Posted on 05/18/2015 7:40:50 AM PDT by AnalogReigns
SANLIURFA, Turkey — When Abu Hamza, a former Syrian rebel, agreed to join the Islamic State, he did so assuming he would become a part of the group’s promised Islamist utopia, which has lured foreign jihadists from around the globe.
Instead, he found himself being supervised by an Iraqi emir and receiving orders from shadowy Iraqis...
All of the men, however, were former Iraqi officers who had served under Saddam Hussein...
His account, and those of others who have lived with or fought against the Islamic State over the past two years, underscore the pervasive role played by members of Iraq’s former Baathist army...
...almost all of the leaders of the Islamic State are former Iraqi officers, including the members of its shadowy military and security committees, and the majority of its emirs and princes, according to Iraqis, Syrians and analysts who study the group.
The raw cruelty of Hussein’s Baathist regime, the disbandment of the Iraqi army after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, the subsequent insurgency and the marginalization of Sunni Iraqis by the Shiite-dominated government all are intertwined with the Islamic State’s ascent, said Hassan Hassan, a Dubai-based analyst and co-author of the book “ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror.”
“A lot of people think of the Islamic State as a terrorist group, and it’s not useful,” Hassan said. “It is a terrorist group, but it is more than that. It is a homegrown Iraqi insurgency, and it is organic to Iraq.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
My son had served in Gulf War 1 with the 82nd for 8 months. In January 2003, when the big blow-up occurred because Shinsecki (sp?) said we needed 350,000 troops for the invasion, I called my son and asked how many he would recommend. He said 450,000. In March 2003, Bush went in with, I think, 170,000. After Bremer’s year was over he said we should have had 500,000.
The problem was that if they were going to do it that spring, then they needed to move with what they had. Summer, the weather would have been too hot, especially with poison gas protective gear. Summer temperatures often hit 115f. Waiting until fall put it too close to the elections a year later. So Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld decided on an inadequate force with no depth for civil control, protection of assets other than oil, etc. etc.
But were does the money come from? Not Iraq.
The House of Saaud.
The only buffer between the poor Shiites in Iraq and Iran is AND SAUDI ARABIA IS........HOLD ON ITS ALMOST HERE............ISIS.
Who is filling the position at this time?
IN 1991, Bush had to weigh several potential issues before decinding. 1) The public was horrified by the highway of death leading out of Kuwait. 2) Gorbachev was in serious danger of being deposed and the Russian thaw going into deep freeze. 3) Reagan had just spent 8 years being friendly to the Iranian fight with Iraq, and it was felt unwise to weaken Iraq too much and allow an Iranian takeover.
My opinion is that Bush should have continued the war 24 hours longer, and greatly weakened the Republican Guard. Also, he should never have allowed free use of helicopters which Saddam and Kusay used to great effect to destroy the Marsh Arabs and Kurdish areas.
Boy are we on the same page!! See my comment #84.
ValJar and Huma on one side and then we have Grover Norquist with his Palestinian wife persuading almost all Republicans to sign the No New Taxes Pledge which has now tied our military in knots with the Sequester and no chance to rearrange limited funding more effectively. Our military has been royally scrxxed.
John Brennan
But was Saddam really the biggest problem in the region? Obviously not!
Perhaps a better strategy in 1990 would have been to give Saddam to understand that he could do whatever he wanted in the Middle East as long as there were no nukes and gas stayed reasonable.
Then, bye bye Saudi Arabia! Imagine the screams of the religious police as they are fed feet-first through Saddam's wood chippers ...
Islam is not a religion of peace. It is incompatible with freedom and must be destroyed!
The Kurds are fighting for an independent state. They have proven themselves willing and more able than the rest of their countrymen. However, they, like all their coreligionists, believe first in tribe.
Their convenient alliance with the islamo-fascist Turks is not neccesarily a good thing, either. The Kurds are easily capable of atrocities, as their history proves. None of the players in the region can be trusted.
There is no concept of truth in the ME, only what’s best for us now. Americans politicians and most military leaders are fools. The areas that are being “conquered” are inhabited by ISIL supporters. The Iraqi troops running from the fight have no stake in the defense of these cities. The very idea of national defense makes no sense in this context. Uniforms and flags do not a nation or an army make.
Remember what GWB provided to Obambi and the world. On one side of Iran is Iraq. On the other side is Afghanistan. We had Iran between Iraq and Afghanistan. Covertly and overtly we could have empowered the 2009 Iranian revolution and reversed the peanut farmer’s treasonous support of the Islamonazis in 1979.
Good points.
I’m not qualified to determine their accuracy, of course.
However, Americans make a huge mistake when they assume other armies are as professional and apolitical as our own.
More accurately, funded by Saudi Arabians.
I have seen no evidence that funding or direction was provided by the Saudi government itself, though rogue elements might very well have been involved.
The single most important goal of al Quaeda is to overthrow the Saudi royal family, which for obvious reasons is not wild about the idea.
Thanks for matching that up
thanks I didn’t know he converted
Here is an interview with James Baker in which he discusses building the coalition to intervene over Iraq/Kuwait, which included getting Shevardnahze/Soviet Union on board.
This is/was part of the PBS Frontline documentary on James Baker's career which was entitled James Baker: The Man Who Made Washington Work
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
This naïve "nation-building" zeal we have developed is our new national religion, replacing (or misplacing) the missionary zeal of Christianity. The Kurds seem the best of a very bad lot at the moment and would perhaps make a better "investment" in the region for us, rather than the "Iraqis," whatever the hell they actually are besides corrupt Middle Eastern toads (a redundancy).
Toto, you ain't in Kansas anymore.
There is no such thing as our idea of a government.. The country actually functions the same way a well-run crime family runs. One Prince with a government post may well be funding terror. Another with two kids at Arizona State, may well be our "friend," and have an important government post himself. Both may have 4 wives at a time and upwards of 50 children, each male with his own piece'o'the family action, down to a filling station, or a fried chicken franchise, all part of the 'family' racket. They are densely intermarried and suffer from various birth defects ... e.g., so many congenital kidney problems that every street corner strip mall has a dialysis storefront!
Every Prince has a piece'o'the action, has a crew, and kicks a piece upstairs. There is constant jockeying to stay in power and improve one's position in the Royal Family. The KSA is not really a country. It is the personal estate of the House of Saud ... Saudi Arabia.
moderate muslims = “Cafeteria Catholics”. The more devout the are, the more dangerous they become.
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.