but you weren't talking about a civil war you were on about deaths from the invasion... changing the analogy is rather dubious now as you're referring to something else
I'm still not sure what exactly you're arguing - again the other poster made a reasonable point about dictators and you're like a stuck record moaning about the number of deaths related to the invasion... as you have done on plenty of other occasions... It doesn't really provide an argument against what the other poster said nor provide any evidence for the population wanting Saddam back... it is barely related to this thread which is about an attack in London... but still you persist in making more and more irrelevant posts... each time I pop into the thread there is a reply form you that isn't anything to do with the original point but instead I get quoted and you've got something else to say yet again about people dying... I'm well aware that people died in Iraq, though this is getting silly as you're basically presenting nothing so I'm going to ignore any further replies from you on the subject.
Over and over you ignore the massive increase in mortality and wave it off like it should hardly matter to rank a file civilians, why not buy yourself a second home in Fallujah I'm sure the prices are very cheap.
The point about mentioning the Civil War is also irrelevant, I've shown figures for the invasion period and also mentioned casualties in the round, many commentators suggest the Civil War in Iraq has been in effect since 2006 although frankly who cares what you call the war if it takes the odd city sized population out. Frankly your inability to entertain the possibility that people could be left with a preference for the lesser of 2 evils in terms of daily deaths is utter nonsense and your comparisons to Post WWII France and Holland show an utter contempt for the people we claimed we were trying to help!