As defined by the dictionary, Saddam Hussein is an evil man.

As defined by the dictionary, Saddam Hussein is an evil man.

Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: He lives in numerous, extravagant palaces while his subjects die from lack of food and medical attention and all the while he doles out $25K to the family of anyone who will walk into a public place and blow themselves up – granted the economic sanctions by the US are a factor here, but I haven’t seen Saddam selling any of his Roll Royces to feed the hungry lately. Bottom line he spends his nation’s wealth on death not life – unless of course it’s his own.

Morally bad or wrong; wicked: He produces chemical and biological weapons that have been deemed unethical by the civilized world since the mustard gas of WWI. He kicked out UN inspectors so no one could stop him from running his germ warfare factories. He doesn’t make a distinction between the ends and means; any means that can possibly achieve his objectives are justified.

Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: Not only is he a bad guy now, he has always been bad. Name five things Saddam has done in the past 20 years that didn’t have a self-interested or outwardly destructive goal.

Please refrain from immediately retorting with the standard GD response: People starve in the US too, the US makes bioweapons too, and the US has self-interested and outwardly destructive goals too. We all know that the US has programs in place to prevent people from starving, they are imperfect but they exist and do make a difference. Second, the US made bioweapons which they are now destroying (at a cost greater than that of their initial manufacture), and US is the largest charitable benefactor in the world. Bush may not be an angel, but i wouldn’t say he has nefarious intentions. I can’t say the same about Saddam.

You may do well to read this thread on the role of dictionary definitions in debates.

Hey, he wrote that book! And that other book! He should retire to Malibu and write romance novels!