Daniel Pipes
Mobile Edition
Regular Site

Saddam and militant Islam
Reader comment on item: Analyst Calls for Redefinition of 'War on Terror'

Submitted by Jerry Gornish (United States), Aug 9, 2002 at 11:03

You stated that these are two different issues, related in the sense that they both stem from the mid-East. It seems to me, though I can't cite chapter and verse (wasn't there evidence that one of the 9/11 20 met with a high-up Iraqi shortly before that date?), that from Saddam's perspective, it is good to encourage and even fund Militant Islam. First, it helps to deflect some of the crticism against his regime; second, it affords him a dedicated proxy to fight the West.

Thus, it would greatly surprise me if his bank accounts, if not yet his fingerprints, are not furnishing some of the money going to Militant Islam. If this is the case, to the extent he is developing non-conventional weapons, he might just as soon prefer to have a proxy use them against the west to prevent severe retaliation against his own country. I suspect we will someday find his fingerprints on Militant Islam attacks, and the danger he presents is a good reason for taking action against him before it is too late.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Submit a comment on this item

Search by Enter name or date
Search Forum Comments:

Reader comments (31) on this item

Title By Date
muslims/irish [88 words]B L GardnerJan 14, 2004 13:49
Muslim Actions Need to be Louder Than Media's Disinformation [200 words]J GilaniSep 21, 2003 12:34
Founded on Religion [204 words]RichardMar 27, 2008 02:45
You guys have it all wrong [210 words]Ayesha KhanJul 26, 2003 00:48
Lies Lies Lies [73 words]Paul ASep 18, 2006 12:26
Ayesha Khan of ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State? [187 words]L.A. DanemanNov 10, 2006 08:08
Khan is a danger to democracy in the U.S. [281 words]CarlDec 4, 2006 09:28
Ayesha Khan is Wrong... based on the Research [544 words]Russ RDec 4, 2006 10:57
The Bitter Truth . . . Now What? [226 words]LeonardDec 4, 2006 17:36
Your audacity is just amazing!! (EOM) [1 words]JaladhiDec 4, 2006 21:05
American Colalition farces [62 words]Marv WomacksMar 29, 2003 23:21
Unbelievable [156 words]don't knowMar 19, 2003 14:03
A little upset!!! [168 words]Jessica DuvallMar 4, 2003 09:13
War on Terrorism through the eyes of a soldier [280 words]Shae JonesFeb 12, 2003 19:43
scare tactics [191 words]MikeyJan 28, 2006 10:41
american allies [89 words]CplFeb 2, 2007 01:59
i agree [2 words]americanJun 1, 2007 12:23
Hijabs give me the hibijeebies [136 words]Jeff BercovitchAug 11, 2002 08:48
American Allies [257 words]Daniel MiddlemanAug 10, 2002 14:47
Militant Islam is not a modern phenomenon [30 words]Greg OfieshAug 10, 2002 02:34
Lateline [334 words]Adam GreenAug 9, 2002 23:41
Who will take Saddam's place? [260 words]Ernie J. YassoAug 9, 2002 14:24
Militant Islam was Born in 622 A.D. not in 1920 A.D. [142 words]A. AhmedAug 9, 2002 14:05
truth about islam and all religions [245 words]anurag satiJul 27, 2006 15:25
I don't get it ... [62 words]Richard BurdAug 9, 2002 13:42
The Bigger struggle [373 words]Glenn KlotzAug 9, 2002 12:51
⇒ Saddam and militant Islam [178 words]Jerry GornishAug 9, 2002 11:03
Crystal Clear For Australia [133 words]William J. SturmAug 9, 2002 09:59
Islam is not a religion, an ideology [110 words]RaviAug 9, 2002 08:25
moderate Muslims... [138 words]donvanDec 5, 2006 13:25
Islam and Terrorism as a whole [73 words]Darrell FreemanAug 9, 2002 06:33

Comment on this item

Name
Email Address (optional)
Title of Comments
Comments:

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.

Back to top of page