No.1597302
>Be Saddam Hussein
>Come to power in a CIA backed coup
>ruling the most well developed and prosperous country in MENA
>thriving state-centered economy, massive oil resources, good infrastructure, good relations with both US and USSR
>attack a neighboring anti-imperialist state because the US told you too
>fight a long, bloody, and pointless war that accomplishes nothing but bankrupting your country and traumatizing a generation of young men
>get duped by the US into attacking Kuwait
>get utterly BTFO
>spend the next 10 years languishing under sanctions
>finally deposed when the burgers come to finish the job
>hide in a random hole until they catch out and you get executed
Nah, I don't see anything worth admiring here. He took a thriving country and ran it into the ground in service of imperialism.
No.1597309
>>1597302you forgot the part where he fought a civil war with actual communists and killed them
>The Ba'athist coup of 8 February 1963 was accompanied by street fighting as Communist activists and supporters resisted the coup attempt. Fighting in Baghdad continued for three days, concentrated in the party's strongholds. When the Baath consolidated its power the ICP suffered an unprecedented campaign of suppression. Leading figures and cadres of the Party killed, including Husain al-Radi.Baathism is just fascism with arab characteristics
No.1597315
>>1597309Ba'athism is socialism. Saddam's Iraq was a socialist workers' state, with an 80% public economy and strong unions, until the US invaded and forced neoliberalism, privatization, union-busting, shock therapy and so on.
It can not be fascist because fascism is brutal bourgeois rule and the essence of fascism is imperialism. Ba'athism is explicitly ANTI-imperialism.
No.1597318
>>1597315>Saddam's Iraq was a socialist workers' state, with an 80% public economy and strong unionsAll of which it lost because Saddam was a gullible fool who danced on American strings until they were abruptly cut. Ba'athism has a proven progressive content, but Saddam specifically was a retard.
No.1597322
>>1597302b-but Hakim said 70 good 30 bad on deprogram!!!!
No.1597325
>>1597320>China on both sides>Norks on the same side as burgers>DDR and BRD on same sideLooks interesting.
No.1597331
Flame of Liberation thread?
No.1597340
>>1597297Are you that ex-CPI guy who is really into Saddam online? (Why do I know about this… ahh well.)
Well it's interesting because I was listening to one of these YouTube guys who travels in different countries, and a very sophisticated Iraqi guy he met in Baghdad told him that, well, Saddam was a tyrant but there are many people who have a positive opinion about him because Iraqis had a much higher degree of personal safety when you compare it to 2003-2011 or so when things turned into a nightmare. The country functioned in a way that it just hasn't since then. But if you joined the Communist Party when in Saddam was in power you risked getting disappeared, or members of your family.
But things have apparently improved a lot in Iraq in recent years.
No.1597344
>>1597331Yeah that's the guy. He seems alright though. I kinda respect the one American Saddam fan who probably has encyclopedic knowledge of the dude.
There are also archives Saddam-era Iraqi government websites with his speeches:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190415004341/https://nointervention.com/archive/Iraq/gov/Hussein_speeches/www.uruklink.net/iraq/espeech.htm No.1597358
>>1597320Iran was in no sense a US puppet. The Shah was one of the most important American allies in the region and his loss was a huge blow to them. American "support" for Iran was inconsequential and was dwarfed by the support they gave Iraq. All it really consisted of was a few missiles the CIA sold them because they needed to raise money independently of Congress. Backing the Islamic Republic was never American policy, and the Iraqi invasion was itself carried out with the encouragement of the US.
No.1597360
>>1597297I'm not a leftist, I'm a communist tho.
No.1597381
>>1597320>>1597359 (this)
c'mon, it's Middle East 101 people
No.1597382
>>1597317WOW, heckin wholesome chungarino 10000, I'm adding this to my based third-worlder collection. Updooted kind sir
No.1597548
>>1597382>>1597317ADD IT TO THE ELDER SCROLL!! :P
No.1597727
Did a bit of research, here's what I found.
