Hate to be a killjoy but (once again) the presented "snip" is contrary to the actual meaning of the article.
>>Title: Amanpour: Saddam's influence still strong in southern Iraq
Headline: Coalition soldiers working to stabilize the Iraqi port city of Umm Qasr are finding that Saddam Hussein still holds much influence there, more than a decade after quelling an Iraqi uprising in that region of the country that was left without backing from the U.S. military... Many Iraqis will not easily forget what they call America's great betrayal during the Persian Gulf War 12 years ago...
<<
The rest of the article details coalition attempts to weaken Saddam's support.
I can see but do not appreciate the careful selection of "snips" to imply a reality that is completely opposite that which the reporter is trying to present.
"... They ne'er cared for us
yet: suffer us to famish, and their store-houses
crammed with grain; make edicts for usury, to
support usurers; repeal daily any wholesome act
established against the rich, and provide more
piercing statutes daily, to chain up and restrain
the poor. If the wars eat us not up, they will; and
there's all the love they bear us."
-- Shakespeare: Coriolanus, Act 1, scene 1
