Yes.
People are still being killed but at least:
1. The rate is lower
2. One side doesn't have all the power to murder the entire opposing side
3. There is a chance it will end
Not a great chance, but at least there's a chance.
Throughout this thread you've displayed a distrubing level of ignorance about the history and current status of Iraq. First, there was no genocide occuring in Iraq directly prior to the US-led invasion (if you don't count the murderous sanctions regime imposed by the U.N.). Saddam's worst crimes against human rights (the gassing of the Kurds, the war with Iran) occured in the 1980s while Hussien was an ally of the west.
Secondly, the rate of death currently is not lower. This has been scientifically established in the Lancet report on civilian casualties in Iraq, showing up to 100,000 additional deaths per year across Iraq through violence and disease; over and above the death rate when Saddam was in charge.
Further, regarding your point 3. (There's a chance it will end) Yeah, and there's a chance I'll jump over the moon, lets just ignore how miniscule. But it raises an interesting point: there was a chance that Saddam's rule could have been ended: By the Shiite uprising following the first Gulf war in 1991. Of course, having a Shiite majority ruling Iraq in was geopolitically repellent to Bush the Elder, so he ordered his armed forces to sit back while Saddam's army slaughtered people in their thousands with imunity.
Back in yr box.
