First off the Iraq insurgency: It was formed by Saddam’s Baathists Sunni officers. They led the insurgency and recruited into it.
The insurgency began at the end of Ashura, Easter Sunday, March, 2004 -two years before Iraq’s sovereignty.
The “old Baathists” were the Sunni insurgents’ leadership. There was no linkup. And you think the former Sunni military officers should have been allowed in the new Army? Hah! You don’t think that was tried by starry-eyed commanders in the field? They were branded as traitors by the Sunnis who were awaiting Saddam’s return. They were usually killed and their families too. They were Sunnis living in Sunni neighborhoods. Get a frickin clue! They had to move many IA commanders and their families onto Camp Victory in 2005 to protect them.
The only ‘mistake’ with the former Baathist IA was to stop paying them even though they didn’t show up for duty. At least that way they’d have something to lose if they were implicated in attacks. And it also gave them an income so as not to seek IED payments which is how insurgents made their money. Iran and others’ paid them per attack. Why do you think they videoed their attacks?
The region, starting with Iraq, was destabilized beginning with the Democrats’ budgetary-mandated withdrawal from Iraq in 2009. Once the Sunni insurgents had cross-border havens their 2011 assault on Syria and 2012 assault on Iraq was made possible. Obama and the Dems then encouraged similar destabilization and collapse in other Arab nations. They ruined Iraq and the region to “give revolution a chance”. Bunch of evil Fs.
Easter Sunday, April 11, 2004
It’s complex but there is/was definitely linkage between the disenfranchised Sadammite Baaathists and the inception of the Islamic State. Just do a search on the terms Baathists and ISIS. Here is just one article of dozens exploring the linkage
I am not sure what Bush could have done to buy off or invest the Baathists into the new Iraqi state, but what they did do, was hugely counterproductive