This prez is a moron!

This last episode was carried out, not by a Republican, although the Republicans blindly follow this clown probably because they are black mailed or paid off, but by a baffoon whose ego and pocket book are served by being in this position and he will do anything he thinks will keep it. He cares nothing for people, the world or anything besides himself. The culprits are those dummies who support him.

I hear what you are saying, but you are oversimplifying the politics on the Midfle East. Islam is not monolithic. Saudia Arabia and UAE represents a faction known as the Sunni Moslems. Iran is the primary representative of the Shia faction. Iraq and Yemen are mostly Shia. These two groups dislike one another, much like Catholics and Protestants in Europe not so long ago. They have no compunction about blowing each other up. ISIS is mostly Sunni.

Saddam Hussein was a leader in the Ba'ath Party in Iraq. Ba'ath Party, originally Shia, is now mostly Sunni Moslem faction. Saddam Hussein killed many Shia as well as many Kurdish families which are mostly Sunni (go figute). Including using chemical weapons in wiping out Kurds in the southern part of the country.

.
The interference by the US began long before George W. Bush. The US help put the last Shah of Iran in power with the help of the Soviet Union in 1941. Mohammad Reza Shah (Shah of Iran) was Shia. The Shah was overthrown in 1979 when he outraged the middle class with his push toward modernism and his courting of the West. Moslem clerics under Ayatollah Komeini rose up and rebels took the American Embassy hostage in Baghdad for 444 days. This revolution fueled the long standing hatred of the West and fostered radical factions of Islamic terrorists.

I remember in high school in 1970 to 72 hearing about the terrorists camps hidden in the deserts throughout the Middle East. It was a major source of the news at the time. They were training terrorists from all over the world like Bader Meinhoff in Germany, the Red Army, Hezbollah, Hammas and others. 1970's is considered the Golden Age of terrorist bombings ( see source below). Jihadism has been around long before Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush.

Whilst I can understand the wellspring of your sentiment, I cannot agree. Several others have cited the history of the region, better than I could, I would like to add a couple of thoughts for consideration.

1. I would suggest that Oman was actually one of the most stable ME countries, with the loss of Qaboos, who was a mediator throughout the region, that has of course put that country back 'in play'.
2. Soleimani was not purely fighting against the Daesh, his portfolio was to expand Iranian influence throughout the region. This did involve quelling any threats from groups not sympatico with Iran, it also involved targetting NATO troops. The targetting of NATO troops was a deliberate and long term strategy. As Iran had correctly divined that a steady trail of body bags would build up pressure at home, forcing troops to come home, creating a vacuum, into which....Iran could move.
3. Who says that IS is on its knees? The idealogy has not been defeated. Last estimate that I'd heard was that it had approx 10K - 15K fighters, not an insubstantial force. Especially as they are going back to their roots as an insurgent force. They, like Al Qaeda are now part of the terrain of the ME and have to be considered as a threat to the region.
   In short I disagree with your statement. I also disagree with the timing of the killing of Soleimani, I believe that it was a knee jerk response. The administration could have used many earlier opportunities as an excuse.
   As with everything in the ME, everything is connected, there are more strands being woven together as others fray. What concerns me the most is the lack of a clear and focussed strategy and desired end state for the ME, it appears that we're dealing with the issues piecemeal, so we lurch from one thing to another. This confuses the ME countries, sows doubt in our integrity and allows other players into the space to further their own objectives.

The problem is, us, citizens, regardless of our nationality, want peace. It's the politicians who start wars. It's easy to start them from the safety of an office. It's us, citizens, who suffer the most from wars. Being in Europe, after a very long time of peace, I do value it. We all know wars are started for money, power and interests. Despite religion being involved or not.

Saddam was an evil leader. That said he was also a power balance with Iran. Much of the difficulties we experience in the area may have been caused by Bush 43.

I skimmed most responses and noted a BIG omission: Wahabbism from Saudi Arabia. That particular branch of Sunnism has given rise to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and Daesh or ISIS and Al Shabob.

