Saddam Hussein = Ataturk?

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

So I was watching Fox News, and the woman was pointing out how Saddam was the most secular leader in the Arab world, implimented a Western-style legal system in Iraq, allowed women to hold high positions in government, and as we all know, repressed Islamic extremists.

This guy is starting to sound like Ataturk, the kind of guy, who, IMO, the middle east desperately needs, a reformist to forcibly take them out of the stone age.

WTF have we done? Saddam is about to be hanged. Did we just kill the modern day Ataturk?

[ballz2wallz]

If he wasn't a crazed dictator, I suspect thing would be A-ok!

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

If he wasn't a crazed dictator, I suspect thing would be A-ok!

But an Ataturk character sort of needs to be a crazed dictator, no? You can't bring Durka Durka Jihad types into the modern age with flowers and candy.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

But an Ataturk character sort of needs to be a crazed dictator, no? You can't bring Durka Durka Jihad types into the modern age with flowers and candy.

I agree (try telling that to liberals!); but you can't bring them into the modern age with a dictatorship as he did either. You don't have to be a dictator to have control of a government, or to live in the modern age.

[Nonphixion]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I agree (try telling that to liberals!); but you can't bring them into the modern age with a dictatorship as he did either. You don't have to be a dictator to have control of a government, or to live in the modern age.

Well you also can't live in the modern age with an occupation force at your doorstep and only 3 hours of electricity per day.

[Kytro]

I'd have to agree that Saddam was better than what Iraq has now.

There isn't any easy way to fix the problem and nothing that isn't painful or forceful will work

[garbagemanlb]

Originally Posted by Kytro

I'd have to agree that Saddam was better than what Iraq has now.

There isn't any easy way to fix the problem and nothing that isn't painful or forceful will work

.

Iraq would have been better off with Saddam in power. Let the conservatives jump and foam at the mouth at that statement.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

.

Iraq would have been better off with Saddam in power. Let the conservatives jump and foam at the mouth at that statement.

They'll eventually come around to that conclusion. I don't think the war in Iraq can be "won" because that could only be occasioned by three things, none of which aren't gonna happen: The insurgency gives up, we kill all of the insurgents or the Iraqis put aside their sectarian differences and fight off the insurgents themselves.

Given that, we have two choices on how to deal with it: occupy it and fight forever ourselves or leave it alone and let terrorists take over.

Certainly the latter is worse than Saddam, but I also think occupying and fighting forever is also worse than Saddam, considering we could've contained what danger Saddam posed with a lot less effort than it takes to secure the insurgent danger.

[Kytro]

For Iraq to work it requires a "radical restructure".

You must hold extremists in check with force and this is simply not possible when those who agree with many of the viewpoints the extremists hold also hold power.

Saddam was effective because he wanted control, an ensured he had it. This is why he was bad. It is not like Saddam killed people for fun, he was making a point. Don't mess with me.

In contrast a democratic government is subject to pressure much more easily. From militants to extremist viewpoints in general.

If you are not going to enforce rules designed to have a specific outcome Iraq will fail (though what happens after is anyone's guess).

In order to enforce rules you need a force. You also need to neutralize opposing force, and prevent re-arming of said forces.

You also need rules that encourage people to think which means preventing interference in reasonable freedoms. This has nothing to do what what people in Iraq want either, people do not always want reasonable things.

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

They'll eventually come around to that conclusion. I don't think the war in Iraq can be "won" because that could only be occasioned by three things, none of which aren't gonna happen: The insurgency gives up, we kill all of the insurgents or the Iraqis put aside their sectarian differences and fight off the insurgents themselves.

Given that, we have two choices on how to deal with it: occupy it and fight forever ourselves or leave it alone and let terrorists take over.

Certainly the latter is worse than Saddam, but I also think occupying and fighting forever is also worse than Saddam, considering we could've contained what danger Saddam posed with a lot less effort than it takes to secure the insurgent danger.

