Many people all over the world think that Sadam needed to be removed. I woud like to say a few words about it:

Do you really think that Sadam needed to be removed from Iraq? I think that we just don't know what had been going on in Irag before the Americans invaded. They just said that that they had found some chemical armaments in Iraq but I had a question then: Where's the evidence that they have really found them? Can you prove to me that there were chemical armaments in Iraq? There was no evidence that Sadam had these weapons (?) I assume that the reason why the Americans decided to invade the country is quite obvious - they just wanted and still want to have large oil supplies. The USA are not very rich in oil, so the Americans don't fancy wasting them now. In around forty years when many oil exporters have run out of oil it will be the Americans who will start exporting oil. Needless to say, they'll put up the prices! I don't think that the UK did right when it (or she, I don't remember now) agreed to take part in attacking Iraq. The government made a big mistake. A lot of peole rose up against it and they had the same question as I did. The situation is really terrible there nowadays. Whenever I turn on a TV set I know that they'll tell me about new explosions, new sieges, new deaths and so on and so forth in Iraq. It's abnormal. Even Russia which has been at war with Chechnya for more than four years now can't "boast" of such a situation.

I agree that Sadam invaded Kuwait and should have been deposed then but the Americans did the same to Iraq. They invaded Iraq for no reason at all. As I said above there was no evidence that there were some chemical armaments in this country. Nevertheless, I don't respect Sadam Husein as a man. I have never liked his manner of governing the country. I think you know that he was a dictator and as a result, he was ruthless to the Iraqis, that's why I have never liked him. Although, Stalin was also a dictator and the Soviet people suffered a lot because of him but he did a huge number of positive things. Just imagine how many factories were built in his time! He helped the country overcome many obstacles whereas Sadam didn't try to do that. The Americans should not have invaded Iraq. They could have attempted to solve the problem by negotiations. Perhaps, they'd have succeeded in persuading Sadam of the necessity of changes. They didn't even try then! I don't think it would have done them lots of harm if they had tried. The USSR aslo invaded Afganistan more than 30 years ago and we said then that we would put an end to the civil war. Yeah, we did put an end to the war but people's life didn't get better.

What do you think about the American invasion of Iraq?

P.S. I do not want to insult common Americans.
I'm sad for this war and for Iraq. You said many true, but who will or want to hear the true? even if there is a big man has a big mind, what he will do?

The oil makes us without mind!
I appreciate everyone's thoughts on this subject....It is a highly debated topic here in the States, as well as the world. It seems no common ground can be found at all on this issue. But, a good point brought up by Bush was to eliminate threats before they materialize, and a good point brought up by Kerry is that we should have had more support before going in. But an even better point of protesters around the world is "We shouldn't go there in the first place."

My opinion differs greatly from all of these, because I was there. I was there from day one, up until about September of '03. I had a variety of mixed emotions going across that border, and no matter what, I couldn't help but think to myself: "What are we doing here?"

But slowly, as the days and months wore on I realized why we were there. Children and their families were giving us flowers, thanking us for being there, welcoming us. I remember being in the square in downtown Baghdad and helping the Iraqi people tear down statues of the old regime. Many were in tears, and many were overly elated--beyond any words to describe. THe amount of relief by the people that Saddam Hussien was gone had me very emotional. I thanked my personal blessings and fortune that I lived in a country where I had freedoms that I could enjoy without a fear. And then, as quickly as that, it came to me.

Even though no chemical weapons were found, even though it seems the situation is spinning out of control with more US and Iraqi (as well as other coalition forces) deaths, we should shift our focus on what good did come out of it. People are free. I remember talking to a man who was a political prisoner---his entire family was murdered by Saddam's thugs and he was thrown in jail for nearly 13 years for speaking of ill of Saddam's policies publicly. He lost two daughters, a son, and his wife. His response on Saddam's removal? Absolutely justified. Imagine this on a larger scale, because thousands, if not hundreds of thousands had been murdered under Saddam's rule. Whoever was affected by Saddam's rule will justify why we should or shouldn't be over there. They are the ones affected the most, whether things are positive or negative. But, I can only speak for myself. There are people that live in Iraq that are glad the regime is gone, and they no longer have to live in fear. The rights that I enjoy, I feel, they are able to enjoy now as well. And isn't that what some of us want?