Why Didn't Iraq Just Take Care Of Themselves?

[Kramer 0]

Don't read this...I don't know what I'm talkin about.
---------------
I just ate dinner with a friend, and we had one of those "what if" kinda conversations where we ponder the meaning of life, etc...

I came up with the following question during all this:

If the Iraqi people were being murdered and tortured by Saddam Hussein, why didn't they just kick him out of office? I know that sounds simple, but go with me here.

Say somehow George Bush gained control of this country. The Constitution went out the window, and he became our dictator. Would we just sit back and wait for Britain or someone else to come save our asses by getting George out of power? I know I wouldn't. If I didn't want him in power, I would do everything I could do to get him out, even if it meant giving up my life.

That's what I don't get. If the Iraqi people really wanted Saddam out of power, then why didn't they just do it instead of waiting on us to come to their rescue? Kinda seems like a weak nationality of people to me.

I dunno...maybe I'm just rambling here and missing a very key variable that would answer my question.

Oh, another thing: Why on Earth did we decide that Saddam should be taken out of power? Who the hell do we think we are? I know I'm hinting at the Isolationist Theory here...but I think it's a damn good question. Americans are no better human beings than Iraqis are...what the fuck were we doing just marching over there and changing their shit around? Sometimes I'm not 'proud' to be an American...I guess this is one of those times. I'm sure soon I'll stop thinking so clearly, and just go back to blindly following American Patriotism.

The FAKE KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER!!!!!!!!!

[quade 4]

Quote

That's what I don't get. If the Iraqi people really wanted Saddam out of power, then why didn't they just do it instead of waiting on us to come to their rescue? Kinda seems like a weak nationality of people to me.

Really?

Seems to me like he had superior firepower at his disposal.

You posed a question about revolution in the US. Do you really think that's possible any more? If all the NRA members in the country marched on D.C. and tried to take it over, do you think they'd stand a chance of living to see another sunrise?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,111]

>I know I wouldn't. If I didn't want him in power, I would do everything
>I could do to get him out, even if it meant giving up my life.

I really don't think that's true for most people. If it was clear that if you resisted, your wife and children would be tortured, raped and killed? And if you didn't resist, you'd be treated pretty reasonably? I think most people just want to live their lives without outside interference. The old man in Catch-22 really is pretty representative.

> If the Iraqi people really wanted Saddam out of power, then why
> didn't they just do it instead of waiting on us to come to their rescue?

If you read up on the life of Hussein, one thing that becomes apparent is that he was a master at avoiding assassination. During six months in 1981 there were five assassination attempts. In retaliation Hussein executed 212 officers and troops; the attempts had come from the military. He had top members of his Baathist party execute other members of the party, thus making it clear what the penalty for disloyalty was.

>Why on Earth did we decide that Saddam should be taken out
>of power? Who the hell do we think we are?

Read Pollack's book - "The gathering storm - the case for war with Iraq." It lays out most of the reasons, primarily that he was a very destabilizing influcence in the Middle East, and that the other methods (containment etc) weren't working.

[damion75 0]

To answer your first question, I dont think I am breaking any new ground by saying 'Fear'. It is not that they are a weak people (these are the Babylonians who conquered the ancient world when we were living in caves!) but that they knew the consequences of going against him.

He owned the people at the top of the military, police etc, and they knew that if he fell from power the people would tear them apart too. So it was in the interests of the military to keep him there. Add to that the internal security, and the encouragement to spy on your friends and report on anti-Saddam activity and it becomes very difficult / suicidal to organise anything against the man. Add brainwashing in schools and you can see it is a slippery slope.

How did he get into that position in the first place? When he first came to power he was able to make himself out as the perfect Arab Knight, the man who overthrew the generals who had carried out a military coup. Actually this was never really true (he was a street fighter) but he was able to carry it off for long enough that it was too late to do anything about him. He tried to portray that image til the end.

As for your second question... that has been thrashed to death in lots of other threads!

***************

Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

You posed a question about revolution in the US. Do you really think that's possible any more? If all the NRA members in the country marched on D.C. and tried to take it over, do you think they'd stand a chance of living to see another sunrise?

