Could it be because the statistics you are mouthing off are utterly meaningless without providing the same statistics under Saddam's rule, so that we can adjudge for ourselves whether Iraq is now better off than back then, or rather (as I suspect) that Iraq has improved slightly recently after having had its infrastructure destroyed by the forces of invasion.
Well, clearly the statistics are not meaningless and show accurately where Iraq currently is compared to other nations.
There are not many accurate economic or welfare statistics from the Saddam era except for GDP. The Saddam era was characterized by the infusion of resources into the sunni area's especially after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and the placing of international sanctions on Iraq. After the 1991 Gulf War the Shia and Kurdish area's were largely neglected. International sanctions on Iraq for many years were tight and did a lot of damage to the country. Its only the last few years of Saddam's time in power that the sanctions regime started to fall apart.
The end of international sanctions brought great relief and resources to many area's in southern Iraq that had been denied humanitarian aid while Saddam was in power. On the other hand, area's in the Sunni majority provinces no longer recieve the priority that they once did under Saddam, in addition, the majority of the fighting after the invasion occured in the Sunni majority area's.
Much of Iraq's infrastructure was already destroyed or severely neglected by the time of the US invasion in 2003, especially area's in southern Iraq. Saddam murdered over 1.7 million people while he was in power through his invasion and attempts to sieze Kuzistan in Iran, his attacks on Kurds including the 1 hour slaughter of 5,000 of them in a sarin gas attack.
Saddam then invaded Kuwait, annexed the country and launched attacks on Saudi Arabia and Israel. He launched Ballistic missiles randomly in downtown populated area's of Saudi and Israel cities forcing the entire population to put on protective mask and seek shelter. He then torched oil fields in Kuwait, flooded the Persian Gulf with oil from the refinery's on the coast causing the worst environmental disaster in the history of the region. All the while, his actions and military moves threatened the security of Persian Gulf oil supply vital to the life of the global economy. Saddam used WMD more times than any leader in history. Despite not finding actual weapons after the 2003 invasion, program related activities for WMD were found that violated the UN Ceacefire agreement and resolutions. In addition, thousands of stocks of WMD remained unaccounted for by Saddam in violation of the ceacefire agreement and resolutions. If this was not enough, Saddam murdered and tortured thousands of his own citizens.
By any reasonable measure, even without accurate life expectancy and education figures from the Saddam era, its rather obvious that Iraq today without Saddam is much better off. The murder rate in Iraq has dropped below the richest country on the planet, the United States. Iraq is no longer ruled by a cruel dictatorship that is investing the countries wealth in unnecessary military and foreign adventures. It is and understatement to say that Iraq today is better off without Saddam.
If you would like to make a case for Saddam go ahead. But your not going to find much support among Iraqi's for that in 2009.
