As the fighters belonging to the group ISIS (so extreme and brutal that even Al Quaeda have distanced themselves from it) advance on Baghdad Iraq looks to be on the verge of a sectarian civil war. The Iraqi government has favoured the majority Shi-ites so much that many Sunnis are prepared to join with ISIS.
What to do about this disastrous situation is a minefield of “damned if you do and damned if you don’t.” It is now obvious to everyone, as it was to thinking people at the time, that Saddam Hussein should never have been removed. Although he was a tyrant and ran a regime that was brutal to its opponents he kept the lid on the country, holding the sectarian divide together. Countless more people have been killed since Saddam was removed than ever came to a bad end under his rule. For the ordinary person in Iraq under Saddam a fairly safe and reasonable life was possible. Now the ordinary folk face increasing danger and terror. If Saddam had received a fair trial (which he obviously did not) he could have argued that his fairly unusual view of human rights was necessary to hold the country together. Without the dictator the country has descended into endless cycles of sectarian violence and terror.
Why did the idiot Bush and his friends Blair and Howard insist on invading Iraq? Why didn’t they remove Robert Magabe from Zimbabwe instead? That would have removed an even worse dictator than Saddam and would have been a cheap and quick war of two or three days. The answer is simple. Zimbabwe has no oil and would have not have offered the same opportunities for corrupt profits (Haliburton and the like) from the following rebuilding.
Don’t forget to buy my novel “Brownout – 666” an ebook available from Amazon, Kobo, Apple Ibook store etc etc very cheaply
One thought on “ISIS and the Iraq civil war: a crisis caused by the idiotic “coalition of the willing” back in 2003”