Posted on 10/20/2017 5:40:11 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
“Saddam, Mubarak & Qaddafi are dead. All were very effective in controlling radical jihadi’s.”
Correction: Mubarak is not dead. He was released from prison when the military restored the Egyptian constitution by overthrowing the Muslim Brotherhood.
And it is a popular misconception that Saddam was opposed to jihadis - he was in fact one of the world’s biggest sponsors when he ruled.
The Iran/Iraq War (1980-88) fundamentally changed the religious policy of the Iraqi Ba’ath Party. They adopted a deliberate policy of promoting Salafi/Wahabbi-style Sunni islam to counter the the Shi’ite radicalism that Iran promoted.
The head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, received his Ph.D. in islamic religious studies (Quaranic Studies) from the Saddam University in Baghdad - which had been established in 1987 explicitly to promote the extreme Wahabbi interpretation of islam that ISIS and al Queda (and Saudi Arabia) preach.
“In the aftermath of the 1991 war, Saddam launched his hamla imaniyya, a faith campaign that sought to entrench Islam across the Baath party and Iraqi society. Religious instruction became mandatory, and the ostensibly secular society he took over in 1979 morphed into a society with religion – or at least the outward signs of devotion – at the heart of it.” (https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/how-saddam-s-iraq-laid-the-foundations-for-isil-1.15505)
Saddam also began an extensive program to train and finance islamic terrorist groups, which (especially after their Gulf War defeat) they sought to target at the United States and Israel. He famously provided $25,000 payments to the families of terrorists who were killed attacking Israel (then a retirement fund in the West Bank), and established several Government-run training camps for terrorist groups from around the the world - including Salman Pak, which had fuselages of the common commercial aircraft of the day, and specialized storage facilities for handling Chemical and Biological Warfare agents, as well as Radioactive materials.
Saddam added the phrase “Allah is Greater” (Allahu Akhbar) to the Iraqi flag in 1991. He went on a mosque building campaign across Iraq, and incorporated truly brutal repression against Shi’ites and the Shia sect.
Saddam was a major promoter, funder, trainer and director of jihadi groups - he just sought to co-opt them for his own political and military purposes.
It is definitely true that installing a strongman leader can be effective in suppressing anti-American elements in a society. But Saddam was the opposite. He was a major factor in the rise of extremist Sunni terrorist capability worldwide.
“Saddam, Mubarak & Qaddafi are dead. All were very effective in controlling radical jihadi’s.”
Correction: Mubarak is not dead. He was released from prison when the military restored the Egyptian constitution by overthrowing the Muslim Brotherhood.
And it is a popular misconception that Saddam was opposed to jihadis - he was in fact one of the world’s biggest sponsors when he ruled.
The Iran/Iraq War (1980-88) fundamentally changed the religious policy of the Iraqi Ba’ath Party. They adopted a deliberate policy of promoting Salafi/Wahabbi-style Sunni islam to counter the the Shi’ite radicalism that Iran promoted.
The head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, received his Ph.D. in islamic religious studies (Quaranic Studies) from the Saddam University in Baghdad - which had been established in 1987 explicitly to promote the extreme Wahabbi interpretation of islam that ISIS and al Queda (and Saudi Arabia) preach.
“In the aftermath of the 1991 war, Saddam launched his hamla imaniyya, a faith campaign that sought to entrench Islam across the Baath party and Iraqi society. Religious instruction became mandatory, and the ostensibly secular society he took over in 1979 morphed into a society with religion – or at least the outward signs of devotion – at the heart of it.” (https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/how-saddam-s-iraq-laid-the-foundations-for-isil-1.15505)
Saddam also began an extensive program to train and finance islamic terrorist groups, which (especially after their Gulf War defeat) they sought to target at the United States and Israel. He famously provided $25,000 payments to the families of terrorists who were killed attacking Israel (then a retirement fund in the West Bank), and established several Government-run training camps for terrorist groups from around the the world - including Salman Pak, which had fuselages of the common commercial aircraft of the day, and specialized storage facilities for handling Chemical and Biological Warfare agents, as well as Radioactive materials.
Saddam added the phrase “Allah is Greater” (Allahu Akhbar) to the Iraqi flag in 1991. He went on a mosque building campaign across Iraq, and incorporated truly brutal repression against Shi’ites and the Shia sect.
Saddam was a major promoter, funder, trainer and director of jihadi groups - he just sought to co-opt them for his own political and military purposes.
It is definitely true that installing a strongman leader can be effective in suppressing anti-American elements in a society. But Saddam was the opposite. He was a major factor in the rise of extremist Sunni terrorist capability worldwide.
Yes. He deserves his stay in Hell.
Saw the comments about him, it was still questioned by some. Take it, it is confirmed now. Had seen pics that made me think he was at room temp.
Name a few terror incidents on US soil linked to Saddam.
I never saw any such news items. But since I do not read or view every piece of news, please post a few news items of such terror incidents on US soil linked to Saddam.
Since Saddam was fighting a 10 year war with Iran, which has more resources and people than Iraq, Saddam was instigating anti-Shia fervor against Shia Iran. He did not send the 19 terrorists on 911.
My point remains, the loss of blood & treasure by United States due to invading Iraq by George W Bush has proved to be catastrophic in de-stabilizing middle-east and Trillions borrowed to fight Iraq war.
In essence, we borrowed Trillions from China to protect oil flow to China from middle-east. It was the most idiotic foreign policy initiative by United States. It was unnecessary and way premature adventure by George W Bush, the dumbest republican president in a century.
