Call me crazy but...put Saddam back in power

[NNguyenMD]

is the only way I see to ending this crisis. This is not the first time I've heard this argument, I've heard it before from a democratic congressman on 60minutes or NPR, but seriously I think its the only sure fire way to deal a blow to Islamofascism going on in Iraq. Saddam is a CRAZY MURDEROUS BASTARD, but he's a secular murderous bastard which brings him closer to being on our side.

Sounds insane, but insane times call for insane measures. You put Saddam back in power with specific conditions to end the insurgency, then you'll be pitting death squads against death squads and whent he fireworks start happening we can finally pull our guys out of there.

[MichiganVote]

1. Crazy

[fordnut]

32. it might be a good idea

[Vexatious Ape]

2. Yes

I've been saying that for a while now. Saddam kept his boot on the neck of Islamo-conservatives for years. (note, I don't call them radicals--they're conservatives.) They where a threat to his power. Now that boot is off.

[Jeroen]

3. You are beyond crazy. You are not serious are you?

[SensibleAmerican]

4. You're crazy

n/t

[BeyondThePale]

5. What about Stalin? or Attilla the Hun?

[poverlay]

26. Definitely Stalin. He was one scary, evil yet intelligent bastard. n/t

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. He'll need to give up his

WMDEEEZ first, then he will pass the smell test.. "OR" he could agree to invade Iran, Syria and that other place... then he will be "Our Boy" once again. Do enjoy this Flash presentation on this particular issue.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/thanks.html

[BeyondThePale]

7. Mussolini would make the trains run on time...

[HysteryDiagnosis]

8. He could bend spacetime?? n/t

[Taxloss]

9. Hell no.

The fact is that ANYONE associated with an agreement with the occupiers - Saddam included - would be tainted in Iraqi eyes, and anyway pandora's box is now open, the civil war isn't going back in. The insurgency is the least of Iraq's worries, it's the civil war that's killing Iraqis.

The sad fat is that even if a bloodthirsty tyrant is the only thing that can pull Iraq bac together, it's got to be one "picked" by the Iraqis, not us.

[NNguyenMD]

13. nice thought, touche

[iconoclastic cat]

10. Call the ambulance! There's been a crash at the corner of Crazy and Silly!

You're a great person and DUer, my friend, but this is one of those threads that should be deleted by the poster.

[NNguyenMD]

16. lol, thanks

I think its a topic worth discussing, even if most people think its insane. But I think most would at least agree with me that it was insane taking him out of power in the first place.

[iconoclastic cat]

30. Yeah, I was hawkish about it at first,

until I saw how the US was just killing civillians by the tens of thousands. We have proven ourselves to be far more deadly to the Iraqi people than Saddam.

[MrSlayer]

11. Exactly what should happen.

They should have never taken him out to begin with. I don't really care how brutal he was, he was the only person able to hold those people in check and he posed zero threat to us. What's going on there now is crazy, putting him back is sane. But you know the Chimp will never do it, he won't even admit the slightest mistake has been made let alone call the entire affair a fiasco.

[NNguyenMD]

12. I agree its nutso but if you think about it, there never were any WMDs.

For years under Clinton we kept a tight lid on Saddam while he kept his foot down on Islamic radicals. Its not a good solution, and I'm no geopolitical expert, but sounds like it would be an effective solution.

[patdem]

14. Crazy is the 'new' sane these days, so I don't know what to call you!

I bet 'some' are sorry he was ever taken OUT of power..but I doubt if that includes the warmongers, war profiteers or the neo cons..maybe those who will lose in the primary or at the polls?

[Tin Man]

15. Too late - the genie is out of the bottle.

I understand your premise, but under the current circumstances, it would be impossible to return Sadam to power - any such attempt would precipitate full-scale civil war.

[seabeyond]

17. no way. yes,...... things were more stable with saddam

in terror. he would have to murder thousands upon thousands to get order,..... what a horrible solution that no one could do in good conscience. the man is bad. he is out. that is good. but what created this mess. this is what happens when one interfers in another nation.


but saddam is NOT the amswer

[Moochy]

18. You so crazy!!!

[clmbohdem]

19. They need to go back to the Ottoman Empire map.

Mass killings by Saddam is not the answer. Iraq should have never been created by the British Empire. We should bring in the UN and break up Iraq into states that look something like the Ottoman Empire map, but everyone shares the "Iraq" oil.

[Exultant Democracy]

29. Now that is a real option with the benefit of being sane n/t

[Cocoa]

20. off-topic, but...

how do you pronounce your name? That's always driven me crazy, it seems to be such a common name, I see it so much in print but I don't know how it's pronounced.

[NNguyenMD]

28. haha no problem, best english pronunciation is simply "Wen"

so "nguyen" = "wen"

[MADem]

21. Bill MAHER, is that you????

MAHER: ... But a connection between Iraq and the people who did that to us? That was the bigger lie, and that‘s the one that Cheney kept pushing. I don‘t have the quotes before me, but I remember they were very carefully crafted, so the beginning of the sentence started out talking about 9-11 and the terrorists, and the end of the sentence was always, and if we could strike them at the very geographical base where they come from. So he conflated the two (events) and the truth is, that if Saddam Hussein, as bad as he is, was in power right now, he would be a bulwark against terrorism, just the way we put rotten dictators in the communist era on the throne, so that they would be bulwarks against communism. Saddam would never have allowed a rival power base like Zarqawi in his country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11366025 /

Click on video link to the right/this may work as well http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=4d3fe9b2-4a63-43b...

[Nite Owl]

22. There's no going back

too much has been unleashed and removing him and the consequences should have been thought of before we went into Iraq. It was obvious that this would happen and this is what PNAC wanted. It really did go from bad to worse but there is no putting back the bad now.

[Cleita]

23. Yes, you are crazy. That wouldn't work at all.

Saddam should be sent to the Hague so he can get a proper trial, not the kangaroo court we have convened, and we need to get out all together. I believe somekind of peacekeeping force needs to be sent in there so the Iraqis can rebuild their country. But, they don't need Saddam and they don't need us.

[ldf]

24. NOTHING will work at this point

the only outcome is a country controlled by shiites, who will take out all their pent up frustrations on the sunni, ensuring continued civil war for the foreseeable future.

in other words, another sharia law-enforcing extreme muslim state.

just EXACTLY what we were out to prevent, with our marching in and spreading of democracy, while being pelted with flowers, reveling in the equivalence of a ticker tape welcoming parade from the "liberated" iraqis.



please note that oil is NOT a part, i repeat, NOT a part of the equation.... as we would so like the world to believe....

[Cleita]

27. You are right, Those are the consequences just like in

Vietnam, when the communists took over after we left, the very thing we were trying to stop then. Yes, there will be Sharia and eventually they will form their own democracy when they get good and fed up with the mullahs. The Iranians are about ready to shake off their extremist overlords if we leave them alone. But if we don't, they will continue to keep those idiots in power.

It's time we work on fixing our problems with our Christian ayatollahs right here at home.

[gulliver]

25. That's crazy. The new Saddam will be some other guy.

The old Saddam is finished.

[mogster]

31. OK: Crazy n/t