New York Times: ISIS Roots in Iraq Predated Iraq War

American_Jihad

Flaming Libs/Koranimals
May 1, 2012
11,534
3,715
350
Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
Ain't that something from the NY rag...
New York Times: ISIS Roots in Iraq Predated Iraq War
"The Islamic State was not created by removing Saddam Hussein’s regime; it is the afterlife of that regime"
December 23, 2015
Daniel Greenfield

al-baghdadi_3100809b.jpg


This is a pretty good piece that makes its way through much of the same territory that my own, "The US Didn't Create ISIS, Saddam and Assad Did" followed. Kyle Orton goes deeper into depth in some areas and it's a good thing to see something like this run in the New York Times.

Kyle Orton also makes some important points,

The government imposed a version of Shariah law: Thieves had their hands cut off, homosexuals were thrown from rooftops and prostitutes were beheaded in public squares. Numerous mosques were built, Quran study became a national focus and midlevel clerics acquired new roles as community leaders.

The Faith Campaign claimed to be ecumenical, but its clear pro-Sunni tilt led to a final collapse of relations between the state and the Shiite population and heightened sectarian tensions. In the Sunni areas, however, the campaign was effective, creating a religious movement I call Baathi-Salafism, under Mr. Hussein’s leadership. It also eased strains between the regime and independent religious movements like the “pure” Salafists, whose long opposition to the regime gave way to some of its members serving in its administration, even though Mr. Hussein was warned by his intelligence chief that if the alliance continued, the Salafists would eventually supplant the regime.

Alongside the Faith Campaign, Mr. Hussein’s regime constructed a system of cross-border smuggling networks designed to evade the sanctions. This funded a system of patronage, much of it distributed through mosques, that maintained a series of militias directly loyal to the ruler, like the Fedayeen Saddam and the Sunni tribes, as a hedge against any repeat of the 1991 Shiite revolt. These networks, which are deeply entrenched in the local populations, especially the tribes of western Iraq, are now run by the Islamic State, adding to the difficulty of uprooting the “caliphate.”

One of the less advertised aspects of the Faith Campaign was the infiltration of mosques by military intelligence officers. There was a trapdoor in this policy: With Baathism a spent force by the late 1990s, many of them slid into Salafism. The security sector had been profoundly influenced by Salafism by the time Mr. Hussein’s government fell.

I don't agree with some of his conclusions about "radicalization". What Orton calls Baathi-Salafism and what is now the Islamic State have a common agenda of Sunni Supremacism. There are a whole lot of other things on top, but if you're invested in having a Sunni-run Iraq, with all the resulting benefits to your family, Saddam's Baath Party and the Islamic State are both the same ticket.

Were Baathists really radicalized or did they just see ISIS as doing the same basic things that Saddam had been doing? A strong Sunni leader using brutal terror to dominate Shiites and intimidate foreigners.

The Islamic State was not created by removing Saddam Hussein’s regime; it is the afterlife of that regime.

...

New York Times: ISIS Roots in Iraq Predated Iraq War
 
A few points....

1. It's the NYT attempt to take blame off Obama for ISIS
2. The root of ISIS does predate the war. It predated Hitler...and Napoleon....and guns. The root of ISIS is ISLAM and it's been around for a long ass time.
 
Ohhhh you've done it now. The moonbats are spiraling out of their guano coated comfort zones by the zillions screeching at the very idea that something, anything can't be blamed on Bush.
 
Who is " Kyle Orton" now, Lets blame this on a dead man and Assad. What a joke.
 
Ohhhh you've done it now. The moonbats are spiraling out of their guano coated comfort zones by the zillions screeching at the very idea that something, anything can't be blamed on Bush.


Nope. Didn't start with the shrub or even his daddy. About 99% of it can be laid at Ronnie RayGun's door.

Three of our worst presidents, all corrupt, all crooked, all driven by greed for the 1%.

But its Obama's fault for not cleaning up the enormous mess they left for him.

10432974_10152226558471275_7837199847487664027_n_zpsf3e6dbcd.png
 
Ohhhh you've done it now. The moonbats are spiraling out of their guano coated comfort zones by the zillions screeching at the very idea that something, anything can't be blamed on Bush.




