WaPo: IS leadership dominated by former Saddam Hussein loyalists

[Mr. Morden]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/the-hidden-hand-behind-the-islamic-state-militants-saddam-husseins/2015/04/04/aa97676c-cc32-11e4-8730-4f473416e759_story.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Worth reading in full.

[politicus]

Great article.

Explains a lot of their success. So far I had only heard that they included a lot of ex Republican Guard, not that they (and others of that ilk)  were dominant.

[The Free North]

The interesting thing though is that Saddam was relatively secular but given the Shia dominance in Iraq post US invasion, it makes sense that many disgruntled ba'athist members would join up with IS

[politicus]

The interesting thing though is that Saddam was relatively secular but given the Shia dominance in Iraq post US invasion, it makes sense that many disgruntled ba'athist members would join up with IS

Yeah:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Famous Mortimer]

It's also worth remembering that the "Saddam the secular leader" talking point is a misleading simplification, as this piece illustrates:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree. This post itself is an even further simplification. Putting "God is Great" on the flag and paying lip service to religion do not negate the fact that Saddam was still one of the most secular leaders in the Islamic world, it's just not a very secular area to begin with. Even in pre-revolution Tunisia, Islam was the state religion. Even in Afghanistan under Communism, the Communist Party praised God. I guess the fact that Saddam wasn't Enver Hoxha did make it easier for his followers to form an alliance with ISIS, that's a pretty useless statement though.

[Indy Texas]

These are people who want two things: money and power. Life in the Middle East doesn't offer many easy options to a good life. If you're born into a wealthy family, you're encouraged to study in Europe or the US and marry a woman from there so that you have foreign citizenship and a place to go if s#$% hits the fan back home; meanwhile, you engage in the sort of crony capitalism that makes Rick Perry's slush funds look like models of good governance. If you're not, you really only have two options: (1) barely make ends meet as a cab driver or operating a small storefront; or (2) enter the military or the civil service, work hard, make friends with the right people, find a mentor and hitch your wagon to his as he rises to the top.

These are men who in all likelihood came from backgrounds like Saddam's - dirt poor with zero opportunities for upward mobility. And they cast their lots in with his because they thought that if he succeeded, their future would be secure. It was never a guarantee. What if his 1979 coup had failed? What if Iran defeated Iraq and replaced him with a client regime? Those guys would have gotten a bullet in the back of the head in some dark alley, no questions asked. So they took a huge risk, invested heavily in the success of Saddam's regime, and what little was remaining by the early 2000s evaporated in a few months and one regime change later.

So these guys are in a whole new dimension of pissed off. They're completely ostracized from the new political order because of their ties to the old regime. The new guys, with Iran's backing, make life for them as miserable as possible. Being military men, they don't have a lot of ways to make a living in the civilian world, so they're worried about their survival and their families'.

They're not Islamists. A lot of them, in their day to day lives, probably aren't even Muslims. But now that they're outside the tent, they want to piss inside it. They'd rather have ruin than rule - though rule would be nice if everything falls into place.

[The Mikado]

What interests me is that the Baathist regime collapsed 12 years ago. I'd been under the impression that ISIS was filled with 20-30-somethings who would be too young for more than a junior role in the old Iraq.

[Associate Justice PiT]

What interests me is that the Baathist regime collapsed 12 years ago. I'd been under the impression that ISIS was filled with 20-30-somethings who would be too young for more than a junior role in the old Iraq.

     That's the impression I had too, but it appears to be rather mistaken. It does make sense, considering how successful they have been in expanding. A bunch of angry kids would not have been this strategically competent.