Never In Iraq Has There Been Anything Like This, Even Under Saddam.

[Solomon]

So says Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the Iraqi Council.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37692-2004May18.html

"Othman, who is generally pro-American, described the assasination as only the most extreme example of lawlessness that has grown in the year since President Saddam Hussein was driven from power."

"Never in Iraq has it been like this -- never, even under Saddam", he said. "People are killed, kidnapped and assaulted; children are taken away; women are raped. Nobody is afraid of any punishment".

[BurtWorm]

1. This *fact* is something Americans will have a very hard time swallowing.

Or even hearing. I'm astonished it's even in the Washington Post. There was law under Saddam, at least, even if it was Saddam's law. Is there law in Iraq now? It doesn't seem like it. And there is surely very little sense of safety and security. I think that is Othman's point, and it's sad but it won't be well taken over here.

[Karenina]

2. If believed at all.

Iraq is in chaos.

[keithyboy]

4. So are we in chaos..a silent chaos that numbs the, spirit hurts the heart.

We have lost our collective soul and our freedom.

[ladjf]

11. anarchy

[Spoon]

3. Athough these things didn't occur in public back in the day,

isn't it a bit over the top to say that it didn't occur under at all under Saddam? OR is his point simply that it used to not occur in public, and now it does? Is it better to have a dictator kill in secret than a bunch of lawless thugs out in the open?

[parasim]

5. sure, that would be over the top...

... if he was saying that it never occured on Hussein. I don't think that's what he is getting at, however. I believe he is referring to how much worse it is now. The lawlessness.

[Solomon]

6. Every so often, I write a post about the demonization of Saddam.

I get flamed everytime. Americans just can't seem to wrap their heads around this. American arrogance won't allow the least amount of respect for Saddam as a president of a country.

Now Othman isn't saying that these things never happened under Saddam. He is saying THAT IT IS WORSE NOW! Get it.

What was it about Saddam that he was able to hold Iraq together? And don't say violence, because we are dishing out plenty and we can't hold it together.

[Spoon]

8. Othman is the former leader of the "Kurdish National Struggle",

so for him to say something like this is quite surprising. Saddam (reportedly) was never very kind to the Kurds. I'm trying to wrap my head around it, as something could be afoot.

Perhaps he is angeling for an independent Kurdish State. That would be big.

[dpibel]

14. Surpassing strange, isn't it?

You have a group of people who will comfortably accept the proposition that everything this administration says is a baldfaced lie, and that the real power behind the throne is BushDaddy, who marketed the original Saddam-as-Hitler schtick. Yet when it comes to the unsurpassed evil of Saddam Hussein, the same people rise up in mighty chorus to say, "But he was! He was just the worst!!"

Don't dare point out the state of healthcare, the status of women, the state of eduction, and the per capita income in Iraq before BushDaddy's big war. That's just being a Saddam apologist.

For the people who justify BushBaby's big war on the basis of the billions of Iraqi lives the USofA has saved, I like to refer them to Amensty International (although I've seen no evidence that anybody takes me up on my suggestion). It's pretty interesting to read Amnesty's annual reports for the five years leading up to the recent invasion. According to that bastion of Saddam-loving, in the last year the USofA has killed at least twice as many Iraqis as Saddam did in the preceding five.

But don't tell anybody I said any of this. I'd hate to be seen as an apologist for the world's greatest murderer, torturer, and rape-room operator.

[Solomon]

16. Tell me about it. I get flamed for bringing it up because there's a

mantra out there about how "evil" Saddam was. Meanwhile, Iraq was the most advanced Arab nation on earth. As in Cuba, healthcare and education were the top priorities.

It's a damn shame what we did to that country.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

7. In Iraq under Saddam...

you knew where you stood -- you knew which rules were to be obeyed and, if you did that, you were relatively safe, you could live your life without too much fear.

Those rules are now gone, with none to replace them.

For better of worse, under Saddam there were no bombs going off in markets, no firefights in the street, no crazy Muslim extremmist trying to take over the country. There was also no free speech or free elections, but the average Iraqi wasn't afraid to step out of their doorway for fear of being shot by a trigger-happy, overtaxed soldier.

They have, unfortunately, stepped from the frying pan into the fire.

[Spoon]

10. The Kurds had a lot to fear.

Othman himself was the longtime leader of the group "Kurdish National Struggle". I'm trying to figure out if he said this because he meant it, or because he is attempting to undermine the support for the Iraqi Gov Coun beacuse he wants an independent Kurdish State, which has been his lifelong goal.

Personally (Orwell scared the hell out of me), I'd prefer lawlessness and independence over a government killing in secret.

[oldcoot]

15. What independence?

Iraq currently is occupied by foreign troops. Iraq has yet to have elections and the U.S. makes all or most decisions for Iraq. The United States has not extended the same rights to Iraqis that are currently enjoyed by Americans. Unlike the United States, Iraqis do not have due process. For evidence of this fact, one only needs to examine the case of Abu Ghraib where experts estimate that approximately 70 to 90% of the inmates are innocent. Iraq will not be a truly independent nation until the Iraqis can elect their own leaders without outside interference and until all the troops leave.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

9. You miss the point entirely...

Saddam DID kill, rape and torture people. No doubt at all. The US is now killing, raping and torturing people in Iraq. So no change there.

What is different is the normal law enforcement role. There is NO policing going on in Iraq at the moment - they don't even have a judicial system over a year after the war supposedly finished.

So normal everyday street crime goes unpunished. Crime is rampant.

THAT never happened under Saddam.

So the government sanctioned crimes are unchanged, but the private crimes are unchecked, thanks to the Bush cabal.

[Bandit]

13. Coming from a Kurd who supposedly hates Saddam

Remember Saddam gassed the Kurds if you believe Fox News. I find this quite an indictment of the US. This man is supposed to be an ally of ours and yet he says in all of his life he has never seen it so bad in Iraq. Now should we believe him or Rush Limbaugh and Fox News? We all know how much more truthful and knowlegable they are about Iraq than someone that actually lives there. :shrug: I would believe even Saddam before I would Fox News or Bush*.

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

12. How many did Sadaam murder in his first 14 months. And then the Usa<nt>

[dpibel]

17. You tell me

If you've got a source, why not share it? I can go to www.amnesty.org and get their figures for the last 8 years or so. Do you have a source that answers your question? Or are we just supposed to assume that the answer is, "Way, way, way more"?

Thanks.