Is George Bush a Greater enemy of world peace than Saddam Hussain ?

[Lovey]

Is George Bush a Greater enemy of world peace than Saddam Hussain ?

[rjung]

Well, let’s add it up, shall we?

Saddam Hussein:

• Finances survivors of Palestinian suicide bombers.
• Supports terrorist groups against its neighbor, Iran.
• Trying to rebuild his military program and/or his chemical/biological/nuclear stockpile after the Persian Gulf War (not verified, but tossed in just for the sake of possibility).

George W. Bush:

• Amassed 250,000+ troops on Iraq’s border without direct provocation.
• Publically demanded the ouster/removal of the leader of a sovergn country.
• Attempted to encourage Iraqi citizens to assassinate their leader.
• Produced false evidence of Iraq’s attempts to buy nuclear material from Nigeria.
• Used nonexistent Atomic Energy Commission report to support claim that Iraq will have nuclear weapons within a year.
• Attempted to get the international negotiating body, the United Nations, deemed “irrelevant.”
• Attempted to claim UN legitimacy for war while ignoring UN authority.
• Attempted to browbeat long-standing allies, France and Germany, into cooperating with its war efforts.
• Attempted to bribe uncommitted member nations into supporting war efforts.

Seems pretty obvious to me…

[Shodan]

Amassed 250,000+ troops on Iraq’s border without direct provocation.

Sorry, rjung, but the last three words of this make it impossible to take the rest of your stuff seriously.

Other Dopers - specifically zigaretten have done a better job than I in refuting your idea of the non-existent report. The rest of your stuff has been chewed over ad nauseum.

Anyone who can compare Bush and Saddam and prefer Saddam is not a serious person, and does not require detailed refutation.

Regards,
Shodan

[Tigers2B1]

Saddam has murdered 200,000 of his own people. There are reports of the Iraqi government torturing children as a method to retrieve information from their parents. The eyes of a 2 year old were gouged out in front of her parents. Every bone in the feet of a 5 year old were broken and a baby was allowed to starve to death in front of its mother. Torture is not just a method used by Saddam but where he starts. The UN Human Rights Commission condemned the Iraqi government in 2001. Even Bill Clinton, in 1999, called for regime change in Iraq.

Nuclear weapon technology is not going to go away. If Saddam were to gain access to nuclear weapons, and it’s clear that he has wanted these weapons for quite some time now, his history indicates that he has no compunctions when it comes to mass slaughter.

In short - the comparison is big-time ridiculous.

[Eclectic_Skeptic]

The number of Iraqis killed in the Gulf War is estimated at 100,000.
http://www.empoweredparent.com/missilestats.html

The UN states that sanctions have killed 500,000 Iraqi children.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/072100-03.htm

The adds up to 600,000, 3 times the number of Iraqis Tigers says Hussein has killed (which may be an exaggeration, but he gives no cite).

So clearly, the US is a greater threat to Iraq than is Hussein. But the OP asked, who is a greater threat to world peace, Bush or Hussein. Hussein is a threat to Kuwait, Iran, Israel and other ME countries. Bush, on the other hand, is discarding the traditional alliances of the US, destroying the UN with bribery and extortion, trying to start WWIII, and trying to destroy the world’s greatest democracy.

Clearly, GW Bush is the greater threat to world peace.

[Corky]

Without a doubt Saddam is the more evil of the two and this is really undeniable. The end of his regime will be mourned by very few people including myself. I can think of quite a number of other regimes that I feel are oppressive of their people but in these cases the establishment of the regimes in question were not aided and abetted by the US as was the case in Iraq.
However this does not mean that Bush has the right to abuse the military might of the USA to advance his own agenda and try and bully other countries to support him.
Outside of the USA you would find it hard to find any people who would regard the Iraqi regime as the biggest threat to the US and this is the pretext that was being used to justify the stance of Bush and his cronies. When the pretext is exposed as wrong the credibility of the case being made is severly dented
Unfortunately many in the US have reverted to the ‘you are either with us or against us’ view on this crisis. I, for one, invariably have supported the US for many years but on this occasion I simply cannot, and find myself fearing Bush more than I feared the leaders of the Soviet Union during the cold war.

