They really should of just tortured him like he did to his many victims, should of been long and drawn out. I swear I'm not evil
I`m suprised there hasn`t been an attacks yet. In America I mean. As brutal as he may have- he was really the only one who has been able to control Iraq. I mean...look at it.
Yea that is what I've been saying all along. There was no need to kill him since he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison anyway. Anyway, let's just hope that the country will be able to have its citizens resolve their differences or else what the US has done will all go to waste.
Re: yupp Isn't this too short for a post? Spamming? Don't do this please? I'm a noob too so i'm not sure if it's considered spamming but it looks like it so yeah. And the last post on this was a while before you guys started it again so it's gravedigging so please refrain from doing that....>.>
Well didn't the Iraqis kill Suddam? Why would the attacks be on America? The Americas weren't even near the executing (physically)Oh this is so confusing
micorazonesazul said it very well. Saddam, although a dictator held the country stable though a series of terrible events. So long as you did not wish to challange him you could live a peaceful life. (Please dont make a connection with this and the US/Terror war)
*nods* But he had a sadistic way of dealing with the "unnessacarys" Kinda like Hitler but dont quote me on that.
But my point is, with a stable head of government (Saddam) he was saving in his own way far more then now. A stable, dictatorship government, riddled with corruption and other unplesentries saves and fosters far more lives then a "free" and democratic, unstable one IMO