Prior to Saddam coming into power, the first Iraqi republic colloquially known as the First Iraqi Republic, was a state formed 1958 under the rule of President Muhammad Najib ar-Ruba'i and Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim after they overthrew the previous monarchistic government.
Qasim was more or less a socialist/social democrat who collaborated with both the Iraqi Communist party and Kurdish tribes, hoping to forge a sort of socialist civic nationalism stating: "Iraq is not only an Arab state, but an Arabo-Kurdish state…[T]he recognition of Kurdish nationalism by Arabs proves clearly that we are associated in the country, that we are Iraqis first, Arabs and Kurds later".
Although far from perfect in this front, Qasim regularly collaborated with Kurds and the Iraq communist party in purging and putting down Arab nationalist rebellions. Now here comes the kicker:
After assuming power, Qasim demanded that the Anglo American-owned Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC) sell a 20% ownership stake to the Iraqi government, increase Iraqi oil production, hire Iraqi managers, and cede control of most of its concessionary holding. When the IPC failed to meet these conditions, Qasim issued Public Law 80 on 11 December 1961, which unilaterally limited the IPC's concession to those areas where oil was actually being produced—namely, the fields at Az Zubair and Kirkuk—while all other territories (including North Rumaila) were returned to Iraqi state control. This effectively expropriated 99.5% of the concession. British and US officials and multinationals demanded that the Kennedy administration place pressure on the Qasim regime. The Government of Iraq, under Qasim, along with five petroleum-exporting nations met at a conference held 10–14 September 1960 in Baghdad, which led to the creation of the International Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries (OPEC).
Well jeez, I wonder where this is going….
In 1962, both the Ba'ath Party and the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) began plotting to overthrow Qasim, with U.S. government officials cultivating supportive relationships with Ba'athist leaders and others opposed to Qasim. On 8 February 1963, Qasim was overthrown by the Ba'athists in the Ramadan Revolution; who were backed by the CIA. The coup was orchestracted by Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, more on him later.
The secretary general of the Ba'ath Party, Ali Salih al-Sa'di, used his control of the National Guard militia, commanded by Mundhir al-Wanadawi, to establish himself as the de facto new leader of Iraq and had more authority in reality than al-Bakr or Arif. The nine-month rule of al-Sa'di and his civilian branch of the Ba'ath Party has been described as "a reign of terror" as the National Guard, under orders from the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) "to annihilate anyone who disturbs the peace," detained, tortured, or executed thousands of suspected Qasim loyalists.
Now how does Saddam Hussein come into play?
Well remember Al-Bakr? One of al-Bakr's first decisions in office was to appoint over 100 new officers to the Republican Guard. Saddam Hussein worked, in the meantime, to establish the party's security and intelligence organisation to combat its enemies. al-Bakr strengthened his position in the party with the help of Saddam's newly established party security apparatus and the intelligence services. Most of 1968 was used to repress non-Ba'athist thought and groups; for instance, a campaign against Nasserists and communists was initiated under Saddam's command.
By the mid-to-late 1970s, Saddam's power within the Ba'ath Party and the government grew; he became de facto leader of the country, although al-Bakr remained as president, Ba'ath Party leader and Revolutionary Command Council chairman. In 1977, following a wave of protests by Shias against the government, al-Bakr relinquished his control over the Ministry of Defence. By the end of 1977, al-Bakr had little control over the country through his office as president. The reason Saddam did not become. Before making himself de jure head of state, Saddam initiated an anti-communist campaign; the ICP had no real power, and most of its leading officials had left the country or been imprisoned or executed by the Ba'ath government. The campaign was not centered on the ICP, but also Ba'athists who did not support Saddam.
So remind me again, OP. Why the fuck should any socialist support a CIA collaborator, a vehement anti-communist and someone who had a hand in overthrowing a social-democracy which knowingly collaborated with the Iraqi Communist party and the Kurds- two factions which Saddam Hussein BRUTALLY repressed?
