Better off under Saddam

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
March 31, 2006

An Inventory

Better Off Under Saddam

By GARY LEUPP

Saddam Hussein is bad man. As a 22 year old he worked with the CIA on a botched effort to assassinate Iraqi President Abd al-Karim Qasim. The CIA and Egyptian intelligence got him out of Iraq and to Lebanon, where the CIA paid for his Beirut apartment, and then to Cairo. In 1963, under the new government headed by President 'Abd as-Salam 'Arif, he was placed in charge of the interrogation, torture and execution of communists whose names the CIA happily provided the new regime. He rose in the Baathist party ranks, and although jailed between 1964 and 1966, grabbed power in 1979. The Reagan administration cozied up to him after he attacked Iran; Donald Rumsfeld met with him twice and provided his regime with invaluable intelligence abetting his aggressive war on Iran in the '80s, which took a million lives. A bad man and bad regime. The propaganda of the occupiers requires that we believe things have improved since his fall. But the evidence suggests otherwise.

Women were better off under bad Saddam, one-time U.S. ally.
According to Houzan Mahmoud from the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, "Under the previous dictator[ial] regime, the basic rights for women were enshrined in the constitution. Women could go out to work, university, and get married or divorced in civil courts. But at the moment women have lost almost all their rights and are being pushed back into the corner of their house."

Islamists are imposing the traditional Islamic dress code on women, and the general climate of lawlessness causes many women to adopt it for self-protection. "Dalal Jabbar, 19, a resident of Sadr City, a poor Shiite Muslim neighborhood in Baghdad, said Iraqi women are more afraid today than ever before. 'There is no law to rule the country,' she said. 'I see the scarves as the best way to protect ourselves in Iraq now. When I walk in the street, I know I'll have no trouble, because men prefer to look at others without a scarf, more than me.'"

Christians were better off under bad Saddam, one-time U.S. ally. According to Simon Calwell of The Times, "in the Shia-dominated south of the country[a]ll women, including Christians---who under Saddam could wear the latest fashions and make-up, and go to work---are under pressure to wear the hijab." Churches have been bombed by Islamists, priests have been abducted for ransom, liquor shops owned by Christians have been targeted.

Baathist Iraq was a basically secular state. The current Iraqi constitution composed under occupation declares, "Islam is the official religion of the state," "a source of legislation," and "No law that contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam" may be enacted. Thousands of families have fled across the border to secular, Baathist Syria---another country targeted by the U.S. for regime change.

Gays were better off under bad Saddam, one-time U.S. ally. According to Ali Hili, a gay Iraqi man recently interviewed by Amy Goodman on MPR's Democracy Now! Program, "Iraq, at the time of Saddam, was---I mean, I'm talking about as a gay Iraqi---it was not as bad as we can see now... There [were] no homophobic attitudes toward gay and lesbians. Most of them[were] welcomed in the community and the society It's a very dark age for gays and lesbians and transsexuals and bisexuals in Iraq right now. And the fact that Iraq has been shifted from a secular state into a religious state was completely, completely horrific. We were very modern. We were very, very Western culturalized -- Iraq -- comparing to the rest of the Middle East. Why it's been shifted to this Islamic dark ages country? [Saddam was] the worst thing that ever happened to Iraq, maybe, until we saw these religious mullahs who were brought to the government to lead this country. We were much better off in the Saddam time, although he [was] a tyrant."

Intellectuals were better off under bad Saddam, one-time U.S. ally. The Times Higher Education Supplement noted in September 2004 "a widespread feeling among the Iraqi academics that they are witnessing a deliberate attempt to destroy intellectual life in Iraq." According to the Monitoring Net for Human Rights in Iraq, over 1,000 Iraqi academics and scientists had been shot to death between the beginning of the U.S.-led invasion and late 2005.

According to Dr. Saad Jawad, a prominent political scientist at Baghdad University, " because of the chaos, the systematized assassinations of Iraqi intellectuals have gone largely unnoticed in the outside world. Iraq is being drained of its most able thinkers, thus an important component to any true Iraqi independence is being eliminated."

People in general were better off under bad Saddam, one-time U.S. ally.
According to John Pace, former director of the human rights office of the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, "Under Saddam, if you agreed to forgo your basic right to freedom of expression and thought, you were physically more or less OK. But now, no. Here, you have a primitive, chaotic situation where anybody can do anything they want to anyone." Under Saddam the scale of abuse was "daunting," but now, "It extends over a much wider section of the population than it did under Saddam."

