Apart from the words of Bush and Rumsfeld, does anyone have any solid reason to think the people of Iraq hate Saddam Hussein? Personally I know only one Iraqi, and he hates Saddam. But does anyone have any reliable information which suggests a common Iraqi opinion one way or the other?

Well, they had the conference in London last month where the representatives from 6 Iraqi dissident groups met to discuss a post-Saddam Iraq. Two Kurdish groups, a Shiite group, the Iraqi National Congress, and two other groups. Four of the groups are still in Iraq, and two, with the INC being one, are in exile. Don't know the size of the groups, but I would imagine that all Kurds are pretty much in concert, and Shiites are the dominant religious group in Iraq, and Saddam is a Sunni, and secular.

i had an inspector on a job for awhile and we would talk about politics. he was from iraq. he came here to go to school. he will not go back until sadam is gone. the sandwich shop down the hill is owned by iraqis. they are also here because of sadam. they would like to go home and be with their families and friends. but not while sadam is there. what possible reason would anyone have to keeping sadam in power.

The question is not whether Saddam is unpopular. "Unpopular Saddam" is an inane understatement. The pertinent question is how will departure happen less bloodily than Tito's departure from Yugoslavia. The proponents of Saddam's destruction by invasion have precious little to say about how they are going to control the considerable centrifugal force in Iraq during the American occupation. The occupiers of Iraq will have to interpose themselves in the firing line on several convoluted fronts of paybacks. The occupiers of Iraq will face vicious direct attack from guerilla organizations from within and from beyond Iraq's questionable borders. Look: Uday and Qusay don't even like their monstrous father. That really is not the point, and it is extremely naiive to only forsee two outcomes to the invasion 1) resistance by Saddam loyalists or 2) joyous reception of the liberating Us/UK troops by tearfully grateful Iraqis.

The truth of the facts on the ground is that the invaders of Iraq are entering where they should not tread. Their authority will be rejected persistently for generations if necessary.

I'll agree with you, hype, in that I don't think every Iraqi is going to be happy with the outcome, regardless of who comes to power. The INC, who is pro-West, and who is obviously who the West wants as the new regime, will likely not be a popular choice, particularly as they are a group in exile. Some Shiites wont be happy if one of the Kurdish groups take control, and likewise the Kurds won't be satisfied with a Shiite group. The reason for the London conference was to work some of this out. Some sort of leadership where all groups have some say-so, some sort of checks and balances system where no group will feel they can be exploited will likely be the only successful form of governemnt. And it is important for the US to keep its promise that the Iraqis maintain control of their oil. Anything else will be unacceptable. This is why the UN must be involved I think, so that some sort of commission be put together to oversee future oil contracts with Iraq. This might also appease the worries of France, Germany and Russia, who probably feel they will be cut out of the loop in a post-Saddam Iraq.

Yes, a UN solution would be far more likely to have success than a US one. Unfortunately, the UN was never structured to survive American arrogance and manipulation. However, when everything goes to sh*t it will be dumped in the UN's lap as always.

The UN can play a role if a couple of permanent Security Council members want it to.

Let's hope so.

I heard a rumor on the tv or something, the US is planning to throw more missiles at baghdad in the first few hours of a war than it did in the first few weeks of Desert Storm (I may be exagerating). One "official" said that there "wouldn't be a safe place in Baghdad." I think they were planning to literally level the city, the death toll was expected to be at half a million people. I don't know if Saddam has ever killed that many innocent people, and although the man is evil, it still gives us absolutely no right to destroy a population of innocents.

But do the Iraqis support him? I don't know if any of us can say for sure--all I see on TV are pictures and videos of Iraqis screaming their support for the man, but it's all part of a process to turn them into objects rather than humans, to ease the public when they find out that half a million of them are dead. How the hell does the US think it's going to put a stop to terrorism when they're mutilating people like this? I find it amazing--a whole new generation of people seeking revenge for lost families will be born. The cycle of violence is apparently too profitable for freedom.

<i>"Do Iraqis hate Saddam Hussein?"</i>

Are they allowed to hold for him any feeling other than love?

I think fear is also allowed.

Ah, very good for you. I missed that one.