No.1597732
>>1597727The CIA mods would delete you if you said anything true.
No.1597734
>>1597733You're a fed too. What does Saddam have to do with anything? It's sad that any nod fed faggots feel lile posting here when you fed faggots control the mod team.
No.1597735
>>1597734>>1597734>It's sad that any nod fed faggots feel lile posting *non
It's clear what it is. Just paid for fed faggots pushing the NATO agenda.
No.1597737
>>1597736TBH anon I don't feel like you're smart enough to be an actual operative. I feel like you're of the category of an honest dupe. You're a legitimate retard.
No.1597738
>>1597737>You're a legitimate retard.Im not the one shilling for a CIA-backed anti-communist dictator.
No.1597739
>>1597738Who are you shilling for then?
No.1597741
>>1597739Not a CIA-backed anti-communist dictator, i'll tell you that much. :^)
No.1597759
I did not do investigation, i have no right to speak about the topic. All anons who do not have direct exprience, i suggest to do the same.
No.1597761
>>1597759>I did not do investigation, i have no right to speak about the topic.And as for the anons who did?
No.1598198
>>1597545>Saddam was backed by the CIA and was installed to serve as an anti-communist presence in the middle east to combat the soviet union. Its only when he started nationalising resources and not doing what the US told him that we was overthrown.No evidence.
No.1598199
>>1597315>socialism is when the government does stuffcongrats you have a cold war americans understanding of socialism
No.1598200
<Saddam was put in and funded by le CIA
You will never ever find any tangible evidence for this claim from any credible source, merely baseless extrapolations. "Because the previous guy had bad relationship with the west, the new one (who continued the exact same anti-west policies) must've been put in charge by them!"
Bryan R. Gibson writes in his book:
>"Nonetheless, it has also been uncovered that the CIA was also engaged in a major intelligence gathering operation, which was primarily aimed at gaining information about Soviet antiaircraft weaponry. With access to a virtual "intelligence bonanza" at stake, the Kennedy administration showed great reluctance about aggravating Qasim. Such a bold move, like overthrowing the Iraqi government, would have probably been deemed too risky at the time. Moreover, a high- level CIA official, who claimed to have helped plot Qasim's demise, has divulged that the CIA's plans to overthrow Qasim had not yet been finalized when the Ba'th Party seized power. In sum, barring the release of new information, the preponderance of evidence substantiates the conclusion that the CIA was not behind the February 1963 Ba'thist coup. After years of frustration with the Qasim regime, the Kennedy administration viewed the Ba'thist coup as a welcome surprise."
No.1598201
>>1597302>traumatizing a generation of young menuh, anyone else?
No.1598209
>>1597322Honestly, even with everything anon said I could still see it as 70% good. If you think some mid-size (even if leftist) state in the middle of the desert in the 90s can survive without cooperating with imperialism you are delusional and terminally online.
No.1598228
>>1598200>Bryan R. Gibson <Bryan R. Gibson is an Assistant Professor of History at Hawai’i Pacific University and an Adjunct Professor in Global Security Studies at Johns Hopkins University.https://advanced.jhu.edu/directory/bryan-gibson/Hmm… "Global Security Studies"? Sounds like a totally innocuous academic program, let's take a closer look at it.
<The JHU Master of Arts in Global Security Studies program is designed for students who are looking to develop or expand their expertise regarding the security challenges of the 21st century. Students confront the complexities of today’s security environment with the latest policy and theoretical tools for analysis and action. Particular strengths of the program are strategic studies; energy and environmental security; irregular warfare; military innovation and adaptation; and the economic aspects of war. https://e-catalogue.jhu.edu/arts-sciences/advanced-academic-programs/programs/center-advanced-governmental-studies/global-security-studies-master-arts/<Students pursuing an MA in Global Security Studies may obtain an additional credential by completing courses that will lead to a Certificate in Intelligence. This combined credential will prepare graduates for careers in the U.S. intelligence community and in government agencies and private sector organizations that use intelligence or work with the intelligence community.Oh cool, so according to a bourgeois academic working in a training program for aspiring glowies, the CIA totally had nothing to do with the coup that deposed an left wing anti-imperialist government and crushed one of the strongest communist parties in the Middle East. That settles it then.