I doubt it was the intention of the Bush administration, once it decided to conquer Iraq and humiliate its former ally, to empower the religious fundamentalists who've launched their reign of terror on all these communities. But the administration does include some extreme Islamophobes who may delight in the general chaos they've inflicted on a mostly Muslim society, and who may see in the worsening situation a launch pad for more chaos in Iran. All this Islamic badness in Iraq, they'll say, is encouraged by next door Iran. Things will only improve, "democracy" will only prevail, when Iran too enjoys a violent encounter with American goodness. As the bloody "creative chaos" they've unleashed in Iraq and Afghanistan spreads, they'll depict it as the necessary cure for religious fanaticism---the very fundamentalist fanaticism which secular Baathism was designed from its inception to prevent, but which in its fundamentalist Christian variety (as manipulated by secularist neocons) helps drive Bush's apocalyptic provocation of the Islamic world.

Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial Crusades.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
darkbeaver said:
According to John Pace, former director of the human rights office of the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, "Under Saddam, if you agreed to forgo your basic right to freedom of expression and thought, you were physically more or less OK. But now, no. Here, you have a primitive, chaotic situation where anybody can do anything they want to anyone."

That one was a doozy. But I digress.

Life was better under Saddam, unless of course you were a prostitute, in which case your punishment would be beheading.

Life was better under Saddam, unless of course you were a relative, in which case you dissapeared.

Life was better under Saddam, unless of course you were one of 13 million Shi'a Muslims, which faced severe restrictions on their religious practice, including a ban on communal Friday prayer, and restriction on funeral processions.

Life was better under Saddam, unless you were part of the 1991 uprising and you were amongst the 250,000 dead.

Life was better under Saddam, unless you were a Kurd, in which case you get rained on with chemical weapons.

Life was better under Saddam, unless of course you happen to fall under Saddam's 988 campaign of terror against the Kurds that killed at least 50,000.

Life was better under Saddam, I suggest we ship all the fringe left elements that make me want to puke by even advocating such an idea, to a deserted island, they can have Saddam as their King.

Then everybody is happy.
 

cortez

Council Member
Feb 22, 2006
1,260
0
36
in all fairness
life in iraq sucked under saddam
but -- it sucks now-- it sucks as bad -- but in a different way
so why bother killing 100,000 people just to change the way of the sucking but not the badness of the suck

--sorry if that was a little too academic
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Yes Cortez, life sucks right now in Iraq. But the Iraqi's have one thing they never dreamed of under Saddam.....hope for the future.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
RE: Better off under Sadd

Life under Bush sucks even for Americans, what did Saddam
ever do to American's to make you hate him ITN what, oh ya the oil deals, oh that must have hurt you deeply, will you ever get over the scars Saddam has placed on you. I hope you feel better now, having murdered 750.000 Iraqi's is the pain starting to ease a little are you able to sleep the night through yet.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Saddam = A Socialists' hero.

Bush = A Socialists' nemesis.

YAY for Bush on that one.

Get it through your head Darkbeaver, Socialism is a disease, and the US is the cure. You'll just have to deal with in your lifetime.
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
If one was so insane as to think Iraq was better under Saddam then they would have no problem thinking Canada would have been better under Hitler.
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
Western civilization would not survive without Bush.
They'd have Dhimitude.
 

cortez

Council Member
Feb 22, 2006
1,260
0
36
I think not said:
Saddam = A Socialists' hero.

Bush = A Socialists' nemesis.

YAY for Bush on that one.

Get it through your head Darkbeaver, Socialism is a disease, and the US is the cure. You'll just have to deal with in your lifetime.

socialism is a disease.....
the us is the cure

canada is not diseased
sweden is not diseased
finland is not diseased
denmark is not diseased
norway is not diseased
france is not diseased
spain is not diseased
cuba is not diseased in its noble aspirations
chile is not diseased in its noble aspirations
brazil is not diseased in its noble aspirations
argentina is not diseased in its noble aspirations
nicaragua was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists
gautemala was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists
el salvador was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists
vietnam was not diseased when they fought the american fascists
people struggling all over the world including in the USA for basic human rights and decend rather than grossly exploitative wages and working conditions arent diseased
there may be set backs
but rest assured --- socialism will never be defeated
because socialism is a kin to a natural law--
you cant break the law-- only break yerself against it
 

cortez

Council Member
Feb 22, 2006
1,260
0
36
I think not said:
Yes Cortez, life sucks right now in Iraq. But the Iraqi's have one thing they never dreamed of under Saddam.....hope for the future.

you are delusional
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
We know the ills of NOW.

