Israel may regret the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein

SwordFish_13

SwordFish_13

Active member
Hi,

Source:BBC News

The head of Israel's domestic security agency, Shin Bet, has said his country may come to regret the overthrow of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

 Yuval Diskin said a strong dictatorship would be preferable to the present "chaos" in Iraq, in a speech to teenage Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

He also said the Israeli security services and judiciary treated Arabs and Jewish suspects differently.

A Shin Bet veteran, Mr Diskin took over as Shin Bet's chief in May.

o.gif
start_quote_rb.gif
When you dismantle a system in which there is a despot who controls his people by force, you have chaos. I'm not sure we won't miss Saddam
end_quote_rb.gif


Yuval Diskin

His speech to the students at the Eli settlement as they prepared for military service was secretly recorded and broadcast on Israeli TV.

When asked about the growing destabilisation of Iraq, Mr Diskin said Israel might come to rue its decision to support the US-led invasion in 2003.

"When you dismantle a system in which there is a despot who controls his people by force, you have chaos," he said.

"I'm not sure we won't miss Saddam."

Inequality

The security chief was also asked to compare the treatment of Jews and non-Jews by Israel's security and judicial establishments.

"I do not see equality in the way the system handles them when they are guilty of the same type of offence," he said.

"If I had arrested a terrorist from Nablus and Eden Nathan Zaada [an Israeli army deserter who shot dead four Israeli Arabs on a bus in August], they wouldn't have received similar treatment in interrogation or court."

Mr Diskin also said he thought Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had made a mistake when he withdrew the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip last year without ensuring the Palestinian Authority could fill the security vacuum.

"From a security perspective, I am opposed to handling over territories to the Palestinians unless we know there are officials there who will take control and commit themselves to upholding the law," he said.

"If there are no such officials, then I am against handing over territories to Palestinian control."

But Mr Diskin criticised militant Israelis who have used violence to oppose further withdrawals from the West Bank.
Click to expand...

Peace
-=SF-13=-
 
Last edited:
I'm sure the Iraqis don't agree, although considering Saddam's financial support for suicide bombers neither should the Israelis.
 
IG

For the first part, I think now it is. 2 years ago I wouldnt have been so certain.

As for Isreal, Saddam was a pest but he was a containable pest. The sanctions and the vast U.S military armada parked next door saw to that.
The trouble is now we really dont know whats going to happen in Iraq. Should the worst case scenario happen, such as civil wars sweeps the entire region or Iraq because a Muslim fundimentalist state, the Isrealis could vary well regret Saddam. I give it 50-50 odds.
 
At least Iraq hasn't lobbed Scuds into Israel lately. I'm sure they won't miss that part of Hussein's hostility toward them.
 
The Scuds were not that dangerous, they were so inaccurate most them landed in the desert. I think Saddams support for Terrorism was a greater threat, however I dont think money was ever the principal motivation for suicide bombers.

On the other hand, there are worse things than Saddam.
 
Money is a great motivation-factor for suicide bombers, because if they kill themselves, their families will suffer economically.
If they know their family will be looked after, it is easier for them to make the choice of blowing themselves up.

Money may not be a primary factor, but it certainly is a secondary factor.
 
mmarsh said:
The Scuds were not that dangerous, they were so inaccurate most them landed in the desert.
Click to expand...
Depends on which end of the Scud you were.


"The most devastating attack was on 25 February, during the ground war, when a Scud struck a building at Dhahran US base in Saudi Arabia, killing 28 US military personnel. In total, 39 Scud missiles were fired into Israel, causing damage but few casualties."



mmarsh said:
I think Saddams support for Terrorism was a greater threat, however I dont think money was ever the principal motivation for suicide bombers.
On the other hand, there are worse things than Saddam.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, he was a real sweetheart.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/02/iraq_events/html/default.stm
"Meanwhile Saddam Hussein exploited the allies’ mistakes to maximum propaganda effect, and also detained more Kuwaiti civilians as human shields at key military and industrial sites in Iraq."

"Chemical weapons were also used during Iraq's "Anfal" offensive - a seven-month scorched-earth campaign in which an estimated 50,000 to 100,000 Kurdish villagers were killed or disappeared, and hundreds of villages were razed."

http://www.state.gov/s/wci/fs/19352.htm

-- According to a 2001 Amnesty International report, "victims of torture in Iraq are subjected to a wide range of forms of torture, including the gouging out of eyes, severe beatings and electric shocks... some victims have died as a result and many have been left with permanent physical and psychological damage."

-- Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds.

-- "Over the past five years, 400,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died of malnutrition and disease, preventively, but died because of the nature of the regime under which they are living."

Executions: Saddam Hussein's regime has carried out frequent summary executions, including:
-- 4,000 prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in 1984;
-- 3,000 prisoners at the Mahjar prison from 1993-1998;
-- 2,500 prisoners were executed between 1997-1999 in a "prison cleansing campaign";
-- 22 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in February/March 2000;
-- 23 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in October 2001;
-- At least 130 Iraqi women were beheaded between June 2000 and April 2001;

-- Allegations of prostitution used to intimidate opponents of the regime, have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women.

-- Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds.

-- The Iraqi regime used chemical agents to include mustard gas and nerve agents in attacks against at least 40 Kurdish villages between 1987-1988. The largest was the attack on Halabja which resulted in approximately 5,000 deaths.
 