No.1598230
>>1597322Tbf I totally understand why Iraqis would like him given the horrors that came after, though it's pretty surprising that Hakim would say so. His dad was a member of Iraq's communist party which was heavily repressed by Saddam.
No.1598235
>>1597297Iraq was under right wing cahuvinistic baathists who were radical anti communist ,at least be pro left wing baath like the syria
No.1598245
>>1598221Palestinians are 98% Sunni and Saddam was strongly pro-Palestinian so it is safe to say that Palestinians support Saddam. In fact the Palestinian workers in Kuwait openly sided with Saddam. Jordanians support him too. Generally most Sunni Arabs do.
No.1598249
OP is either a white person or someone from South Asia
No.1598254
>>1598245>the arab world is all about sunnis and shiasnew york times tier analysis
No.1598260
>>1598245What are you talking about? The biggest backer of Hamas right now is literally Iran and the Axis of Resistance. Yes a lot of Sunni arabs kinda upheld Saddam mainly because of the absolute state of Iraq after the war with Shia paramilitaries basically running the government, but even among Sunni Islamists a lot of people hated Saddam because of the Baath's generally secular bent and perceived his religious turn as just opportunism to take advantage of the rising conservatism wave
No.1598265
>>1598235All Ba'athists are left wing. The Iraqi Ba'athists were arguably more left wing than the Syrians after the 1970 "corrective revolution". The Syrian Ba'ath got the reputation of the "leftist Ba'ath" from the 1963-1970 period when Syria was basically Maoist.
No.1598266
>>1598265> The Syrian Ba'ath got the reputation of the "leftist Ba'ath" from the 1963-1970 period when Syria was basically Maoist.real shit? where can I find more info on this
No.1598267
>>1597317And 1917 "Russians" supported the Whites. Which Palestinians, dumbass.
No.1598349
>>1598198wasnt he talking about wanting to sell oil in euro just before getting fucked by the US ?
No.1598358
>>1598200even if he wasnt backed by CIA, he was still an anticommunist retard than ran his country into the ground through military adventurism
No.1598359
>>1598358>even if he wasnt backed by CIAHe was. The source cited in that post is an author who himself has CIA affiliations. See
>>1598228 No.1598561
>>1597545USSR was allied to him until Gorbachev though, despite him being opposed to the local communists and the split with the other Soviet ally of Syria.
No.1598619
>>1598566Nothing wrong with dupping the agency
As leftists, we should be figuring out ways to gain fraudulent sponsorship from the FBI and right-wing booj. It's either going to us or the next Pride Bois club.
No.1598621
>>1598359Not disagreeing, but even
if the coup was only enjoyed and not backed, the commie purging and Iran conflict afterwards was certainly backed.
No.1598624
>>1598566>LGBTQ is CIA propagandaAre you the same fuckwit who got exposed for lying about how the CIA controls Rojava?
No.1598631
>>1598624no those letters are TQILA
No.1598636
>>1598633hardcore fans
>>1598632dumb take
No.1598726
>>1598646Listened to the first two episodes.
Holy Shit. Honestly, baffling how this thread exists "praising" Saddam Hussein- considering he was a vehement anti-communist, attempted to assassinate Qasim, and the Ba'ath party knowingly colluded with the CIA- all of which were confirmed by former Ba'ath and CIA members.
No.1598730
>>1597374>>1597297I think these are both jokes, but there is genuinely a problem with some leftoids simping for strongmen who have a "daddy" vibe, like Saddam's mustache or ᴉuᴉlossnW's orc-like jaw. I suspect a large portion of the simping for Stalin (despite his actual merits) is wanting to bottom for him.