Do we know the ills of THEN ?

Under Saddam, no family member could trust another
family member. If a brother heard a nephew say the
wrong thing, he could capitalize on it by bringing
himself money and favor by turning his own nephew.

That's called incentive.

And thus for almost 40 years existed a psychotic
nation of liars and traitors, a society most liberals
could not even fathom, because these lies and
betrayals went deeper and personal beyond what
you see in our own societies.

The lies and betrayals of our society don't risk our
own immediate death, but theirs did, on a scale
much more epic than you can find in your own
neighborhood.

That's why you are witnessing REVENGE in Iraq.

They remember.

You don't.

Because you're a creature of HEADLINES.

That society was closed, far more than the one you
live in.

So... no headlines, no knowlege.

Remember the MINDERS, the ones who walked along
any foreigner visiting Iraq ?

Almost a million made money by this occupation
in Iraq.

Ah, but it wasn't headlined day after day, and what
are our opinions the stuff of ?

Repetitive headlines.

We're poor choices to supersede our own leaders.
 

cortez

Council Member
Feb 22, 2006
1,260
0
36
Re: RE: Better off under Saddam

jimmoyer said:
We know the ills of NOW.

Do we know the ills of THEN ?

Under Saddam, no family member could trust another
family member. If a brother heard a nephew say the
wrong thing, he could capitalize on it by bringing
himself money and favor by turning his own nephew.

That's called incentive.

And thus for almost 40 years existed a psychotic
nation of liars and traitors, a society most liberals
could not even fathom, because these lies and
betrayals went deeper and personal beyond what
you see in our own societies.

The lies and betrayals of our society don't risk our
own immediate death, but theirs did, on a scale
much more epic than you can find in your own
neighborhood.

That's why you are witnessing REVENGE in Iraq.

They remember.

You don't.

Because you're a creature of HEADLINES.

That society was closed, far more than the one you
live in.

So... no headlines, no knowlege.

Remember the MINDERS, the ones who walked along
any foreigner visiting Iraq ?

Almost a million made money by this occupation
in Iraq.

Ah, but it wasn't headlined day after day, and what
are our opinions the stuff of ?

Repetitive headlines.

We're poor choices to supersede our own leaders.

none of that has substantially changed
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
cortez said:
canada is not diseased

The CBC and your "universal" health care doesn't make Canada Socialist.
cortez said:
sweden is not diseased

Sweden has free market

cortez said:
finland is not diseased

Ditto

cortez said:
denmark is not diseased

Ditto

cortez said:
norway is not diseased

Ditto

cortez said:
france is not diseased

Yes it is.

cortez said:
spain is not diseased

Socialists just came to power after the right wingers took the country an economic wreck to an economy challenging Canada.

cortez said:
cuba is not diseased in its noble aspirations

Castro doesn't have noble aspirations.

cortez said:
chile is not diseased in its noble aspirations

Free market baby.

cortez said:
brazil is not diseased in its noble aspirations

Ditto

cortez said:
argentina is not diseased in its noble aspirations

cortez said:
nicaragua was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists

Yes it was, Noriega was a bad bad man, we took care of his ass, like I said, we're the cure.

cortez said:
gautemala was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists

Ya they, were, they're fixed.

cortez said:
el salvador was not diseased when it fought the american backed fascists

cortez said:
vietnam was not diseased when they fought the american fascists

Yes they where, too bad we lost that one.

cortez said:
people struggling all over the world including in the USA for basic human rights and decend rather than grossly exploitative wages and working conditions arent diseased there may be set backs

Socialism doesn't have basic human rights, it's an oxymoron.

cortez said:
but rest assured --- socialism will never be defeated because socialism is a kin to a natural law--
you cant break the law-- only break yerself against it

Socialism directly contradicts human nature.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Cortez would rather delay history.

What you see now is what you would have seen 10 years
later with Saddam dying a peaceful death as his two
sons fought for power, and in that vacuum, would have
opened the day you see now between the Kurds, the
Sunni and Shia.

Just as with Tito keeping a hold on Yugoslavia, no
Strong Man ever denied their ethnic and religious
groups their day for settlement.

For as soon as they died, or get removed you see
what you see now in both former Yugoslavia and
former Saddam's Iraq.