[Gatopescado]

Stupid question. NEXT!

---

Fagjunk Theology: Not just for sodomite propagandists anymore.

[Splanky]

Funny how the sanctions are imposed by the UN, not the US. Nice try though.

Anyone who seriously thinks Bush is a greater enemy to peace than Hussein needs to be smacked. I’m serious. Smacked or deported.

[ShoNuff]

Is Bush a greater enemy of peace than Saddam?

In a word.

No.

[scr4]

I would say yes. Misguided and incompetent actions by a US president can cause far more damage than all the intentional efforts of the Axis of Evil.

[Tigers2B1]

For Eclectic Skeptic and other skeptics who seem to be ignorant of the depth and extent of Saddam’s brutality —
First, the 2000 report of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights
http://www.hri.ca/fortherecord2000/vol3/iraqchr.htm

The Commission strongly condemned, inter alia:
· the systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the government; suppression of freedom of thought, expression, information, association, assembly and movement;
· widespread use of the death penalty in disregard of the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN safeguards;
· summary and arbitrary executions, including political killings and the continued so-called clean-out of prisons, enforced or involuntary disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detention, and consistent and routine failure to respect due process and the rule of law;
· widespread, systematic torture and the enactment and implementation of decrees prescribing cruel and inhuman punishment as a penalty for offences.

Here is a quote from an Amnesty International report with links showing Saddam’s use of torture and what are called “disappearances.” I suggest you take a look at the 4 links titled “Systematic torture,” “Repression,” “Disappearance” and “branding, amputation and the death penality.”

Human rights violations have been committed on a massive scale against all sectors of society in Iraq. Most of the victims have been suspected political opponents of the government, their relatives, and members of religious and ethnic groups.
In our numerous reports over the years, we have documented:
o “disappearances”
o extrajudicial executions and other unlawful killings, including mass killings of civilians using chemical weapons
o imprisonment of prisoners of conscience
o long-term detention without charge or trial
o grossly unfair trials
o systematic torture including the use of judicial punishments such as flogging, ear amputation and branding of the forehead.
o forcible expulsions
o extensive use of the death penalty
o recruitment of children in the armed forces

Links to Amnesty International reports on Iraq:
Iraq: Systematic torture of political prisoners - 15/08/2001
Iraq: Victims of Systematic Repression - 24/11/1999
Iraq:“Disappearances”: Unresolved cases since the early 1980s - 01/10/1997
Iraq: State cruelty: branding, amputation and the death penalty - 01/04/1996

Here is a link to the most recent Human Rights Watch paper on Saddam’s human rights abuses.
http://www.hrw.org/mideast/iraq.php

This briefing paper examines Iraq’s arbitrary and widespread use of the death penalty and extrajudicial executions. For more than three decades, the government of President Saddam Hussein has sanctioned the use of the death penalty and extrajudicial executions as a tool of political repression, both in order to eliminate real or suspected political opponents and to maintain a reign of terror over the population at large. The executions that have taken place over this period constitute an integral part of more systematic repression - characterized by widespread arbitrary arrests, indefinite detention without trial, death in custody under torture, and large-scale “disappearances” - through which the government has sustained its rule.

Here is a link to an article regarding an instance of child torture by Saddam’s government.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1hi/world/from_our_correspondent/2058253.stm

The star witness against the government of Iraq hobbled into the room, her legs braced with clumsy metal callipers. “Anna” had been tortured two years ago. She is now four years old….

Here’s an overview on Saddam’s use of mass torture, WMDs and summary executions.
http://www.arbiteronline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/03/17/3e7544d178a4d

Saddam and his regimes have countless rape, murder, torture and kidnapping charges. Not to mention his acts of genocide in which Saddam used chemical and biological weapons to kill close to 1.5 million people, most of them women and children. Saddam’s justification for his actions: relentless determination to stay in power, and to strike fear into the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, the people in which he was elected to lead. Instead, he is killing, raping and gassing them.
…One of Saddam’s regime’s primary weapons against his people and those who oppose him and his regime is the use of torture.
Types of torture include: eye gouging, hand-piercing with an electric drill, pouring acid into open wounds, electric shock (mainly to genitals, ears, tongues and fingers), sexual abuse (which includes taking broken glass bottles and placing them in victims’ anuses) and falaqa (beating victims’ soles with a cable).

