Could the Bush admin be getting a new Hussein?

[FreedomAngel82]

Remember in the early 60's how Hussein got to where he was today by the help of the CIA who wanted to over throw the previous government. Someone posted about this on Arianna's online forum and it's an interesting thing to think about. Remember that Hussein was brought in to control Iraq and thus the oil fields. He went against the rules (going to change the money to Euro's) so they had to take him out.

Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2058790,00.html

Snip: < Influential figures close to the US administration have long been emphasising the dire consequences should sectarian divisions escalate into all-out conflict. Andrew Krepinevich, a Pentagon adviser who heads the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a military think tank, warns that if civil war breaks out “the outcome may be that we help the rise of another Saddam Hussein who is ruthless enough to deal with the problem”. >

Snip: < US officials are racing against two clocks: one in Iraq, the other in America. A Gallup poll on Friday showed that fewer than one in three Americans believe their country is winning in Iraq, the lowest figure to date. >

Snip: < In the event of a civil war Americans might “want to wash their hands of Iraq”.
Snip: < “If you put someone in who is extremely powerful at the top, the key is whether that person turns into another Saddam Hussein,” Wilkerson said. “After a year you might see the political apparatus around him disappearing and he’s there for life.” >

Snip: < In its report, the International Crisis Group cautions that Sunni Arab nations, especially Saudi Arabia, would be alarmed by the emergence of an “Iranian-influenced entity in southern Iraq sitting on more than 80% of the country’s oil”.

So would the West. Krepinevich argues it would be better if any future despot were an ally of the Americans rather than the Iranians or Syrians. That, too, could encourage America — despite its hopes for democracy — to seek out a strongman. >

And funny how we never hear the results of these "elections" and weren't they supposed to have more? I think these "elections" are just to make time to stay in Iraq while they continue finding someone to take over.

[Mythsaje]

1. Their ultimate strategy...

get rid of the dictator who'd no longer play the game by our rules and replace him with one who will.

How...nice. :D

[marmar]

4. Exactly....

All that "bringing democracy" bullshit makes me sick. BushCo doesn't give a damn about the oppression Saddam inflicted on the Iraqi people. But they damn well care when a dictator in an oil-rich country stops taking orders from Washington. And they're setting up the same scenario again, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[FreedomAngel82]

7. And whatever happened to the other elections they were to have?

Weren't they supposed to have another election last December or something like that? I thought there were others they were talking about, but funny how you don't hear anymore talk from the "news" anymore about what's going on over there with their "government."

[FreedomAngel82]

6. Seems like it

And now they started talking about Iran after their president started talking about changing money to Euro's.

[TomInTib]

2. Too late, the Shah is dead and the region is too pissed off...

Any obvious ally of the US would not last long.

I truly believe that era is over. The impotence of Karzai in lowly Afghanistan is an example of how poorly this model would work. Hell, he cannot leave Kabul to visit the countryside because of security concerns.

[bryant69]

5. I don't know

They've had reason to not be fond of us for a long time - and they aren't talking about a beloved dictator but more the brutal oppressing one.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[cliss]

8. I think so too.

This is a "formula dictatorship" that's gone on FAR too long. The US has used it, and used it and recycled it all over the world.

We've been doing it for decades.

This is really a bad mistake because

a) Our puppets often turn on us. Then we have to spend millions (in Iraq's case billions) to get rid of the puppet.

b) The people all over the world are beginning to see through this. Look at the Philippines. They could slide into Civil war.

c) It's not an effective way to rule. It's enormously expensive to rig elections, to hand-pick our puppets, set up death squads for the opposition, and try to keep the puppet in power.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

3. Interesting post . . .

:kick: