Iraqi prelate holds US responsible for plight of Christians [CWN]


#1

The United States created the conditions that led to the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, according to Iraq’s leading Catholic prelate."The US is indirectly responsible for …

More…


#2

A little bit more from the article:

The United States created the conditions that led to the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, according to Iraq’s leading Catholic prelate.

“The US is indirectly responsible for what is going on in Iraq,” said Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Sako. He said that American leaders promised to bring democracy to Iraq, “but ten years have passed and on the contrary we have gone backward.”

The Chaldean Patriarch had earlier been quoted as saying that “America is behind ISIS.” But he indicated that he was not suggesting a conspiracy between the US and the Islamic State. Rather, he explained, “the Americans left Iraq in the midst of a vacuum where there was no army to protect [the people] and ISIS and these jihadist groups have been present for four years.”

He is utterly right.

Obama deciding to pull US forces from the country before the country was ready was one big factor. Bush’s utterly naive “democracy project” was just as bad.

Don’t get me wrong: since his father decided to militarily involve us with Iraq in the first place, finishing the job and ridding the world of that nasty piece of work, Saddam Hussein, was a worthy concluding act [particularly after the 12 year starvation diet that Bush 41 imposed and Clinton affirmed].

However, having said that, once the US dismantled the Baathist regime in Iraq, we had a moral responsibility to occupy and pacify the country until such time as the country had the infrastructure and social structures necessary to properly self-govern.

The US did none of that.

And now, as Patriarch Sako indicated, they are where they are.

May God preserve these Christians.


#3

I think you’ll find Bush Snr was opposed to his son’s invasion of Iraq. Gulf War One was different. Saddam Hussein had invaded another sovereign state, and at that time there were two serious issues at stake.

As my old pastor put it, if Saddam had been allowed to occupy Kuwait unchallenged, he’d have then gone to take Saudi Arabia. As the old pastor put it, not only would he have had control over a large part of the world’s oil, but he’d have also had Mecca under his thumb.

Since every Moslem is expected to try to make a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their life, he’d have been in a position to say to every Moslem “So you want to go to Mecca? Right son, in that case, you’ll have to do what I say if that’s what you want.”

But Gulf War II was a different option altogether. Colour me cynical, but I think the politicians told the CIA that they wanted to be told Iraq had WMD’s, so they’d have an excuse to invade Iraq. I think it was political chicanery from start to finish.

And you can see where it has lead. They started a wind, and it is becoming a whirlwind.

But I’m afraid I see it as a part of an ominous judgement against the world at large. We talk about ISIS ruthlessness, but this year to date Americans have killed 772,000 unborn children. Australians have probably killed a proportional number. And God sees every single one, not just the ISIS killings on the media. The media generally are not in the abortion clinics, filming their ruthlessness.

At least the Iraqi soldiers and Kurdish Pesh Merga had a chance to shoot back at some stage.


#4

I think, if you look at history, you’ll find that the Gulf War never ended after 1991. There was a “cease fire”, not a formal and permanent cessation of hostilities, as one would have through a defeat of an enemy or a peace treaty being signed.

UNSCR 687:

i.imgur.com/rRSaQht.jpg

A cease fire is defined as follows:

i.imgur.com/MwByMoT.png

There was not a permanent end to the war until the Baathist government capitulated following the death of Saddam Hussein.

Now you can prove me wrong by giving me a link to an official diplomatic document that ended the war.

Looking at the UN authorizations, there was never an end to the authorization for force granted in UNSCR 678. As you can see above UNSCR 687 affirmed a cease fire. In fact, UNSCR 687 was cited as being active and in force as late as UNSCR 1483 and 1546, both which were after the 2003 campaign.


#5

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.