It should've happened after the first Gulf War, in my opinion. If left alive the new government wouldn't be strong enough to fight him and so he would be back in power in a matter of time, so he had to go. That said, if he went after the first Gulf War when the region was on the US's side there would have been less international fallout from the power vacuum.
[–] Clips 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
He definitely was a ruthless leader, even to the innocent. But considering that he kept a lot of terrorist groups in check, and presumably an off-shoot of ISIS, he could've prevented a lot.
One needs a ruthless leader in the Middle East to keep the irrationals in check.
[–] Vladimir_Komarov 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I don't think he was able to sell Iraqi oil for non-american currency after this, so petro-dollar success?
[–] brokenfingers 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
If I remember correctly he wanted to sell oil in euros instead of dollars.
[–] toats [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
Talk about a show! The US invaded on false premises of WMDs in 2003. In 2004 the death penalty was helpfully reinstated and in 2005 the special court hearing the trial was renamed because Iraq's constitution disallowed the creation of special courts. 2006 saw Saddam's conviction of crimes that happened in 1982 and execution sentence by inexperienced judges who were longtime enemies of his.
[–] arrggg ago
That's what happens when you attempt to create a silver/gold based currency to replace the dollar.
You either get hung, or get a giant bowie knife in your ass like Gadaffi. The hanging was more civilized.