No.1598865
>>1597297Yeah no. Social democrat dictatorship at best. Genocidal CIA asset at worst.
No.1598868
>>1598619What does Fidel have to do with this?
No.1598911
>>1598906Are you actually implying Fidel was CIA?
No.1598939
>>1598937Finessing the CIA doesn’t mean he was CIA, take your meds you demented asshole.
No.1598940
>>1598939Im not saying he was CIA, im pointing out he outplayed the CIA despite having some support from them.
>take your meds you demented assholeyou first
No.1598942
>>1598940No you were clearly fucking insinuating that Fidel was CIA. I’ve seen your meemflag ass around and it’s clear you’re a low effort shitposter.
No.1598944
>>1598942>N-no you were>y-you're a shitposterYou sure IM the one who needs to take their meds? Take 5 lad, log off.
No.1598947
>>1598944Shut the fuck up bitch you clearly said Fidel was CIA and I have screenshots of it
No.1598961
>>1598947I didn't though.
>but i have the screenshotsyou have an out of context screen shot and a shitpost that alludes to you lacking knowledge about Fidel gaining support from the CIA.
Again, meds.
No.1598963
>>1598961Fuck off already I’m completely normal I like you
No.1598968
>>1598963>fuck off already>im completely normal I like you bit of a mixed message there, anon.
Perhaps you should take your meds to clear your mind.
No.1598969
>>1598968I was in the hospital recently man leave me alone, you have no idea how bad it is being there for 15 hours and seeing people suffer, need emergency surgery or go schizo and try to fight security
No.1598971
Bro what the fuck is going on here
No.1598973
>>1598969>leave me alonethen stop lying about my positions and quit having a sook when you get called out on it.
>you have no idea how bad it is being there for 15 hours and seeing people suffer, need emergency surgery or go schizo and try to fight securityThat's rough, but that doesn't give you the right to be a wanker.
perhaps you should take your meds to calm yourself No.1599006
>>1598973I’m not lying about your positions bitch you specifically said Fidel was CIA, like you glow dude I don’t know what to tell you.
No.1599034
sex
No.1599182
>>1599006>you specifically said Fidel was CIAno i didn't.
>like you glow dudemeds [2]
other ypg anon who replied to you isnt me btw No.1599368
>castro was funded by cia
>because a few members of his movement received some fund from them when they hoped they could coopt the coming insurrection against their client state
>no indication he even knew about it
No.1599479
>>1599368Tbqh if Castro really did cuck the CIA that would make him even more based in my book.
No.1599483
>>1598942>post a meme abt castro finessin the CIA<clearly this man is saying castro is CIA backedlmao the reading comprehension is GONE
No.1599561
>>1597315>Saddam's Iraq was a socialist workers' statethe poverty of AES right here
>>1597320>China supporting both sidesDeng chads never lose 👌
No.1599626
>>1598230> His dad was a member of Iraq's communist party which was heavily repressed by Saddam.unless of course he's always been lying and he's just a 2nd gen muslim american living in secondthought's basement
No.1599633
>>1597320>Iranian kurds on the side of Iraq>Iraqi kurds on the side of Iran>China on both sides>North Korea on the same side as Israel and burgerstan>Both Germanies on one side>Yugoslavia and USSR on one side>France and Britain on opposite sides from USExtremely goofy conflict
No.1600350
So, the usual narrative perpetuated by both the Western and Arabic mainstream media goes something like this: the United States is responsible for all the woes Iraq is suffering from today. Although this understandable when it comes from a Western media source (you break it, you buy it), this focus smells fishy when it comes from the other side of globe.
Why does it smell fishy? Well, because it overlooks three blatantly obvious things. First, that Saddam is the sole responsible for everything before the invasion, most importantly, two disastrous wars of choice. Second, that Saddam could have prevented the invasion had he stepped down. And finally, that Saddam is also partially responsible for what happened after the invasion.
