If an unarmed Saddam is taken out, are we safer?

[mediaman007]

Bush* logic answers yes.

[Inland]

1. Before invasion, no americans dying. After, 70 attacks a day on us

eleven hundred dead, thousands wounded, and an army tied down in Iraq. Compare and contrast.

[mediaman007]

3. One vote for a bad Bush* investment; just like everything else

Bab's boy touches, this too turns to shit.

[Jacobin]

2. When the American puppet government in Iraq is overthrown

which it will be at some point, I suspect that the new dictator or ayatollah who rules Iraq will make us long for the return of Saddam. After all he was a secular dictator, not a suicidal jihadist and he only wanted to retain his power. He did not welcome terrorists and he sold us oil through pipelines which did not get blown up daily.

Removing Saddam is going to go down in the history books as the geopolitical cluster fuck of the century. Historians will be scratching their heads for decads wondering why American (er actually Smirk and the neo-cons) were so goddamned stupid.

[mediaman007]

4. Another vote for the pud as America's biggest loser ever!

edit: spelling

[Radical Activist]

5. If I beat the crap out of a helpless schoolgirl, does it make us safer?

I mean, she could have had the intention to grow up and attack someone someday. In terms of military power, Saddam was like a little school girl compared to the US.

[mediaman007]

6. Ah yes the softer side of the Shrub*; the compassionate conservative