I just don't get it. How can anyone possibly conclude that Saddam Hussein was a GROWING threat to world peace in 2003?
Saddam Hussein came to power 25 years ago. Despite his best efforts, his war machine was never anything more than a bad joke. His officers were political hacks - incompetent and corrupt. Saddam has had his butt handed to him in every international conflict he has engaged in. Even with the assistance and approval of the United States, in using chemical weapons against Iran, Saddam still lost that war. (Anybody remember that? Anybody remember when we thought the use of chemical weapons was A-OK as long as they were used on the right people?)
Between 1979 and 2003, Saddaam Hussein was only able to put together a fourth rate military. Given this track record, how on earth can you conclude that but for our invasion in 2003, he would eventually have put togther a war machine that would have rivalled the Nazi war machine of the '30's and 40's?
The Iraqi army was helpless and hapless in 2003, as was its leadership. By comparing him to Hilter you minimize the terror and death and destruction that Hitler and His Nazis wrought on the world in less than 10 years.
Maybe, a more apt comparison would be Idi Amin - a cruel and merciless buffoon - but relatively harmless and inconsequential in the international scheme of things.