The last point is crucial, since many people tend to ignore the connection between the state of Iraq after 2003 and everything the regime did over the years. Throughout his stay in power, Saddam capitalized on the sectarian divide to his own advantage. Additionally, the oppression produced by his forces was one of the contributing factors behind the violent and extremist atmosphere that dominated Iraq post 2003.
Therefore, by focusing merely on the US, it overlooks the one of the main reason behind many of the troubles of the Middle East: Madmen in power. Worse, it led numerous people to reach the conclusion that shouldn't be meddled with. Instead, the conclusion I came to is starkly different. If anything, the Iraq War should teaches us that Arab dictators are just ticking time bombs; the longer they stay, the worse the outcome. Whenever the Iraq war is brought up, the discussion should revolves instead at how could have Iraq avoided having an unhinged and paranoid dictator in power in the first place, and how could have Saddam been removed from power earlier.
No.1600364
>>1600350But the West supported Saddam for decades though? Sure tyrannical dictators are bad but the question is whether a self-interested western intervention would lead to a better outcome (usually no)
No.1600386
>>1600374>muh democracylmao, the west is wildly undemocratic, kowtowing to the regime change lobby and giving credence to their concern trolling is just giving them extra ammo.
No.1600388
>>1600386I know the West is wildly undemocratic, does it mean I should start simping for Saddam instead, who repressed communists?
The whole point is that most of you here who retreat into this anti-imperialist posture doesn't have any program, any idea to propose beyond kneejerk anti-Americanism. You don't give a shit about workers, you just want to cheer on Big Men like a football supporter.
No.1600411
>>1600388Obviously the OP of this topic is an idiot, probably a troll, Saddam was a piece of trash and he deserved to be hung. But the people of Iraq didn't deserve the suffering that was inflicted on them by the western coalition and the power vacuum which continues to this day.
Do you really think it matters if an American communist says 'we support the Iraqi workers in toppling Saddam' in 2003? He has no control over that, he at least lives in America and can say 'this government's policy is criminal and murderous' with some credibility. Obviously the left wasn't strong enough to stop the Iraq war but at least they provided some kind of alternate narrative to the jingoism of the time. 'We should support the Iraqi workers in toppling Saddam' (as far as I know no such movement existed) would just be confusing the message.
The only response to western imperialism should be 'hell no', any compromise on that position just gives them credence as I said.
No.1600422
>>1600411 (cont.)
Also, this entire thing is based on a false premise anyway, I don't think the mainstream counter-narrative in 2003 was 'we shouldn't overthrow Saddam, because he's such a great guy actually', it was that US adventurism would just make things worse, and oh look, that's exactly what happened.
I watched a Channel 4 dispatches show in 2006 about how America stole billions of dollars from Iraq and gave it to Republican donors to set up fake contracting companies to provide services. Babies were dying in the hospital because the doctors didn't have basic medical supplies, this from a country that had some of the best healthcare in the Middle-East under Saddam.
No.1600432
>>1599182>other ypg anonwhat, we have a rojavan insurgency on the board now? we had zero last week.
>>1599479 this
No.1600469
>>1600411>But the people of Iraq didn't deserve the suffering that was inflicted on them by the western coalition and the power vacuum which continues to this day.No one in this thread is arguing for this.
No.1600501
>>1597309>Baathism is just fascism with Arab characteristicsWell no wonder /leftypol/ loves it so much
No.1600620
>>1600613it's literally as simple as "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. "
No.1600630
>>1600613>NOOOOO IF YOU DON'T SIMP FOR SADDAM UR BADNo one here is arguing that the Iraq war was good, justified or anything. See this anon here
>>1600469The main topic of this thread is whether Saddam himself ought to be "admired"- and the answer is no. You can hate Saddam for being a CIA plant and a vehement anti-communist while also pointing out that the Iraq war was unjustified as was them ousting Saddam Hussein on bullshit charges of WMD and kiling thousands of innocent people.