“Name a few terror incidents on US soil linked to Saddam.”
Now you are moving the goalposts.
First you proposed that Saddam was a bulwark against jihadis, now you propose a far different standard.
However, Saddam’s Intelligence officers have been implicated in the Oklahoma City bombing (John Doe number two) and in the final coordination meeting for the 9-11 attack in Malaysia. That is just off the top of my head.
Face it, we remained at war with Saddam after the Gulf War (no fly zone in the North etc.) - he naturally sought other avenues to pressure us.
aHA...you have nothing to report on ANY terrorist incidents on US soil sponsored, supported and funded by Saddam. That is EXACTLY why George Bush is easily the dumbest republican president in a century. $6,000,000,000,000 borrowed to fight wars in Iraq and collateral wars, thousands of brave and young American soldiers killed or maimed, all for the purpose of revenge on Saddam. That Iraq war started by GWB was unnecessary and way premature at best. We lost tons of treasure and blood and gained NOTHING except more chaos in middle-east.
I never said Saddam was a nice guy. But facts are there was no ISIS during his reign. And Al Qaeda operated from Afghanistan, NOT Iraq. $25000 prize to anti-Israeli terrorists? That is a piddly small amount, even in Iraq. Name ONE terrorist who committed terror on US soil, whom Saddam sent a $25,000 check. You can’t.
Again, Saddam was trying to survive with hostile neighbors. Iran & Israel were his mortal enemies. Can you blame Saddam for encouraging terrorists operating in those countries?
So yes, George W. Bush was the dumbest and worst republican president in 10 years. But I hold no grudge against Bushbots like you. Because I actually like GWB sa a person. I met him in a line and shook his hand in 2001 in Portland, OR.
I am losing faith in the ability to have an honest, objective discussion with you on this topic, but I’ll give it one last attempt.
You said that “If only Bush-43 had NOT attacked Iraq, we would have no ISIS, Sadddam and sons would be keeping all radical Muslims where they belong, in prisons doing hard labor.”
I gave you ample information about the wide extent of Saddam’s cultivation and sponsorship of radical muslim terrorist ideology and organizations. Without acknowledging that fundamental error on your part, you (apparently rhetorically, to avoid conceding, or perhaps avoid admitting to yourself) you shifted the standard to “Name a few terror incidents on US soil linked to Saddam.”
So I named the Oklahoma City Bombing (then the biggest mass casualty terrorist attack in US history), and 9-11 (now the biggest). Your response: “aHA...you have nothing to report on ANY terrorist incidents on US soil sponsored, supported and funded by Saddam.”
It is as if you simply refuse to register any facts or arguments contrary to your dearly held (but poorly supported) prejudice.
You continue to cling to that prejudice (that Saddam was in opposition to islamic extremist terrorists), by saying “I never said Saddam was a nice guy. But facts are there was no ISIS during his reign.” It is true that the ISIS name was adopted later, but fundamentally, the core of the organization was initially established and nurtured under Saddam, as his Government’s deliberate policy.
The religious authorities of ISIS including their top leader, the Caliph) were predominately trained and educated in the Iraqi institutions established by Saddam, for just that purpose, rather than in Saudi universities or al Azhar. The initial cells that became al Queda in Iraq (whose remnants later formed ISIS), were established by, and as part of, Saddam’s own Ba’ath party, under his direct command and on his payroll.
The military command of ISIS was led by former Ba’athist officers, who had been trained under Saddam for just such an insurgency (along with the Fedayeen Saddam) as a “poison pill”, in event that the country was conquered, or the Ba’ath Government overthrown. Ba’ath doctrine was that they would covertly organize a coup to reclaim power (which they had previously done twice before - three times if you count ISIS).
You seem emotionally vested in your opinion that Bush was the sole or the overwhelming problem, and seem willing to go to great lengths to avoid recognizing any facts that weaken that narrative. You say: “My point remains, the loss of blood & treasure by United States due to invading Iraq by George W Bush has proved to be catastrophic in de-stabilizing middle-east and Trillions borrowed to fight Iraq war.”
OK, but the Middle East was unstable before Bush, and leaving Saddam in power would itself have been a catastrophe. Not removing Saddam could well have been worse, in the long run. Like Iran, the number one enemy for which Saddam preached destruction, was the United States of America. The largest of all the extremist mosques that he commissioned for building (left unfinished, due to the invasion and his overthrow) was the colossal Victory Over America Mosque. You ignore his essential anti-Americanism, aspirations of regional dominance/superpower status, and the huge resources (as one of the World’s great oil powers) that he poured into cultivating the professional military capability of the modern jihadi movement. That is why his regime was designated the World’s largest State Supporter of Terrorism in his day. I also don’t believe you appreciate the fundamental heinousness of the ideology of the Ba’ath Party itself (the Nazi model of socialism based on race rather than class).
So things didn’t turn out well in the Middle East (as is usually/always the case), but there are many reasons why, and many bad actors doing their damnedest to make it so. My point is that Saddam was not some benign dictator, in terms of US interests - he was in fact among the most dangerous world leaders, in terms of US interests, and one of the greatest enablers of of Sunni islamist terrorist organizations worldwide. It is not simple to make peace in the Middle East, or to contain its many bad actors.
It is the preferred narrative of the Left to re-write the history of the region in the simplistic terms that everything would have been fine, if not for the sheer stupidity of George Bush. Saddam was one of the great monsters of the 20th century, and his regime was a significant threat to America and American interests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.