Blix: Iraqis better off under Saddam

[Che Guava]

Hans Blix, the man probably most famous for not fining the WMD's, has made some 'unusually critical' comments in a Danish newspaper:

Iraqis better off under Saddam, says former weapons inspector

The war in Iraq is a "pure failure" that has left Iraqis in a worse state than when they lived under Saddam Hussein, former United Nations chief weapons inspector Hans Blix said in comments published Wednesday.


"Iraq is a pure failure," Blix was quoted as saying in the Danish newspaper Politiken.

"If the Americans pull out, there is a risk that they will leave a country in civil war. At the same time it doesn't seem that the United States can help to stabilize the situation by staying there."

Blix, in comments that were seen as unusually critical for the diplomat, said the U.S. is facing a situation where neither staying to fight nor pulling its troops out of Iraq are good decisions.

Blix said Iraq would have been better off if the war had not happened.

"Saddam would still have been sitting in office. OK, that is negative and it would not have been joyful for the Iraqi people. But what we have gotten is undoubtedly worse," he was quoted as saying.

Blix was in charge of a team of UN inspectors who looked for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the U.S. and its allies invaded the country in 2003. He had asked for more time to allow the weapons inspectors to do their work, but was criticized by Washington for his request.

After his team left Iraq, a coalition of forces led by the U.S. invaded the country. The U.S. and British military forces found no weapons of mass destruction.

Violence in the country is escalating, meanwhile, with Iraqi civilians, government officials, police officers and often U.S. soldiers killed every day. Bodies are frequently found in Baghdad, bound and tortured. Bombings are common.

According to Iraq Body Count, a website that tracks reported deaths of Iraqi civilians, more than 44,000 Iraqis have died in the war.

link

This is a point that has been brought up in a few different threads: are Iraqis any better since the invasion? Will they be better off in the future or will current trends in violence and civil war keep on?

Vote now

 

[ummmm........]

The structure of the thread is confusing since a "yes" vote to the poll question is a "no" vote to the thread title . . .

 

[JohnRM]

Of course, Hans Blix had a never-ending job when Saddam was around and I'm sure some of his UN buddies were more than happy to be skimming money from the Oil-for-Food program.

 

[Che Guava]

The structure of the thread is confusing since a "yes" vote to the poll question is a "no" vote to the thread title . . .

Hmmm..perhaps that should have been phrased better...

Of course, Hans Blix had a never-ending job when Saddam was around and I'm sure some of his UN buddies were more than happy to be skimming money from the Oil-for-Food program.

Now we have Halliburton for that

 

[zulu9812]

The invasion and occupation has been an unmitigated disaster. Now, civil war if America leaves, civil war if America stays. I have no idea what the solution is.

How can things have gotten this bad?

 

[Phlegmak]

Of course, Hans Blix had a never-ending job when Saddam was around and I'm sure some of his UN buddies were more than happy to be skimming money from the Oil-for-Food program.

When you don't like the message, ad hominem!

How can things have gotten this bad?

The Bush administration.

 

[nc-1701]

I voted that it's a moot point because we can't go back now. Although the answer would be no their worse off now.

 

[Che Guava]

Well, here's an alternate question for the thread: knowing what we know now about how things turned out in Iraq, what should we have done?

 

[Phlegmak]

Well, here's an alternate question for the thread: knowing what we know now about how things turned out in Iraq, what should we have done?

Not invaded, of course.

 

[puglover]

It will get better, and not in two months, or even two years. It will take a long time before Iraq can stabilize itself, but eventually (if all goes well) Iraq will be a much better place.

 

[zulu9812]

It will get better, and not in two months, or even two years. It will take a long time before Iraq can stabilize itself, but eventually (if all goes well) Iraq will be a much better place.

And the hundreds of thousands of people who have died are... what? A sacrifice to the great god of capitalism?

 

[TrailblazingScot]

The invasion and occupation has been an unmitigated disaster. Now, civil war if America leaves, civil war if America stays. I have no idea what the solution is.

How can things have gotten this bad?

Because Iraq was a very divided Nation held together by Sunni oppression.

That Iraq invaded Kuwait and not backing down led to this whole sorry mess, but one the Iraqis have primarily themselves to blame for. At the moment our forces are just sat inbetween two sects of Islam fighting themselves and we should leave them to it. At least the Kurds appear to be doing okay.

Under Saddam the Iraqis had a pointless war with Iran, a pointless war with most the World and had bloody repression costing hundreds of thousands of lives and things kept on going from bad, to worse. Whilst it is bad now, there is still the possibility of getting Iraq to go in a forward direction, with Saddam it had no future as he had sons that'd have been worse.

 

[Murky]

It's a moot point but there was less chaos under Saddam than there is now.

I think they should split the country up into 3 independant states. It wouldn't stop the violence completely but would reduce it to a more managable level.

 

[Masquerouge]

I'd say it's a moot point now. I believe that on the whole, the Iraqi population is less safe than it was under Saddam, but most of the population is now better off (like the Kurds)

 

[civdood]

Anyone who know iraqi mans know it is true, iraq so so much better, we have much iraqi friends come to sweden. iraq must fight for self, stoppa killin each persons. USA soldiers brave to help fight bad evil who kill even each other and religious chiefs of muslim men say it is so that muslim god say kill kill kill and even kill kill kill thsoe in self 'house o f peace' even send childs not old man to blow up self and others of not peaceful muslim groups. europa must be moral to help, but only interst is self, yes it is true. sefl self self, no sence of right to help iraq be free like sweden.

 

[puglover]

And the hundreds of thousands of people who have died are... what? A sacrifice to the great god of capitalism?

People die in war. It's a simple fact. The question here is whether or not their deaths will pave the way for a better life for the generations after them, free from the tyranny of their former ruler.

I think they should split the country up into 3 independant states. It wouldn't stop the violence completely but would reduce it to a more managable level.

No. People of different ethnic groups should learn to live together. If we divide them up, they'll just play border clash for the rest of their lives.

 

[Murky]

People die in war. It's a simple fact. The question here is whether or not their deaths will pave the way for a better life for the generations after them, free from the tyranny of their former ruler.

There are many forms of tyranny. When an elected leader has unlimited power then that too is a dictatorship.

No. People of different ethnic groups should learn to live together. If we divide them up, they'll just play border clash for the rest of their lives.

I think you underestimate the amount of hatred each of the 3 groups has for each other. The Kurds think the Iraqis are genocidal religious fanatics bent on their destruction. The other two have been in a religious conflict for around 1400 years. No one is willing to live together in peace. It would be better to split them up and let them have separate governments. You would have better luck convincing Egypt, Syria and Israel to form a single country under a unity government.

 

[bhsup]

Yes. Freedom or death, live free or die, all that stuff. There is no acceptable alternative to freedom, so they are definitely better off.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yes. Freedom or death, live free or die, all that stuff. There is no acceptable alternative to freedom, so they are definitely better off.

I can't believe you typed that:

So - what's the current fate of the 600,000 souls who have died because of the invasion? Are they better off dead?

 

[Phlegmak]

Yes. Freedom or death, live free or die, all that stuff. There is no acceptable alternative to freedom, so they are definitely better off.

See my signature! Some people would disagree with your last sentence.