Politics Are you worried Bush will invade more countries?

[Jamison]

So what should we have done? Allowed him to invade Kuwait? Ignore it till he invaded Saudi, or UAE? The embargo was Hussains fault. It was badly and corruptly adminstered.
That demands on how you measure worse, so they may not get the same maternity benefit. But if they live anywhere except the Sunni Triangle and they happen to be Kurdish or Shia, there is probably less chance of them disappearing to.

[post="1358501"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

I think having violence escalating against them and not being able to get the same rights they were once entitled to is much worse.

 

[noggi16]

So basically you would have preferred to leave Hussain in power, so they have proper maternity rights? And we should have left Saddam to his own devices in Kuwait just so we didn't damage the economy?

 

[Jamison]

So basically you would have preferred to leave Hussain in power, so they have proper maternity rights? And we should have left Saddam to his own devices in Kuwait just so we didn't damage the economy?

[post="1359769"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

You're using this maternity rights thing like crazy...so let's just forget about that, shall we? They also got much better education, voting rights, equalness among the sexes, top positions in Sadaam's offices, and were not scared to leave their houses for fear they'd be killed by insurgents (or targeted by radical clerics). The maternity rights thing is minor, but I pointed it out to show that their position in Iraq was quite high...and in some respects, they did receive better rights than citizens in more developed countries.

I never said that we should've left Saddam to his own devices. But let's not forget that it was Kuwait that started that war, by tapping into Iraqi oil reserves. Does that excuse what Sadaam did? Of course not. But the truth remains that the harshness of the penalties placed on him is what helped to cause the decreased rights that women received.

Conditions are horrible in Iraq right now, and although they had a tyrant as a ruler, there are many Iraqis who wish he was still in power. That way they'd still have electricity, running water, and wouldn't be afraid to leave their houses because of insurgent attacks.

 

[noggi16]

They also got much better education, voting rights, equalness among the sexes, top positions in Sadaam's offices, and were not scared to leave their houses for fear they'd be killed by insurgents (or targeted by radical clerics). The maternity rights thing is minor, but I pointed it out to show that their position in Iraq was quite high...and in some respects, they did receive better rights than citizens in more developed countries.

I never said that we should've left Saddam to his own devices. But let's not forget that it was Kuwait that started that war, by tapping into Iraqi oil reserves. Does that excuse what Sadaam did? Of course not. But the truth remains that the harshness of the penalties placed on him is what helped to cause the decreased rights that women received.

Conditions are horrible in Iraq right now, and although they had a tyrant as a ruler, there are many Iraqis who wish he was still in power. That way they'd still have electricity, running water, and wouldn't be afraid to leave their houses because of insurgent attacks.

So all those things are more important that a free country, a country where all ethnic groups are treated the same?

Are you in Iraq? Did you live in Iraq under Saddam Hussain? How can you possibly assume that you know what it is like or was like?

The fact that he could send some women to BRITISH universities so they could learn how to make anthrax and they'd get maternity pay would make everything else he'd done ok. You make it sound like living under Hussain was a good thing, well Franco and Castro achieved some of the most equal societies in the world, but I wouldn't have wanted to live there. And Hitler got unemployment to its lowest ever in Germany, people got holidays and cars and women were vauled, and Mussolini made the trains run on time? Would you like to live in Germany or Italy in the 1930s?

What you get from the government doesn't make it a good place to live. Libety makes some where a good place to live.

 

[Jamison]

So all those things are more important that a free country, a country where all ethnic groups are treated the same?

Are you in Iraq? Did you live in Iraq under Saddam Hussain? How can you possibly assume that you know what it is like or was like?

The fact that he could send some women to BRITISH universities so they could learn how to make anthrax and they'd get maternity pay would make everything else he'd done ok. You make it sound like living under Hussain was a good thing, well Franco and Castro achieved some of the most equal societies in the world, but I wouldn't have wanted to live there. And Hitler got unemployment to its lowest ever in Germany, people got holidays and cars and women were vauled, and Mussolini made the trains run on time? Would you like to live in Germany or Italy in the 1930s?

What you get from the government doesn't make it a good place to live. Libety makes some where a good place to live.

[post="1360811"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

Right now they don't have equalness.

And you don't live in Iraq, and you didn't live under Saddam Hussein. So I don't think you could assume that it was awful there or that all people hated him, now can you? But I have heard interviews and read articles by people who thought life was better under him. And that's a hard fact to dispute at the very moment, with the way Iraq is. Most people can't leave their houses for fear of being killed, they don't have electricity or running water. Now ultimately, life might be a million times better. But at the moment it certainly is not.

You might not have wanted to live under Castro...but some people do! There are plenty of Cubans (ie Elian Gonzales' father) who love Cuba and want to stay there at all costs. So just because it's not something that you would like to live under, certainly doesn't mean everyone feels the way you do (and you say you don't want to live there because you've lived somewhere else, maybe if you hadn't then your opinion would differ). Of course I wouldn't want to have lived under Hitler in the 1930s, but that's because I've had history and know how horrible Hitler was. Now if I lived in the 1930s and lived in Germany at the time he was in power, I could have a completely different opinion.

And once again your last statement it completely opinion. Some countries might view what you get from the government as bearing that it's a good place to live, and not liberty. There are people who live under dictatorships who are quite happy with life. There were obviously plenty of Iraqis (based on the number of insurgent attacks) who are not happy that we're over there right now.

I will never think this war is a good thing...never. We have caused more harm than good...and daily it seems to be worse.

The whole reason I posted the article was because it's such a misconception that we've 'liberated' the Iraqi women. You hear it on the news all the time...but the point is, that's not at all true.