>but ur both sideismSo we should just ignore Saddam committing genocide and communist repression and having a hand in a CIA backed coup which overthrew the socialist government of Qasim?
>But the USA- did and continues to do that. But why should we therefore "admire" Saddam. Genocide and anti-communist persecution does little to aid the cause- why should we as leftists "take a side" when both seek to eliminate us from the global stage and hinder our progress to world revolution?
No.1600646
>>1599479You guys are retarded, you need to do some serious investigation if your favorite leader was a CIA puppet. Maybe Gonzalo had a point?
No.1600655
>>1600647>You're just a first world aristocrat who doesn't understand the plight of imperialism and colonial dominationAs opposed to an anti-communist dictator who knowingly allied with the CIA and overthrew a government which was resisting imperialism and colonial domination.
>who doesn't understand why the exploited in the third world would look up to a man like SaddamSo we should make excuses for people who look up to ISIS? Spare me the moralist grandstanding
>who stood up to the Yankee empire and was martyred for his devotion to his people.So I suppose we should start sucking off France and lumping upon them endless praise, considering that they didn't get involved in the Iraq war?
go away FOL, you're not fooling anyone No.1600999
>>1600613Anon the invasion already happened, Saddam is gone. I think at this point it's safe to criticize him without emboldening US imperialism, especially since he was a willing collaborator with it for decades.
No.1601000
>>1600646>you need to do some serious investigation if your favorite leader was a CIA puppetHe wasn't though. He took their aid, promptly told them to fuck off, and proceeded to build the most enduring socialist and anti-imperialist state in the Americas.
No.1601077
>>1601000So he was the Saddam of the Americas
No.1601092
>>1600647>You're just a first world aristocrat post wall socket now
No.1601093
>>1601078
ah ha butthole flag
No.1601098
>>1601092>>1601093Do you people really seriously not understand when you sit around waiting for him to post so you can have your epic reply or say 'LOL BUTHOLE!' it only encourages him and you're doing nothing but acting as an accessory in his mission to shit the place up?
If you are so week willed you MUST interact with him at least sage it and report it.
No.1601101
>>1601000>He took their aidgive me a fucking source before accepting that narrative
No.1601403
>>1601077Except he didn't run his country into the ground or attack his neighbours at the request of the state department. Idk where anybody gets this notion that Saddam was some kind of valiant anti-imperialist. He was a major US ally until he outlived his usefulness and they turned on him. Literally the definition of a useful idiot.
No.1601433
>>1601109
FOOLISH ATLANTEAN, IF MY ARGUMENTS ARE BAD THEN WHY DO I KEEP SCREAMING THAT THEY'VE NEVER BEEN DEBUNKED LOUDER AND LOUDER INTO YOUR FACE
No.1601781
>>1601433If by "bowing to western social dogma" you mean upholding the rights of LGBT people, I'm afraid I'll have to diagnose you with a case of severe brain damage.
No.1602161
>>1601866>>1601869absolute braindead behavior
get a hobby
No.1602801
As contrarian as I am to support a man the yanks hated, he was funded by the yanks, and then proceeded to attack Iran and do no help to Tudeh or socialist movements, oppress kurds because of Iraqi nationalism, and getting so bankrupt you invade a neighbor to pay off debts. I would only support Saddam if he actually unite the Middle East against NATO but he harmed any plans to ally with Iran and Saudi Arabia was too deep in burgerstans pocket to get in good touch with Iraq
No.1602813
>>1597761For those, truth flows from the facts, a direct exprience is a building block in gathering a concrete understanding of the issue at hand.
No.1602827
>>1602161<calling out reactionaries is braindead behvariour>>1602813>a direct exprience is a building block in gathering a concrete understanding of the issue at hand.Including the concrete understanding that Saddam Hussein was a CIA plant.
Glad we agree.
on the real listen to the blowback podcast Unique IPs: 64