Is it time to bring Saddam Back to Power?

[RATM]

Now that Blair and Bush have admitted Iraq is a disaster and "major combat operations" have definately not ceased,is it time to bring back the one man who could control the population?
Kofi Annan has declared it a civil war,Blair and Bush are reluctant to do so only because it would cede more ground to the opposition.However Annan is on his way out and he is calling a spade a spade.
A recent poll of Iraqis showed that a majority think things were better under Saddam.
Now lets play realpolitik here.As bad as Saddam was most of his atrocities were commited with US and British assistance.Historically the minority Sunni muslims have always controlled Iraq,they are the ruling political elite of that country.
What other way is there out of this?A 3 state solution?Would we not just end up seeing rockets being fired across borders a la Gaza?
This war will last at least another 4 years if no radical solutions are put forward.Or maybe it suits the US and Britain to have the cogs of their massive arms industries spinning in overtime?

Is the US going to put to the electric chair the one man who could exert control over the population?Granted it would not be nice to watch but surely it would save lives in the long term?Having successfully put down one Shia uprising whilst the US and Britain sat back and did nothing after the 1991 war is he not the man to do it again?

[Gladstone]

An evil dictator would be the best alternative....things are going to be far far worse than that, they will declare victory and start leaving in 2008, after which the country will break into three parts with a weak central govt that only exists on paper (like Afganistan).

[TheBear]

<Mod>Moved to Foreign Affairs.</Mod>

[daithimac]

I was thinking about it and ended up wondering how many Irish people thought things were better under the English in the period of 1916-1922 when there was open warfare on the streets of dublin during the rising and the civil war. Things will get worse before they will get better but since bush and Blair have waided so deep in bllod that it is easier to go foward than go back they might as well finish the job they have started so as not to make the deaths which have already occured not be in vain.
al-maliki has said that the Iraq army and police should be ready by september. They should be given atleast that long before troop withdrawals commence.

[cyberianpan]

I reckon McDowell will be needing a new job soon.

cYp

[FakeViking]

Is the US going to put to the electric chair the one man who could exert control over the population?

Slight correction here: they plan to hang him

al-maliki has said that the Iraq army and police should be ready by september.

And he hasn't said which September.

Whatever way you want to look at it, the Iraqi invasion has been a disaster for all involved. And the really annoying part is all this was perfectly predictable. Armies have invaded before, but there always was some planning for the aftermath of the invasion. One point that Ricks makes in his 'Fiasco' book is that the US forces were so fast in making haste to Baghdad in the early stages of the invasion that they left all the Iraqi army arsenals unguarded, because they didn't want to blow them up as that would destroy the chance of finding WMD's. Of course all these arms evaporated very quickly!

The sheer daftness of disbanding the army and de-Baathification of the civil service, firing those who knew how the country ran must also rate as one of the prime causes for the chaos that still exists. But if they were doing their job, there'd be no roles for Haliburton, etc.

[Gladstone]

I think it's ironic that Iraw which had few or no terrorist connections before, is now a haven for terrorism.
Serves the prats right I hope they're stuck there for the next decade and it bankrupts them.