Last edited:
Let us be more realistic to this issue!

US dealings with Saddam before 1990 actually made him powerful enough to do anything he wanted.

The "double standards" of US policy cannot be just ignored.

Although Israel has a different case!

Have a look at these de-classified documents by Western Media!

LINK -> http://www.meib.org/articles/0104_ir1.htm (Very Interesting FACT's here)

Courtesy to wsws.org

Some reports from some other Western Sources:

Washington Times Report:

LINK -> http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0314,ridgewar3,42994,6.html

NPR Reports with Voice System:

LINK -> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1555533

And we all know about the controversy of "Chemical / Biological Weapons" that US gave Saddam to contain Iran. And now they want these weapons back but couldn't find them!
 
Last edited:
Iraqis appreciate that Saddam the madman is not there any more to kill them.

It doesnt matter if Israelis or others regret. it matters that Iraqis are rid of a dictator
 
I always knew it would be bad for the US and Israel to invade Iraq, but we did it anyways despite having a couple of much better targets.

Invasion was a great way to piss off Muslims everywhere and open up a whole country to lawlessness. Make the terrorist recruiters' jobs much easier.

And even living in Iraq, would you rather have a chance of blowing up every time you walk outside or every time you get in the dictator's way?
 
Iraq ia not a 'natural' nation like say England or France. It was put together and defined politically. Remove a strong leadership like Saddam with no obvious replacement and you have a power vacuum, which is exactly what has happened. I think Israel probably does regret the overthrow of Saddam because at least they knew who they were dealing with.

IMO I don't see the nation of Iraq lasting another 10-15 years. It will break up and this will spell another possible conflict when Iran comes in to claim its 'share'.
 
mmarsh said:
I think Saddams support for Terrorism was a greater threat, however I dont think money was ever the principal motivation for suicide bombers.
Click to expand...

That is one of the biggest myths about terroism. Yeah, I'm sure they just had thousands of bombers waiting it was just that Hamass said "NO! We will not allow you to blow yourself up untill we have these hundred-thousand dollars to give to your family! No, stop, don't do it yet, wait till saddam gives more money THEN we will let you blow yourself up... but don't do it until then!"
 
Missileer

Scud

Well thats the argument you can make for any weapon. Any weapon can be lethal if you are at the wrong place at the wrong time, even a slingshot. My point was, as a strategic weapon, the Scud was largely ineffective. I remember the US Army barracks, that was its only real success. 1 out of 74 (total Scuds fired, all areas)is a pretty lousy number you know. Compare the Scuds hit:miss ratio to say a tomahwk cruise Missile. As a pyschological weapon, the Scud was much more effective...

Yeah, he was a real sweetheart.

Thank you for misquoting me, I never said he was. If you are going to quote me, thats fine. But please quote what I said, and not try to imply something I absolutely didn't say.

To reiterate: What I said was that (as bad as he was) there is worse. Given the choice, would you prefer Saddam Hussein who was a terrible dictator to his own people or Osama bin Laden, Ahmadinejab or other Islamic Fundimentlist who would also export that type of terror abroad as we saw on 9/11, London, Madrid, etc. All the Iraq war *might* (because the jury isn't out yet) have accomplished was to remove one evil, and place a greater evil in its place. And if that turns out to be the case, then Saddam was the lesser of two evils, espically for Isreal.

Whispering Death

Precisely my point, well said...
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
Missileer

Scud

Well thats the argument you can make for any weapon. Any weapon can be lethal if you are at the wrong place at the wrong time, even a slingshot.
Click to expand...

And, you were right.

mmarsh said:
My point was, as a strategic weapon, the Scud was largely ineffective. I remember the US Army barracks, that was its only real success. 1 out of 74 (total Scuds fired, all areas)is a pretty lousy number you know. Compare the Scuds hit:miss ratio to say a tomahwk cruise Missile. As a pyschological weapon, the Scud was much more effective...
Click to expand...

You sort of shoot from the hip, then in a longer more informative tome, you give your true meaning to a single sentence.

Yeah, he was a real sweetheart.

mmarsh said:
Thank you for misquoting me, I never said he was. If you are going to quote me, thats fine. But please quote what I said, and not try to imply something I absolutely didn't say.
Click to expand...

Come on, we're all grownups here, don't act like I misunderstood what you said. I said there couldn't be anyone much worse than Saddam. If you want to be quoted word for word, flesh out your original post somewhat. Remember, all we have are keyboards to express ourselves.

mmarsh said:
To reiterate: What I said was that (as bad as he was) there is worse. Given the choice, would you prefer Saddam Hussein who was a terrible dictator to his own people or Osama bin Laden, Ahmadinejab or other Islamic Fundimentlist who would also export that type of terror abroad as we saw on 9/11, London, Madrid, etc. All the Iraq war *might* (because the jury isn't out yet) have accomplished was to remove one evil, and place a greater evil in its place. And if that turns out to be the case, then Saddam was the lesser of two evils, espically for Isreal.
Click to expand...

There you go again, you just narrowed a hypothetical worse case to being a nebulous band of world class criminals, then you say Saddam was the lesser of two evils. While that hasn't been proven yet, who is the second example? I don't see how anyone could measure up to an animal like Saddam. Let's handle the threats as they come and we have Saddam.

Whispering Death
Precisely my point, well said...[/quote]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top