If the US hadn't intervened in Irak... (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 12:27:14 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  If the US hadn't intervened in Irak... (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ...what would have happened to Saddam Hussein during the Arab Spring ?
#1
He would have been overthrown in a relatively peaceful way (see Tunisia)		  
#2
Protests and riots would have degenerated into a civil war or close to a civil war - Saddam eventually bows out		  
#3
Protests and riots would have degenerated into a civil war or close to a civil war - Western countries eventually intervene and help overthrowing it (see Libya)		  
#4
Protests and riots would have degenerated into a civil war or close to a civil war - but the international community would fail to take any action and the fighting would continue for months (see Syria)		  
#5
Protests and riots would have degenerated into a civil war or close to a civil war - but Saddam would eventually crush the opposition		  
#6
Some protests would have erupted, but not enough to succeed (see Saudi Arabia)		  
#7
Some protests would have erupted, but Saddam would manage to placate them through moderate reform (see Morocco)		  
#8
No significant protest would have erupted		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 24

Author Topic: If the US hadn't intervened in Irak...  (Read 1365 times)
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,484
United States


« on: February 27, 2012, 04:36:40 PM »
4 or 5...I went with 4.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,484
United States


« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2012, 08:10:15 PM »
It still should be broken up into three countries, but it's neighbors and I think the non-Kurdish Sunnis in the middle have less oil than the other two regions and feel they'd get screwed in the split (not that they wouldn't deserve it since they've been the ones enjoying the oil money while sh**tting on the other two groups for the last half a century).  What's for the best doesn't always get done if people with a little bit of power feel like they might get slighted a little in the process.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,484
United States


« Reply #2 on: February 29, 2012, 12:18:54 AM »
Quote from: Antonio V on February 28, 2012, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: Vosem on February 28, 2012, 08:43:05 PM
and Saddam is more of a bad guy than Gaddafi under pretty much any reasonable definition.

Really ? I'm not saying Saddam was significantly better, but the two seem at least comparable in terms of hideousness. Hasn't Gaddafi has done his fair deal of atrocities too ?
Saddam's got a much higher "kill" total.  They both were giant douches and the world is better off without them, but Saddam was at least an order of magnitude (pop POP!) more deadly than Gaddafi.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,484
United States


« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2012, 10:45:41 AM »
and?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 14 queries.