5 bombs in Baghdad.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:06 pm

Scrat;1270988 wrote: 120+ injured, hundreds maimed. I've seen some pics and these were not small bombs, several were huge suckers.

I heard this was political too, it has to do with the upcoming elections in the country. What have we done there? We got rid of the a-hole that controlled the other a-holes. Then we got another bunch of a-holes to run the country for us.

This is an exercise in futility.

Scores killed in wave of attacks in Baghdad - Conflict in Iraq- msnbc.com

Just about sums it up in a nutshell

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:31 pm

Scrat;1270988 wrote: 120+ injured, hundreds maimed. I've seen some pics and these were not small bombs, several were huge suckers.

I heard this was political too, it has to do with the upcoming elections in the country. What have we done there? We got rid of the a-hole that controlled the other a-holes. Then we got another bunch of a-holes to run the country for us.

This is an exercise in futility.

Scores killed in wave of attacks in Baghdad - Conflict in Iraq- msnbc.com

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing the other day. Saddam gassed, tortured, and killed his people. But he kept a country of total psychopaths in check. We should be more careful with our definitions of "evil dictator" in the future.:-2

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:08 am

Saint_;1271038 wrote: Yeah, I was thinking the same thing the other day. Saddam gassed, tortured, and killed his people. But he kept a country of total psychopaths in check. We should be more careful with our definitions of "evil dictator" in the future.:-2

He did hold it all together fairly well.

Forcing a democracy or revolution on people who didn't ask for it, has little or no central cohesion to hold it together long term. IMO we are almost sure to screw this up worse than what it was.