SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Keith Feral who wrote (228163)4/22/2007 11:50:10 AM
From: epicure  Read Replies (4) of 281500
 
No liberals that I've seen are "defending" Saddam Hussein. But sometimes even evil men serve a purpose, and some liberals see that before invading Iraq we 1. did not have a civil war there on the scale we have now because evil Saddam was keeping it in check 2. Iranian influence was much less than now because evil Saddam was keeping it in check and 3. evil Al Qaeda was not there because evil Saddam had different interests from Al Qaeda and 4. we weren't wasting a ton of money and tying up our military trying to keep Iraq in control- although much less effectively than Saddam did- (let's not even talk about rebuilding any more).

That's not "defending" Saddam- that's seeing the negatives in doing stupid things to remove an evil leader, when you really haven't thought out very well what the removal will lead to. It gets frustrating for me to keep seeing the lie about liberals perpetuated. You can certainly criticize liberals for being pragmatic about Saddam's benefits - but that's hardly defending him.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News