[Pencil_Pusher]

Of the two, Bush the greater threat to:

• world peace,
• saftey of the American people,
• civil liberties of Americans,
• civilians in Iraq

[Monster104]

Of the two, Bush the greater threat to:

• world peace,
• saftey of the American people,
• civil liberties of Americans,
• civilians in Iraq

-Nope
-Nope
-Nope
-Most emphatically NOPE.

[bizzwire]

Well, I guess we’ll know the answer in about a week.

[Pencil_Pusher]

“When contemplating war, beware of babies in incubators.”

Did Saddam gas his own people?

What about those mobile weapons Colin Powell was talking about?

The U.N. predicted that 30 percent of Iraq’s children under five “would be at risk of death from malnutrition” in the event of war (CASI press release, 2/17/03), and that 500,000 people could “require medical treatment… as a result of direct or indirect injuries,” with potentially 100,000 Iraqi civilians wounded “and another 400,000 hit by disease after the bombing of water and sewage facilities and the disruption of food supplies” (London Guardian, 1/29/03)."

Bush has no reservations in lying to the American people, and the media has very little incentive to correct him. Yes, Saddam is a bad, bad man. Bush, with his ignorance, stupidity, stubbornness, born again Christian zeal, arrogance, jingoism, and complete disregard for anyone but himself and is still the greater threat.

[Optihut]

“Anyone who can compare Bush and Saddam and prefer Saddam is not a serious person, and does not require detailed refutation.”

That much is true. However, comparing Bush to Saddam or Hitler or other dictators and then saying “Ok, so all the wrong things Bush did are all right, because he isn’t as bad as those guys.” is bogus too.

The scary thing about the Bush administration is that things like homeland security bills are issued and the general population is shouting “Hooray!” as rights are taken away in the name of protection, peace and freedom.

“Anyone who seriously thinks Bush is a greater enemy to peace than Hussein needs to be smacked. I’m serious. Smacked or deported.”

Deported?
My opinion is this: The government isn’t a benign entity. That goes for all governments alike. Bush is only human and not really a remarkable specimen either. Then we all know that power corrupts.

Given all that, I encourage everyone to watch the words and the gap between words and actions of the government very carefully. To trust Bush to do the right thing could prove quite dangerous.

Back to the thread: I really want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but sometimes I get the impression that Bush doesn’t want to get rid of the so called axis of evil, but that he wants to replace it. I just hope that I’m wrong.

[jjimm]

The fallacy of the negative answers here is that they compare the behaviour of the two leaders, not the scope for danger.

Yes, if I had to choose between Bush and Saddam to run my country, I would choose Bush. I acknowledge, or course, that Saddam is a vicious tyrant, whereas Bush is largely democratic.

However, Saddam is not in charge of the largest unchallenged military the world has ever seen, pursuing a policy of global hegemony.

If anyone’s going to kick off WWIII in the next few years, it isn’t going to be Saddam (unless you count this current conflict as being kicked off by Saddam). I therefore, reluctantly, nominate Bush.

[NixDorf_90000]

Saddam have been a greater enemy of world peace if he have had the power that Bush have

[Beagle]

Some people obviously think so. Stupid people, with too much time on their hands, in this case.

[Tigers2B1]

What’s the deal with the people who cite Iraqi deaths, which are alleged to have been caused by the United Nations Sanctions, and blame that on the current President. Don’t most of the alleged harm transpire during the 8 year Clinton Administration? Aren’t they really making a case for “Is Bill Clinton a Greater enemy of world peace than Saddam Hussain” thread? Didn’t Clinton bomb Iraq without UN approval?