* Scud-B: (1990: 36; 2003: 27)(Russian)
* Scud launch vehicles: (2003: 6)(Russian)
* Abbas (Iraqi)
* Husseyn (Iraqi)

# Attack helicopters

* MBB Bo 105: (1990: 56)(German)
* Mil Mi-24 Hind: (1990: 40)(Russian)
* SA 316 Alouette III: (1990: 30)(French)
* SA 321 Super Frelon: (1990: 13)(French)
* SA 342 Gazelle: (1990: 50)(French)

# Anti-tank missiles

* AT-3 Sagger(Russian)
* AT-4 Spigot (Russian)
* HOT ATGM (France/Germany)
* Milan ATGM (French)
* SS.11 (Russian)

And the Iraqi Infantry rifle was the Kalashnikov AK-47

American AR-15 bullets would be useless in a AK-47
5.56(.223) vs. 7.62(.308)
I don't think the M-60 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge is interchangeable with the AK-47 either. Gotta use Russian Bullets or Chinese maybe.

Carsten “Even now Iran is a poor country, incapable of exerting any serious influence anywhere”

When the Shar was deposed and exiled Iran had significant Oil wealth. The state it is in today is not representative of where it was but is testament to the incompetence of theocracies.

I thank aqvarivs for clarifying the weaponry sources acquired by Sadaam.

I would point out Bush Senior wanted UN support to depose Sadaam before he did it. That is why the US forces stopped after destroying the Military machine and did not proceed to Bagdad. So before you blame US for everything,I suggest you cite UN as complicit by insisting on everyone doing nothing. Nothing new there, just ask the Tutsi in Rwanda or I guess you blame that on US too.

Once again, your views are seen to be lacking substance as well as reason.

I never understand some folk who go on a hell bent rampage to discredit the western allies management of the post WWII years as if all they had to do was sit back and arrange the doilies for tea. You fail to realize, had it not been for USA, ANZUS Alliance, NATO and a few other organisations your lifestyle would, likely, not include access to the internet.

Living in a democracy, where freedom of speech is taken for granted, I would guess you, like me, have a lot to thank those “rough men” (my previous post) who developed tactics and strategy and the politicians who defined policy, all on our behalf, for. However, from your posts, I would surmise, they would have nothing to thank you for.

re:

"Britain and the United States offered assurances and continued to do business with German companies like Gerber and Siemens(and several others I can not remember off hand)during WWII while they were under the thumb of Hitler and the Nazi's. Lets blame the Americans for the Jewish holocaust."

Seriously misses the point of my post. The trial and speedy execution by hanging of SH is very convenient to the current US Administration and cabinet.

If Aqvarivs wants to carry an argument to its logical absurdity and blame "The Americans" for the Holocaust, do it! Run with the ball! Maybe a class action suit can be won!

IBM helped Hitler with logistics for his blitzkriegs and death camps, Hercules Powder trained technicians from both Germany and Russia between WWI and WWII. Ford set up assembly lines in both Germany and Russia in the same period, as did General Motors. After WWII, General Motors tried to get compensation for the bomb damage done to their German factories!

GM blamed "the Americans", and tried to get American taxpayers to pay for the gamble they lost.

Gross generalities like "Blame the Americans" clumsily sidestep what Blind Freddy can see: SH was given a show trial and execution by a kangaroo court. The current US administration believes that justice has been done by a court they repeated ly interfered in, in a country they propped up with a constitution they lobbied hard for.

Is the current US executive and cabinet representative of "The Americans"? Only Bush and Cheney were voted in. The rest are political appointments by (in my opinion) the worst US Executive branch of all time. You might follow the Ehren Watada Court Martial, to learn why a US soldier currently refuses to go back to Iraq.

In someone's "better" world, SH might be hanged and resuscitated repeatedly, 30 or 40,000 times (if possible), once for each person whose murder left blood on his hands. All with room for the final dramatic, public gesture.

But gloating and hand-wringing and justifying have nothing to do with a fair trial by a properly constituted authority.

Sir Vivor

The Iraqi Government, their law and their courts system constitute proper authority. That's really the end of the story. If you want to believe that the Iraqi government and it's leadership is so lacking in fortitude that they can't manage with out the BIG USA so be it.
However, I think you do the Iraqi people a disservice.
The Boogers dead, long live freedom! Long live Democracy. PARRTAAYYY!

Check back in twenty or thirty years. If Iraq is a thriving democracy the world will be a better place and thank you America and the Coalition Forces. If not and all has been reverted to tribal chaos.
Hell, blame the Americans. That will teach them to stay home until we call them to solve the problems we decide. Heh, heh, heh.