The men who raped Iraq.
An excerpt from, "US and Britain wrangled over Iraq's oil in aftermath of war, Chilcot shows" The Guardian, July 7, 2016:
The US and British governments fought bitterly over control of Iraq’s oil following the toppling of Saddam Hussein, the Chilcot papers show.
But Sir David Manning, foreign policy adviser to Tony Blair, told Condoleezza Rice, the US national security adviser, in Washington on 9 December 2002 that Britain still wanted more of the spoils.
“It would be inappropriate for HMG [Her Majesty’s government] to enter into discussions about any future carve-up of the Iraqi oil industry,” he said. “Nonetheless it is essential that our [British] companies are given access to a level playing field in this and other sectors.”To the victor go the spoils, that has always been true in history, but, please, for the love of God, enough talk about the "liberation" of Iraq. Iraq was not liberated. Iraq was destroyed. It was bombed back to the stone age.
The only people who benefited from the illegal American invasion of Iraq have been Shiite sectarian groups backed by the usurping Mullahs in Iran, ISIS and other terrorist groups backed by the shameless kings in Saudi Arabia and the other backward oil-rich lands, and corrupt Iraqi politicians who can't provide basic security or even electricity to their angry citizens.
Iraq as it exists is a mistake that should have never been created in the first place a century ago. It was created because of oil. And it was destroyed because of oil. And "Her Majesty's Government" was at the center of both historical crimes. One crime can't wash away another. At the same time, Saddam was a piece of shit whose fate was deserved.
The only sad thing about Saddam's downfall is that it was the devils in Washington who made it happen. But that is how history works. It takes a bigger monster to take out a smaller monster. If Russia or China or a true coalition of nations had liberated Iraq then the country might be somewhat functional today, but then again who knows.
An excerpt from, "Reuters Colludes With Terrorists By Disguising Them As "Rebels"" By 'b', Moon of Alabama, July 10, 2016:
By disguising designated and well established terrorist groups as "rebels", not once but twice within a short time frame, Reuters colludes with these groups. This demonstrates that Reuters has serious problems with providing objective news.An excerpt from, "Is the Islamic State Unstoppable?" By Hassan Hassan, NY Times, July 9, 2016:
The threat is not going away. The group’s ultimate goal remains unchanged: control of the Muslim world. The apocalyptic idealists who form the Islamic State’s core believe that they are ordained by God to accomplish this. And they will change their tactics as often as they need to in order to get closer to that goal, whether that means increasing the number of suicide bombers or shifting the front lines in Syria.It should be clear to anyone paying attention that the job of the morally bankrupt Western media is to do PR for ISIS and other terrorist groups. And this is nothing new. The rotten British and U.S. state media have had a love affair with radical Islamists and Jihadists terrorists for decades now, going back to Bin Laden's days. As long as these evil media outlets are powerful and people take them seriously then ISIS's narrative will get out to the world unopposed.
Always remember that ISIS and other terrorist groups that are operating in the Middle East are doing so under NATO supervision and would be nothing without the propaganda cover provided by the likes of Reuters, CNN, BBC, the New York Times, etc.