Isn't one of the "options" on the table to overthrow the gov't we created and install a "leader"

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Isn't one of the "options" on the table to overthrow the gov't we created and install a "leader"

If you want to change Iraq from what it is, that is almost a requirement

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Isn't one of the "options" on the table to overthrow the gov't we created and install a "leader"

Actually, that looks like the most attractive option.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

So I was watching Fox News, and the woman was pointing out how Saddam was the most secular leader in the Arab world, implimented a Western-style legal system in Iraq, allowed women to hold high positions in government, and as we all know, repressed Islamic extremists.

He let anyone into higher office as long as they were in full suport of his dictatorship and he repressed as hell of a lot more people than Islamic extremists. It would be like saying Hitler was a neat guy for the improvements to German public schools under the Nazi's.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

He let anyone into higher office as long as they were in full suport of his dictatorship and he repressed as hell of a lot more people than Islamic extremists. It would be like saying Hitler was a neat guy for the improvements to German public schools under the Nazi's.

You really cannot say it would be like Hitler. Germany was a pretty modern place when Hitler took over. The middle east is a backward piece of shit. It's a shame that Hitler ended up taking power, because Germans certainly had it in them to do better. I don't think Iraqis have it in them to do better than Saddam. I think if you leave it up to Iraqis, they'll elect allah akbar durka durka jihad cock receivers. They need a guy like Saddam to force them into the modern age because they'll never do it themselves; and while it's too bad he was so repressive, he was modernizing that part of the world when everyone else was bent on keeping it in the stone age. In other words, I think the repression was warranted, and now we're all seeing why.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

He let anyone into higher office as long as they were in full suport of his dictatorship and he repressed as hell of a lot more people than Islamic extremists. It would be like saying Hitler was a neat guy for the improvements to German public schools under the Nazi's.

Godwin's Law

[Elph]

You apparently know as little about Ataturk and his deed as you do about Sadaams' . But Ignorance does not excuse making stupid remarks. Saddam Hussein mass murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people. SO DID ATATURK!.

Turkey's Violations of the Human Rights of Its Minorities in the 20th Century

The following is a list of Turkey's violations of the human rights of its minorities committed throughout the twentieth century, a number of which continue up to the present time:

• 1915-1923: The Armenian Genocide in which 1,500,000 Armenians were killed by Turkish forces.
• 1914-1922: More than 150,000 Greeks from the Pontus region and 400,000 Greeks of Asia Minor were killed by Turkish forces.
• 1924: The Turks initiated their attacks on the Kurds which amounted to ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and genocide which continues to date. Since 1984, over 30,000 innocent Kurdish civilians have been killed by the Turkish army and another 18,000 assassinated by surrogates of the Turkish military.
• September 6-7, 1955: The Turkish government organized a widespread pogrom against its Greek minority in Istanbul with massive destruction—thousands of shops destroyed , 29 churches burned to the ground, 46 churches looted. Over 100,000 Greeks fled Istanbul in the ensuing years. Today there are less than 3,000 Greeks in Istanbul.
• Since 1955: The lack of religious freedom for the small number of Christians left in Turkey.

The military-controlled government of Turkey is anti-Christian. They have placed severe restrictions on the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the Eastern Orthodox Christian religion and in 1971 illegally closed the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology and have consistently refused to allow it to reopen.
Turkey’s human rights abuses of its minorities have been amply reported by a number of organizations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and in the U.S. Department of State’s annual Human Rights Country Reports on Turkey. Minorities in Turkey have historically been treated as second class citizens.
Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz failed to mention the Turkish government’s human rights violations against its citizens generally. These violations include torture on a nation-wide basis, illegal detention, the thousands of political prisoners and journalists in Turkish jails. Turkey ranks third in the world on the number of journalists in jail. These violations of human rights by Turkey have been fully documented by the State Department's annual country reports on human rights violations by Turkey, and by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and other NGO's.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

So I was watching Fox News, and the woman was pointing out how Saddam was the most secular leader in the Arab world, implimented a Western-style legal system in Iraq, allowed women to hold high positions in government, and as we all know, repressed Islamic extremists.

