If Hussein Was Still Alive

[Jermyn Davidson]

ISIS has burned 45 people alive and have completely cut-off a town in hopes of starving the town into submission.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-mar...204300316.html

My question is this:

If Hussein was still in power, would there be an ISIS?

My answer is no, but I'd like to know what others think.

[Jermyn Davidson]

A good article on the global threat that ISIS poses.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/0...s-Burned-Pilot

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

ISIS has burned 45 people alive and have completely cut-off a town in hopes of starving the town into submission.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-mar...204300316.html

My question is this:

If Hussein was still in power, would there be an ISIS?

My answer is no, but I'd like to know what others think.

Agreed. There was much more religious freedom under Sadam.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

If Hussein was still in power, would there be an ISIS?

My answer is no, but I'd like to know what others think.

i think i agree with you, but it is for the unfortunate reason that we sponsor them both.

and as for "global threat," my money is still on those killer bees!

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i think i agree with you, but it is for the unfortunate reason that we sponsor them both.

and as for "global threat," my money is still on those killer bees!

We don't sponsor ISIS.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i think i agree with you, but it is for the unfortunate reason that we sponsor them both.

and as for "global threat," my money is still on those killer bees!

What's your proof behind such a preposterous statement?

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

We don't sponsor ISIS.

We certainly under Obama have accelerated the development of an atmosphere for them to thrive in that Bush started.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

ISIS has burned 45 people alive and have completely cut-off a town in hopes of starving the town into submission.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-mar...204300316.html

My question is this:

If Hussein was still in power, would there be an ISIS?

My answer is no, but I'd like to know what others think.

Good question, JD.
I believe the question maybe too nuanced for you to answer with a simple no.
Saddam was all about money and power. Anyone that threatened either, would be fed to the wood chipper in short order.
What Saddam provided was a balance against Iran.
That is what we have lost.
However, he was stirring up other problems when he was alive.
One example was the money he paid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

What's your proof behind such a preposterous statement?

hmm. really, it would be better if you discovered the truth or lie of this yourself. much of the rest of the world does not even dispute it. you might google "isis funded by us" (wherein all that is needed for auto-complete is "isis fu...")(HA!)...or, you might watch the first ten minutes of that Max Keiser link i've been propagating--even tho they were discussing something else, it would make the connection clearer. Um...ya, i would just be an unnecessary filter there.

But surely you at least suspect that the US funds puppet-monster regimes to forward its own ends; the Shah of Iran et al...isis is just the latest extension of this. Backing both sides of an engineered "conflict" is a virtual cliche` for us, JD. I am not even being melodramatic or inventive here in the least. It is what it is; ancient ruling tricks of the Rothschilds'. They all read The Prince as their gospel now

[shazeep]

ok, the Keiser link