[kj] Congrats Obama

[B. Oliver Sheppard]

Yeah, Saddam was a thug, but a secular thug, not a religious zealot or 
Jihadist. he likened himself more to Stalin than to any sort of holy 
warrior, and thrugh his heavy hand prevented what the US invasion 
unleashed. In fact, most will probably remember Saddam's right-hand man 
Tariq Aziz was a Catholic, not even a Muslim.

Bin laden and Saddam were at sword points. Bin Laden wanted the ungodly 
secular regime of Saddam destroyed so that he and his zealots could 
restore the historic Islamic caliphate to the country. Everyone always 
asked "Why did bin laden attack the US? What does he want/ WHAT DOES HE 
WANT?" When bn Laden qute clearly announced in message after message 
what his demands were. These were and are readily available, translated 
into English, and newspaper printed them.

People in the US apparently did read them, because they preferred to 
think bin Laden jst "hated freedom" or something. In fact, bin Laden's 3 
demands were 1) removal of US bases from Saudi Arabia [which he got, so 
that's one for Osama] 2) end of US support for Israel, and 3) 
restoration of Islamic caliphate to its historic place in Baghdad. Bin 
Laden has one out of 3 of these already, and he's closer to getting the 
3rd one now than he was when Hussein kept bin Laden's group, as well as 
the Kurds and others, suppressed.

Now that Turkey, a US ally, is suppressing the Kurds, it's okay. But 
Saddam doing it? What an evil man.

-Oliver

ade wrote:

> You know, Saddam was already dealing with religious unrest, bombings,

> etc, on his own soil. The ironic outcome being that he was much nearer to

> being on 'our' side when it came to Islamist nutfucks terrorising. Whereas

> the void will now be filled by well established battle-hardened Islamist

> nutfucks. We've trained them up...

>

>