2 of 4

Yes

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

cannot be righteous. The use of mercenaries caused a lack of accountability for actions that benefited the occupation forces instead of the Iraqis.
Although Saddam's regime mainly benefited a minority (Sunnis and Baathists), at least it did benefit some Iraqis, whereas the American occupation forces mainly supported themselves, instead of Iraqis. The American focus on military actions over development activities was clear from the start of the invasion. It caused alienation from the people and much hardship.

Sometimes the known "Devil" is better than the unknown. In the case of Saddam, the Iraqi people were initially pleased to throw off the yoke of his domination. However, as it became clear that the American troops brought more destruction and violence than experienced under Saddam, they became less than enthusiastic with their new self-serving foreign "protectors".
Where al-Qaeda had not existed under Saddam, it was given relative free reign, between counter-terrorist sweeps. Civilians felt terrorized by forces nominally devoted to peace.
Iraqi society became dominated by the tug between powerful forces and that seemed that powerful forces were unleashed against each other. At least, Saddam held sectarian forces in check, instead of allowing the slow dissolution of Iraqi society. The Iraqis have long been confused by dubious American motivations. That caused the Iraqis to feel they were better off under Saddam.

Learn more about this author, Robert C. Sage.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about Would life in Iraq be better if Saddam Hussein were still there??
We want to hear your view. Write now!