Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
I think part of it stems from your assumption(s) that the civil war will be neat, clean, end up in three nice pieces, people won't miss or care about the barrels of oil lost per day during the war, and that the neighbors will wait patiently at the border until it's over. For starters.
|
At the end of Gulf War I both the Kurds and the Shiites rose up in rebellion against Saddam Hussein. They hated his reign so much that they were willing to incur tens of thousands of casualties to get rid of him. So civil war was preferable to them than the status quo. Now the majority of the people in the country have what they want - no Saddam Hussein.
The Civil war may last for a while but in the end the Sunnis will have to lose. They are the minority and they are don't have the oil.
Clearly the majority of the people wanted him gone, and were willing to take massive casualties to do it. We took him out and now they have got what they want.
If the majority of people wanted him out and he is out, and they are not suffering near the number of casualties they suffered under Saddams post rebellion opression how can anyone say the people are worse off or the status quo has not improved?
