> OK, not grat leadership. However, if Hussein
>was an absolutely horrible leader who tortured
>everyone, I doubt he would have won.

Wow, that's the most retarded thing ever. What on EARTH makes you think the voting was even *real*? Do you REALLY think 100% of eligible voters in Iraq turned out for the election? Do you REALLY think 100% of them voted for Hussein? Doesn't it strike you as slightly more plausible that Hussein just put up some random voting boxes, let people stuff paper in them, and then at the end of the day threw the boxes in the river and declared himself the victor with 100% of the vote?


> I'm not going to add more to this thread,
>because it seems to be becoming dangerously
>close to flame-war status. People are supposed
>to read our statements and think about our
>ideas, not follow an argument.

I'm not even sure what this means. If you *had* an argument that was followable, I might attempt to follow it. And if you had any ideas that really seemed worthy of thought, I'd think about them. But it seems to me you're just spewing crap out your piehole that somebody fed to you and you decided to believe.

-- Dave