When will we protect the lives of the Iraqi people.
Should we give Iraq back to Saddam Hussein?

You'd like that, wouldn't you, Roy?

So you think giving Iraq back to Saddam Hussein would be good for the Iraqi people do you how do you figure that?

lol i almost dont know what to say to that....expect saddam really really loved his citizens..... loved em enough to test his new mustard(or some kinda nerve) gas he just bought from america

Because Saddam was such a great leader.

Pick any three normal years he was leader (besides the years he gassed the kurds, etc.), and compare them to the three years we've been there. More than likely, you will find there were less deaths.

It wasn't our job to get rid of him. It was the Iraqi people's job.

Death counts werent to high as they are now but.
Saddams soilders used to go round raping people, Hitting them, Unofficial deaths.

And this comes from one of my friends that used to live in Baghdad until he moved to escape the war...
No, Saddam should never have that back, He should face death, Right now, and a painful one at that, hmm maybelock him in a room with slow release Naypalm.

The People are not going to over power the army, In any country, and place, And time, So, It was their job, but they couldnt do it alone.
Alot differnt could be done though, Save both soilder lifes and public lifes

Hmmm, And just a little thing about your site on that "Fuck the troops", The soilders dont have choice to goto iraq, they join the army, Stationed in lots of places, and have to stay there unless theres an urgent reason for them to leave, If a soilder tells the Gov to fuck themselfs, That has reprucusions on both their's and there family lifes, Even resulting to death in some cases from treson....

The only reason they won't stop listening to the government is that the gov't pays them. Other than that, the military could easily fight off the government. The military has bombers, tanks, and all that other happy crap.

Most of the recruits are lulled into joining the army by the promise of a free education. I actually agreed with John Kerry's remark, although he's still a flipflopping douchebag in the long run.

Kerry was talking about the President, and it's quite obvious once you read his comments previous to his infamous line. He blundered a joke, and it was taken out of context although he's to blame for saying it the way he did. I never ever liked Kerry, but it's entirely unfair to snatch that line out of context and say he's degrading the US soldiers - considering he was a soldier and he fought in Vietnam.

Last, this is just a distraction. Who gives a shit what Kerry said, even if he did mean to degrade the soldiers? He's not running for office. Anyone who buys into this is being used by Republicans. They obviously don't want to talk about real issues.

Saddam will not back Islamists (qa'adh)Incomes Iraq with the American forces

Wasn't it al-Quada and Shi'a Muslims that hated Saddam in the first place?...

Undoubtedly, the al-Quada and Shi'a both hated some (enmity between them) and the Shiites sympathetic to the Americans

So, instead of taking a few steps forward, we should take 10,000 backwards.

Saddam was a butcher and removing him from power is one of the few things we have done right.

Yeah, because it's not up to the people actually being persecuted to have the balls to fight back.

I hate to be so negative, but that may not prove to be true in the long-term. In all honesty, I'm convinced Iraq will develop as a twin-state to Iran, depending on the longevity of their regime. It's a cycle with regime change; you get rid of a bastard leader, only to be replaced by an even worse change. Years from now, after Iraqis are subjected to a strict Shi'a Muslim rule, I can imagine some saying "... at least Saddam was secular." Hopefully not, though.

As an example, it's like the Russian Revolution: "The Czar is gone! Power to the people! Down with aristocracy!... Oh shit, now we're screwed with Communism for seventy years!"

AJ.. I hate to disagree with you but the persecuted are often so put down and forced into feeling less than they are marignalised by the society within which they have to live thay have not the will nor the ability to fight back all the time. liekthe child continually distances and dumbed down by its parents.. verbally abused and told its worthless... looses often the will to fight back.. or women in violent relationships. verbal abuse can make you so unwilling to fight back bring you so far down its hard for those on the outside to see why women don't stand and fight back or take those men back .. its for the same reasons.. just on a far smaller scale than a whole race or tribe,
perhaps enpowering the people would have been a better way to go.. but you can never go back and change things

Sounds alot like here.

JJ...Mustard Gas is easy to manufacture...it was first used in WW1...and it caused quite a few deaths in WW2 (close to 1,000)....nerve gases were first produced by the germans during WW2...its likely iraq got their chemical weapons capabilities from the Soviets as they did their tanks, aircraft, guns (the AK-47) and their artillery.....he also used chemical weapons during the iran iraq war in the mid 1980s.

Castle, it's a well-established fact that the US sold/gave Hussein weapons and biological weapons because he was an ally and more importantly, he was occupied fighting Iran. It's also well-known that Iran and the USSR/Russia are aligned, which means it's far more likely they've been receiving military technology and sales through Russia.

kiku...then why during Desert Storm were we fighting against Soviet military equipment?...Such as Soviet Aircraft...tanks and weaponry?