Nope, if they tried taking DC, the National Guard, at least, would be called in to stop them, probably with massive community support. However, you changed his scenario from GWB going dictatorial to one of NRA members initiating action.

If it really came to revolution, why are you so convinced every soldier would stay in US service? History goes against that presumption (US Civil War).

Also, there are 4 million NRA members. How many active members do you think the IRA had in Belfast during the hot times in the 80s? I bet it was less than 4 million. How many active insurgents do you think there are in a given Iraqi city?



Kramer - there is a difference between Isolationism and Non-Interventionism. I believe strongly in the latter. You might want to read A Republic, not an Empire. Good book.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[quade 4]

I guess my point was (remains) that violent revolution is, for the most part, passe. Insurgency and terrorism still thrives, but true revolution by violent means is NOT something that is likely to happen again in our lifetimes. Any government can easily have the resources to over power their own people and dictators don't really give a rat's ass about being popular so . . . they can (and unfortunately do) just kill off their own citizens -- and the people will let them because they -know- they'd be next in line.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,111]

>Also, there are 4 million NRA members. How many active members
> do you think the IRA had in Belfast during the hot times in the 80s?

Well, but the term "NRA members" does not equate to "people willing to die to take down the government of the US." If the aforementioned event happened, you'd have most of the NRA supporting the new government.

Keep in mind that if this were to come to pass, the president wouldn't appoint himself "Grand Tyrant" or something and kill a bunch of babies on TV. He'd temporarily suspend meetings of both houses of government in response to a terrorist attack (hey, we can't have all the leaders of government in one place with the proven threat of terrorism!) And all his speeches would emphasize a temporary state of affairs, where martial law would be declared just until the terrorist threat to the citizens of the US was neutralized. And the US military would be engaged in "stopping terrorism" in the towns and cities of the US. We would have a new Joe McCarthy to prosecute suspected terrorists, a news media with temporary, minor government control to prevent the spread of terrorist messages in the latest Bin Laden tape.

We already have the hooks in place to completely control the Internet and telephone services; we even have computers that can monitor phone conversations for trigger words and record them. All in the name of stopping terror, of course.

Play this scenario out for a year or so, play the terror card for all its worth (perhaps even with some staged foiled attempts to detonate nukes in major cities) and you'd have 90% of the US supporting the new dictator. Fear is a powerful motivator. Heck, you'd have NRA members volunteering to go on "anti-terrorism" patrols in local towns and cities. And if a group of people rose up against a tyrannical government? Well, we know what to do with terrorists. They just disappear into Gitmo or the equivalent.

Check out the movie "Brazil" if you ever get a chance. It's set in a world where there is an eternal state of martial law in response to a vauge and illusory terrorist threat. The language in that movie is eerily reminiscent of some of the more vociferous "anti-terrorist" advocates today.

[lawrocket 3]

It's weird, because a Jeffersonian viewpoint would support revolution and armed overthrow every now and then. He sounds like one of those militia members from the 90's.

"As revolutionary instruments (when nothing but revolution will cure the evils of the State) [secret societies] are necessary and indispensable, and the right to use them is inalienable by the people." --Thomas Jefferson to William Duane, 1803. FE 8:256

"We are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a feather-bed." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1790. ME 8:13

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[FallRate 0]

Taking complete control of the country would be easy: Free Universal Home Delivery of Yoo-Hoo. I'd cave...that is one tasty beverage!

FallRate

[mikkey 0]

Quote

If the Iraqi people were being murdered and tortured by Saddam Hussein, why didn't they just kick him out of office? I know that sounds simple, but go with me here.

Saddam had learned from Stalin. The internal security apparatus was brutal and efficient. Everybody was spying on everybody. SH was absolutely ruthless and murdered anyone who was getting too powerful and was not blood or tribal related to him. That was how he ensured no one would threaten him and there was nobody any opposition could rally around. He even murdered his own son in laws when they dared to oppose him.

There is a chilling black and white video tape that shows the first party meeting in the 70's after Saddam came to power. He calls the name of every power broker in the party who could threaten him and accuses him of treason. They are then marched out of the meeting room and shot. Very Stalin like.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[Gawain 0]

Fear is a powerful tool. On the Discovery Channel right now is a documentary "The Real Saddam". He built his foundation of power before he ever took total control in 1979.