A better question is do evangelicals want turmoil and terror to thrive. The answer is yes, anything to "help" their god bring about the second coming (aka the end of the world).

Saddam was an evil "king." Truly beyond any reason. The damage he had done to the souther part of the country was intolerable. He repeatedly committed mass murders.

Saddam and his family was the religion. Just like in N Korea.

There was a UN resolution to remove him.

The war was managed badly. But Saddam and his ilk needed to be gone. Just like the islamers in SA and iran, and now Nigeria,...

Of course they do. This is because it is all about money and wealth, especially mineral wealth. Americans are played back and forth by both parties and so is the rest of the world. Just when you have had enough of it from one party the other one steps in to let you believe you are actually getting your treasured way of life back. Both parties work for the controllers and one is more extreme than the other. Currently we have a wave of "god's last stand" in which Evangelicals agg this all on in hopes of bringing about the second coming. If Jesus returns through our border with Mexico he will never be recognized. Religious hypocrites are falling right in there with our controllers. None of this is about you or your welfare in any way.

The war and murder industry makes big money- for the "war and murder industry".

So it would appear.

When you say "Iraq under Saddam" had no religious extremism, that's a very disingenuous view. Saddam and his Baath Party suppressed religious dissent and the Shiaa minority. He also used religion as a tool when he wanted: for example, commisioning the Umm al-Ma'arik ("Mother of All Battles" ) Mosque after the first Gulf War to mobilize Sunni religious feeling against the Western occupation forces in the region. He was also not averse to stirring up trouble when he thought he could; for instance, the Iraqi hit team that tried to plot to kill former President George H. W. Bush during his 1993 visit to Kuwait, using explosives hidden in a Toyota Landcruiser. Iraq also provided bases, training camps, and other support to terrorist groups fighting the governments of Turkey and Iran, as well as to Palestinian terror groups.

So, while Saddam himself did these things for political reasons, not for religion, he certainly used religion and worked with some religious extremists. Saddam was a secular dictator, and his regime generally tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamists such as al-Qaeda. But Iraq also supported some Islamist Palestinian groups opposed to Israel, and before the 2003 war, the CIA cited Iraq’s increased support for such organizations as reason to believe that Baghdad’s links to terror could continue to increase.

Yes, they do. Turmoil equates money for them.

The is thought and effort going on here. The middle east is working on trying to develop their resources and see them to those who want it. The US has had control of the effort for the past 60 or so years. Our leadership believes that the end times are coming and that it does not matter who controls the area. They are trying to influence the area until the end times come. The US dollar is the means to control the oil on the planet. Soleimani was trying to get the area together to change the status quo so that the countries of the middle east could as a unit change the currency oil is exchanged on and sell their resources to the highest bidder, China. The sanctions that have been put on Iran do not allow for this to happen which is why the other countries are trying to get together and form a new alliance where the US is not involved.

Start
a war. Retain the Presidency. Historical precedents.

It certainly seems so.

It goes back even farther than that.

yes

So. . Sadam was a good guy. So was Hitler and Stalin great leaders because they kept their country under control.
I am just glad would be terrorists, killers, rapists will all think twice before doing harm.

The worst Trump you can imagine is no where near how these people behaved.

Saddam and his sons would attend weddings to demand their “Divine Right of Kings,” to be the FIRST to FUCK the BRIDE!

They drained nearly the whole southern portion of iraq to punish those who lived in the swamps for opposing he invasion of Kuwait. A major environmental disaster for ALL of us.

These were true monsters. Most of the iraqees wanted him gone. Just like with all the other despots and their gangs.

Would you not want someone to rescue you when you lived in such constant fear?

Iran, eqypt, turkey, saudi-stan,... are no different than how East Germany was when the Russians had it surrounded. Constant, total, fear.

Saddam’s form of islam put him in complete control of who was going to Allah’s house, and when.

He should have been removed before he captured the country.