Originally Posted by
TheDogsBollocks
Personally in my honest opinion, he should have carried on what he was doing. He had Iraq under control, he knew how to deal with the situations, he knew how to keep the public controllably. We know this because when he was in power everyone stayed quiet and peaceful, cause they where feared of him.
Now we interupt and we think we can do what we like. Thing is, Bush, Blair also does killing in Iraq, so what makes them different to Sadam>? to keep the peace? but it isnt working and yet killing more lives lol. I dont see the point in it but letting our own people die... Where we could of just let it go past and bother about our economy and so on. Cause end of day, they're far from us :P, and it might bring up terrorist organisations and so on, but the start of even invading Iraq has braught it to more of attention. e.g.
Imagine soldiers from another country being outside your local supermarket, with guns, watching you, searching you and shoudnt even be there. If you make a slight mistake or say something wrong you have the fear of being shot. Your not going to like and rebel against them, and especially with the media whats over there. It isnt like over here with newspapers, it only takes a few people here and there to spread rumours i.e. "you know them guys over there, they are here to prevent us from doing things" etc etc alot worser things though. Blah blah, they should have let him do his stuff, and by hanging him, will make him more famous in the long run and cause more havoc in the Iraq atmosphere lol