This guy is starting to sound like Ataturk, the kind of guy, who, IMO, the middle east desperately needs, a reformist to forcibly take them out of the stone age.

WTF have we done? Saddam is about to be hanged. Did we just kill the modern day Ataturk?

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

But an Ataturk character sort of needs to be a crazed dictator, no? You can't bring Durka Durka Jihad types into the modern age with flowers and candy.

so only white people can have a democracy ? Those colored people need to be lead by dictators

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by Elph

You apparently know as little about Ataturk and his deed as you do about Sadaams' . But Ignorance does not excuse making stupid remarks. Saddam Hussein mass murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people. SO DID ATATURK!.

Turkey's Violations of the Human Rights of Its Minorities in the 20th Century

The following is a list of Turkey's violations of the human rights of its minorities committed throughout the twentieth century, a number of which continue up to the present time:

• 1915-1923: The Armenian Genocide in which 1,500,000 Armenians were killed by Turkish forces.
• 1914-1922: More than 150,000 Greeks from the Pontus region and 400,000 Greeks of Asia Minor were killed by Turkish forces.
• 1924: The Turks initiated their attacks on the Kurds which amounted to ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and genocide which continues to date. Since 1984, over 30,000 innocent Kurdish civilians have been killed by the Turkish army and another 18,000 assassinated by surrogates of the Turkish military.
• September 6-7, 1955: The Turkish government organized a widespread pogrom against its Greek minority in Istanbul with massive destruction—thousands of shops destroyed , 29 churches burned to the ground, 46 churches looted. Over 100,000 Greeks fled Istanbul in the ensuing years. Today there are less than 3,000 Greeks in Istanbul.
• Since 1955: The lack of religious freedom for the small number of Christians left in Turkey.

The military-controlled government of Turkey is anti-Christian. They have placed severe restrictions on the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the Eastern Orthodox Christian religion and in 1971 illegally closed the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology and have consistently refused to allow it to reopen.
Turkey’s human rights abuses of its minorities have been amply reported by a number of organizations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and in the U.S. Department of State’s annual Human Rights Country Reports on Turkey. Minorities in Turkey have historically been treated as second class citizens.
Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz failed to mention the Turkish government’s human rights violations against its citizens generally. These violations include torture on a nation-wide basis, illegal detention, the thousands of political prisoners and journalists in Turkish jails. Turkey ranks third in the world on the number of journalists in jail. These violations of human rights by Turkey have been fully documented by the State Department's annual country reports on human rights violations by Turkey, and by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and other NGO's.

Good insight and welcome to the board.

[extraterrestrial]

• 1915-1923: The Armenian Genocide in which 1,500,000 Armenians were killed by Turkish forces. Ataturk was not in power at that time.
  
• 1914-1922: More than 150,000 Greeks from the Pontus region and 400,000 Greeks of Asia Minor were killed by Turkish forces. This is not true. Most of them Greek soldiers, remainings are people who were exchanged with Turkish people in Greece. No Greek civilian was killed.
  
• 1924: The Turks initiated their attacks on the Kurds which amounted to ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and genocide which continues to date. Since 1984, over 30,000 innocent Kurdish civilians have been killed by the Turkish army and another 18,000 assassinated by surrogates of the Turkish military. Full lie. 30.000 is the number of total people died including kurdish, turkish, soldiers, and terrorists. 18.000? How do you make up these lies?
  
• September 6-7, 1955: The Turkish government organized a widespread pogrom against its Greek minority in Istanbul with massive destruction—thousands of shops destroyed , 29 churches burned to the ground, 46 churches looted. Over 100,000 Greeks fled Istanbul in the ensuing years. Today there are less than 3,000 Greeks in Istanbul. True but nothing to do with Ataturk!
  
• Since 1955: The lack of religious freedom for the small number of Christians left in Turkey. Maybe true but nothing to do with Ataturk!