It's because that bit of conventional wisdom is true. Saddam had Shia officials in his regime also and replacing the Sunni officers after his death didn't necessarily warrant de-Baathification of Iraqi army. The fact of the matter is that the US governor of Iraq disbanded a multiethnic military institution and handed over state coercive power to the Shia.Originally Posted by Kralizec
At which point they (Iraqi gov) were already a client of Iran. It sort of proves his point.Originally Posted by Kralizec
1) This may be true about Baathist Iraq, but far from the truth in Syria's case.1) decades of Baathist rule which actively exploited ethnic tensions to justify its authority
2) meddling of neighbouring states, essentially this whole quagmire is a proxy war between Qatar and Saudi Arabia on one hand and Iran on the other
2) Western countries discredited the country's sovereignty when they asked Assad to step down publicly and started funding foreign non-Syrian movements in the country after destroying Iraq. They opened the door for the neighboring countries to split it open.
Bookmarks