Nope. Didn't start with the shrub or even his daddy. About 99% of it can be laid at Ronnie RayGun's door.

Three of our worst presidents, all corrupt, all crooked, all driven by greed for the 1%.

But its Obama's fault for not cleaning up the enormous mess they left for him.

10432974_10152226558471275_7837199847487664027_n_zpsf3e6dbcd.png

True that Reagan armed the mujahadeen in Afghanistan who at the time were fighting the Russians.

True also that Isis has grown exponentially under Obama's "watch" He can most certainly be blamed for things that go further into the shitter while he's in office.

And, btw, that quote was from a speech Reagan gave on the Nicaraguan Contras...
 
A few points....

1. It's the NYT attempt to take blame off Obama for ISIS
2. The root of ISIS does predate the war. It predated Hitler...and Napoleon....and guns. The root of ISIS is ISLAM and it's been around for a long ass time.

In reailty- the NYT is trying to take the blame off of Bush.

Certainly the 'roots of ISIS' predate the invasion of Iraq- but- without the invasion of Iraq- ISIS would not exist today.

The founder of ISIS was a Jordanian who was radicalized in Afghanistan(the real breeding ground for ISIS and Al Qaeda being of course- Afghanistan during the Russian war)- further radicalized in Jordanian prisons. He was based in Iraq- a known terrorist who the CIA wanted to target- and the CIA was denied the attack- he escaped.

Remember after the invasion- the Iraqi Army and the entire Baathist Party were kicked out of power- with no income

AFter the invasion, he started bombing mosques and such- trying to incite a Sunni/Shia conflict. - and that is the real source of what happened- Iraq was not a society of radicalized Shia and Sunni prior to the invasion- there was conflict and resentment- but the two sects largely allowed each other to live in peace.

As the Iraqi population descended into religious war, former Iraqi Army officers got involved with radical Islamists.

The United States did put that down through excellent tactics and strategy by 2010- killing the original ISIS commander and largely driving the original ISIS contingent underground.

Then Syria happened- the originally non-religious Civil War in Syria- which left a power vaccuum.

ISIS in Iraq sent troops to 'help' Muslims fighting the Syrian dictator- and then took over. From Syria- ISIS came back to Iraq, and were able to recruit once again former Iraqi Army officers- and the party out of power.

There were several 'roots' to ISIS- but the invasion of Iraq by the United States- and the failure to have a plan for the former Army and occupation is the primary reason why ISIS was able to take hold in Iraq.
 
True that Reagan armed the mujahadeen in Afghanistan who at the time were fighting the Russians.

True also that Isis has grown exponentially under Obama's "watch" He can most certainly be blamed for things that go further into the shitter while he's in office.

And, btw, that quote was from a speech Reagan gave on the Nicaraguan Contras...
The Nicaraguan Contras........ proof that the US government is not above arming and training mercenary armies (terrorists) to achieve regime change.
 
True that Reagan armed the mujahadeen in Afghanistan who at the time were fighting the Russians.

True also that Isis has grown exponentially under Obama's "watch" He can most certainly be blamed for things that go further into the shitter while he's in office.

And, btw, that quote was from a speech Reagan gave on the Nicaraguan Contras...
The Nicaraguan Contras........ proof that the US government is not above arming and training mercenary armies (terrorists) to achieve regime change.


Not at all uncommon. Been going on forever. Well before Reagan.

Hillary wanted to arm the Syrian rebels and seems to think the failure to do so led to the explosion of ISIS.

"Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recently publicly criticized the foreign policy of the Obama administration for its “failure” to take action in Syria, leading the well-armed jihadi fighters who style themselves the Islamic State (formerly known as ISIS) to grow out of the instability caused by that country’s civil war.

“The failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against [Syrian President Bashar al] Assad – there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle – the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled,” Clinton said of President Barack Obama’s hesitation to take action in Syria."

Should Obama Have Armed Syrian Rebels Sooner?

Whether arming them was the right call, wrong call we don't know, but sitting with our thumb in our ear did nothing but let them grow into a serious problem. Little doubt about that.
 
That must mean that the myths of Saddam not supporting terrorism, and/or he kept things under control have been debunked.
 

Forum List

Back
Top