Bring back Saddam Hussein?
Was former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein a bad guy?
Yes, he was.
But after him has come something that is so MUCH worse. And we need to talk about it.
Under Iraq’s new law, girls can legally marry from the age of 9 in certain circumstances, depending on religious interpretations. The legal marriage age for boys has also been reduced from 18 to 15. The law gives religious authorities the power to decide on family matters, including marriage, divorce, and child custody, and abolishes a longstanding ban on child marriage under the age of 18, which had been in place since the 1950s. This change significantly reduces protections for women and children, exposing them to greater risks of exploitation and abuse. The law also restricts women’s access to fundamental rights, including divorce, child custody, and inheritance, which are all important for their autonomy and safety.
These new Islamic restrictions leave women and girls increasingly vulnerable in a country already facing significant instability. And the West is to blame.
It was the US and its western associates who moved to take down Saddam Hussein. But was he such a terrible leader?
While he presented himself as a religious leader at times to strengthen his legitimacy, particularly after the Gulf War, he was more of an opportunist who used Islam to his advantage. His Ba'athist regime was officially secular, and he had a history of persecuting religious groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Iraq’s Christian population has shrunk by 83% since the fall of Hussein and their lives became intolerable.
When Hussein fell there was much Neocon talk of building a more modern democracy in Iraq. That is not what happened and instead with each passing year Iraq goes further back in time towards the 6th century.
You have to feel bad for little girls who can now be legally married at 9.
The very thought horrifies me and yet this is how Islam rocks.
It’s a dark ages pathology.
As uncomfortable and unpleasant as it is. Countries and cultures such as exist in much of the world cannot and do not benefit from secular democracy. But require strong men to govern and rule them, or else descend into sectarian and ethnic chaos and genocide which is then exported to the rest of the world, specifically the "secular, rational, civilised and enlightened" West, where they do incalculable harm and destruction on all levels turning our lands into a mirror of the Hell-holes that they "escaped" and "fled" from. Even though some of these people helped to create these selfsame Hell-holes and are seeking to repeat the process here for cultural, ethnic and ideological reasons, and we are letting them also for ideological reasons. They can no longer legitimate be considered victims, but the selfsame things that is claimed that we in the West are, colonisers, oppressors, etc. The "Victims" eventually become the perpetrators of the abuse and horrors that they have suffered. What then happens when the native people's of the West, eventually turn on their oppressors and colonisers? A question that few if any are asking or imagining what this may look like and the consequences.
No,..
better than the regime in power now. It doesn't bear thinking of the little girls of 9yrs being raped by a adult male, because this is what it amounts to, and if anyone disagrees then they are not civilised.