Several Problems Here
Aside from the Saddam-friendly flavor of this article, which makes it seem a virtual paradise, and him an "enlightened" elected official instead of the despotic dictator he was, I find it disturbing Saddam isn't shown to be the master genocide practitioner of the region. Like feeding political opponents into industrial shredders carted into the dining room for his guests amusement.--~ TK MyTalk 06:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
- Given the nostaligia of reactionaries in the US Congress and elsewhere for the good old days under Saddam, I suggest we let them paint the picture of the fascist paradise they want to return to after timetables for US withdrawl are met. Alternatively, these reactionaries and supporters of fascism among the American left may assist a more theocratic style regime ala Iran or Saudi Arabia once funding gets cut off for any further US invovlement. RobS 13:03, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
This is a gem of an article. So wonderfully simplistic. Mralph72 08:56, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
So, is the truth a problem?
"Saddam saw himself as a social revolutionary and a modernizer, following the Nasser model. To the consternation of Islamic conservatives, his government gave women freedoms and offered them high-level government and industry jobs. Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Saddam abolished the Sharia law courts, except for personal injury claims."
All of this is true, would the more ideological among us prefer it to be hidden in a deeper article? Maybe they could write one. Flippin 12:30, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
American Support of the regime during its worst atrocities
Despite Saddam's brutal crimes, the United States supported him until the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. They even supplied him with chemical agents which may have been used to gas his own people. Human rights are only an issue if they further our own interests --DemocraticRevolution 22:25, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
The second sentence in this section needs to go. If you intend to throw in that the Administration attempted to prove a connection between Osama and Hussein, you need to explicitly state it in that sentence; something can't be 'alleged' without someone alleging it, and it's bad journalism and bad scholarism to leave that antecedent undefined. Second, the external reference for that sentence needs to go as well, because it does not reflect upon the actual statement. That reference inconclusively tries to prove that there was a link between Hussein and Osama.
I suggest the following rewrite - change the sentence to "Leading up to the war, some members of the Bush Administration cited a link between Hussein and Osama as a rationale for the war, although critics adamantly insisted that such a link was non-existent. [reference to a quote from both administration and critics] A credible link was never proven." Stryker 08:24, 27 June 2007 (EDT)
- I'll give you that the controversy exist, but if there is a choice we should simply treat this article as we do any other article.--IDuan 23:21, 5 February 2008 (EST)
- I am not trying to make your editing task any more difficult. However, I am not sure what you mean by saying that we should treat the article as we do any other. Surely we would normally use what we generally refer to as the surname. Neither Saddam nor Hussein appear to be a surname as we understand it.
- Anyway, I just thought I would mention it when I saw your edit. I leave it in your capable hands. --CarolineMilton 23:26, 5 February 2008 (EST)
Please add this to category, Category:Iraq -- 07:55, 7 July 2008 (EDT)
Well, this article needs expanded pretty significantly (it only really covers his actions in war), but I think we should really add the controversy surrounding the supposed "abuse" he suffered prior to his hanging. It illustrates the left's desire to victimize criminals in order to criticize the death penalty.--DReynolds 16:16, 13 January 2009 (EST)
The heading "Iran Iraq War" should be hyphenated Iran-Iraq War. --Steve 16:27, 8 June 2009 (EDT)
This page is protected, but I was wondering if I could add a section on Saddam's rise to power and his human rights violations.JakeRMurrin 15:08, 27 November 2010 (EST)
- Done. Rob Smith 16:05, 29 November 2010 (EST)
"To the consternation of Islamic conservatives, his government gave women freedoms and offered them high-level government and industry jobs. Hussein also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Hussein abolished the Sharia law courts, except for personal injury claims." Why do you support Saddam Hussein? I thought that Conservapedia is conservative and not liberal.--JoeyJ 09:58, 17 November 2013 (EST)