Once the Baathist took final control (1968?), he grew his power through maintaining secret, brutal "spying" over all the interior ministries, while building schools, and selling oil to the US during the OPEC embargo in the early 70s, giving him money to be the "benevolent despot". Everyone loved the free health care etc.

Once he took power, he had hundreds of government officials killed to thwart "conspiracies". There had been public hangings to consolidate power and fear. Consider also that by the time the US went in, there were at least two full generations who only knew a world of Saddam, didn't know to recognize what others characterized as fear.

There's no doubt that many in Iraq wanted Hussein gone, but the way to do it...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[quade 4]

Yeah, but ya gotta remember that Jefferson lived in a -much- simpler time. Weapons were less effective and basically all the weapons were of approximately the same effectiveness. So, the more people you brought to the battle, the better your odds were of winning. Generally speaking, governments were small and the population was large by comparison.

This is not the case today. The government has a wider range of and far more powerful weapon than the citizenry and so even if the government forces were out numbered, they -can- still "win" by a large margin.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Ron 10]

Quote

Yeah, but ya gotta remember that Jefferson lived in a -much- simpler time. Weapons were less effective and basically all the weapons were of approximately the same effectiveness. So, the more people you brought to the battle, the better your odds were of winning. Generally speaking, governments were small and the population was large by comparison.

Any revolution performed today would not be one of pure fighting. It would be political, and it would be one where media spin would be the most powerful tool.

A bunch of folks could not walk on DC with weapons with this economy....Now have a few nukes go off in the US, and the economy fall into the toilet and you never know what could happen.

Many revolutions were atsrted by people IN the military. So if given the choice between following a popular General, or an unpopular President....Who knows? And lets not forget peoples desire to follow others.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[feuergnom 29]

obviously you are very young. obviously you are white. obviously you live in a country, that has (at least for white people) no traditin in putting others to concentration camps & all the other crap. praise yourself a very lucky man.

i live in europe. my grandfather went to prison 'cause he was against the nazis. he was beat up several times. still he didn't tell his secrets, 'cause he didn't want his friends to suffer the same as he did. luckily he wasn't tranfered to a concentration camp & he survived

all my life i've been wondering, if i had the same guts as he had way back then.... still i'm not sure how i would act if i were to walk in his shoes

if they don't get hold of you, they will find your family, torture your loved ones just to break you....

think about & consider this before you judge the average iraki who was trying to survive and who didn't try to overthrow sadam

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[Casurf1978 0]

That was a scary and very interesting tape. It was the Iraqi congress and you see SH calling people out and his guards taking them away. Half way through this tape you start seeing people change and denounce the ones who were being led away. At first they were in shock. You also see people praising SH and giving him their loyalty towards then end. SH was very good at employing Stalinist and Nazi tactics. There is no doubt that he was an evil SOB, but an extremly smart evil SOB.

[sdgregory 0]

Quote

Taking complete control of the country would be easy: Free Universal Home Delivery of Yoo-Hoo. I'd cave...that is one tasty beverage!

FallRate

Oh man I would probably give up every one of my freedoms for the chocolate banana flavor.

[Kennedy 0]

That whole scenario sounds like you just watched Star Wars...



I see the difficulties, but I still wonder. The biggest problem would be TV. I wonder if papers would be shut down for no toe-ing the Government line. Eh, we can play this game all night. Maybe we can over a few rounds.

ps - thanks for the tip, I'll look into 'Brazil' and see if I can find a copy.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[billvon 3,111]

>I wonder if papers would be shut down for no toe-ing the Government line.

Absolutely. A small amount of censorship to "fight terrorism?" And "protect Americans?" 90% of the US would go along with it. Heck, we did it in Iraq, a country we theoretically recently bestowed the blessings of freedom upon.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

He even murdered his own son in laws when they dared to oppose him.

Not only that, but one of the son-in-laws had fleed to Jordan, where he betrayed a host of state secrets and Saddam had the "charisma" to dupe him to return and "calmly settle the family dispute". Uday met him at the border. That's crazy sh*t.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!