> > I didn't say he was a bad leader, in fact I think he is an excellent one. He has (somehow) made his (let's call them subjects) like him and believe in him. Everyone voted for him for fear that anyone who didn't would be "punished." There was no way for anyone to get 50% of the people to vote against Hussein, so they all voted for him. I doubt all Iraqis honestly like their leader, or wouldn't rather have a different one. Just because they can't speak their ideas doesn't mean they can't think them. However, the fact that he is so powerful and feared only reflects how great, charismatic, and influential of a dictator he really is.
> >
> > MA"Ok, so I made some mistakes in my last post. Oh well."NGO
>
> What! NO.
>
> Saddam Hussein is RUTHLESS. He's not great. He's not charismatic. He's not influential. The guy is not Hitler. He is a BRUTE. Everyone votes for him because to do otherwise is to sign your own execution order. And that has NOTHING to do with charisma, greatness, convincing people, etc. These people fear for their lives. The only thing they want less than Saddam to remain in power is to die. Coercing people into "voting" for you by threatening their deaths has *absolutely* nothing to do with "great" leadership qualities.
>
> The Other Matthew

Two fine examples of information differences. I read what I stated in a newspaper. I assume The Other Matthew got his information from a reliable source too.

Which source do you trust, or better yet, which can you trust at all?

MA"Now do you get my point?"NGO