Posted on 07/11/2016 9:09:15 AM PDT by marshmallow
The Chilcot Report has brought to light the absurdity of the conflict to bring down Saddam Hussein which has transformed the Country into a cesspool of terrorists. The Pope, already old and ill, tried everything to stop it. But in vain
In January 2003, during a working meal with some Vaticanists at the Nunciature in Italy, the then Secretary of State Angelo Sodano decided to reply to some questions on the already imminent Anglo-Saxon war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. “We say to our American friends: is it in your interest to anger a billion Muslims and risk having the hostility of the Muslim world for decades?” Wise words, spoken by a diplomat who was capable of putting the future of that Country above the ability to achieve a quick military victory. With the Holy See’s diplomacy and his personal charisma, the elderly and sick John Paul II sought to dissuade from this “adventure of no return,” which unfortunately has revealed itself to be exactly this.
Pope Wojtyla had met with many leaders and heads of government. He had sent cardinal Roger Etchegaray to speak with Saddam and cardinal Pio Laghi to speak with George Bush Jr. in an effort to prevent the conflict. The logic of a “preventive war” had prevailed against everything, even if the intelligence on the weapons of mass destruction proved to be false.
All this has now been confirmed by the Chilcot Report, written by a commission of the British government, from which it is evident that the then prime minister Tony Blair, like Bush, wanted to wage war at all costs, ignoring alternative possibilities. It was these very alternatives the pontifical diplomats had insisted on so passionately, convinced as they rightfully were that not all avenues had been explored. War, as we know, is won by.....
(Excerpt) Read more at lastampa.it ...
Would that WE had stayed angry till this very day. Islam is at war with us. We should be at war with it, not importing more of it.
Saddam Hussein was not an islamist.
He was a dictator who kept a lid on the islamists.
More happened than just dealing with Saddam. And really, that was already going to eventually happen even without 9/11.
On August 15, 2002, before before our invasion of Iraq the 3 Islamofascist terrorists stabbed, hacked and decapitated an Assyrian nun in Baghdad...
In 2002 Iraq-backed terrorists assassinated US AID official Lawrence Foley in Jordan.
The organization whose leader went on to cofound ISIS with an Iraqi intel chief... moved into Baghdad after the US invasion of Afghanistan and had two cells- one in Baghdad and the other in northern Iraq- BEFORE the coalition invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
Meanwhile, Saddam’s sons were busily praising al Qaeda attacks on US embassies in Africa, predicting the US would be “struck on the arm that is already hurting” [New York] by bin Laden, and torturing dissidents, their children, and the Iraqi olympic team....
In other words, it is glaringly obvious that Iraq already was a cesspool of terrorism well before the invasion.
Anglo-Saxon war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq”
LOL. Anglo Saxon? Like we were being led to war by Alfred the Great?
Of course now that I think about it...some of that would be great. Would that we were a bit more Anglo Saxon, and a little less Norman.
Saddam Hussein’s intel chief was both Baathist and Islamist. He cofounded ISIS with Zarqawi after working for years with Islamic radicals.
Saddam built his mega-mosque with the scud missile and rifle lookalike minarets to appeal to Islamists ; he also instituted sharia law in Iraq before the invasion to please the islamists he and his General were courting and once he did it hundreds of women were decapitated in Baghdad, mostly dissidents accused of prostitution. His general is a believer of a sect with end times prophesy much like Iran’s Ahmadinejad, only not Shia.
And anyone who bothered to read his speeches from the late 90s couldn’t miss the Islamist rhetoric.
The myth of secular Iraq needs to be put to rest.
AUGUST 1997 : (IRAQ : ASSASSINATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LEADERS) leaders (AINA, 08-19-1997)
1999 : (IRAQ : ISLAMOFASCIST TERRORISM) In the northern UN “Safe Haven,” attacks against Assyrian Christian villages (AINA, 10-16-1999)
1999 : (IRAQ : ISLAMOFASCIST BOMBINGS OF CHRISTIAN CONVENTS) as well as Christmas-time bombings of convents (AINA, 12-25-1999) have been previously reported
FEBRUARY 2001 : (IRAQ : ASSASSINATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LEADERS) leaders (AINA, 02-19-2001)
Yes but the Normans were the winners against the Anglo Saxons and I like winning. Also they were largely Viking in origin not modernist French , having already conquered Normandy. So they were doubly - winner- like , if you will. Maybe a little more Norman in us might help us defend ourselves against the Islamonazi invasion?
But there's a difference between Islamic "rhetoric" plus window-dressing, vs the more defining acts of state. He forcibly suppressed his rivals, and his rivals were the kind of islamists who, shall we say, really needed to be suppressed.
It's not Monday Morning Quarterbacking to note that what Pope John Paul II said would happen back in 2003, happened.
Well said!
Now you can explain how the Iraq war helped other Christians. Explain why Christians by the thousands were ran out of their homes in Iraq, churches bombed, and had to flee to Syria to stay alive, all under George Bush’s watch, while our military was in Iraq.
Since your bringing up atrocities here’s one: 9/11/2001. Most of those terrorists were Saudi’s. Money came from Saudi. Some of it passed out to the terrorists by the US Saudi ambassador, who was a dear friend of the Bush’s and hung out and smoked cigars with him while the crater in New York was still smoking.
Shock and awe should have been in Saudi Arabia, period.
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.