Israeli Experts Say Middle East Was Safer With Saddam In Power

[Mark E. Smith]

The Jewish Daily Forward

Jerusalem - Although few tears were shed in Israel over Saddam Hussein's death last week, a small but
growing chorus - including government officials, academics and Iraqi emigres - is warning that Israel
could find itself in more danger with him gone, and that it might even regret having welcomed his
toppling.

"If I knew then what I know today, I would not have recommended going to war, because Saddam was
far less dangerous than I thought," said Haifa University political scientist Amatzia Baram, one of Israel's
leading Iraq experts.

Saddam was feared and reviled in Israel, both as a tyrant and as an enemy of the Jewish state. He
demonstratively supported Palestinian terrorists, and few have forgiven his bombarding of Israel with
Scud missiles during the 1991 Gulf War.

"Retrospectively, justice has been done," Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh told Israel Radio this
week. Still, he cautioned, Israel must now be concerned "about what is liable to happen in the future."

Saddam's death, Sneh warned, could lead to "a reinforcement of Iranian influence in Iraq." He said that
Iraq had turned into a "volcano of terror" following the war, with "destructive energies" that could spill
over into Jordan and Israel.

Such misgivings, though rarely aired publicly for fear of offending Washington, reach high into Israel's
security establishment. Yuval Diskin, director of the Shin Bet security service, told a group of students
in a military preparatory program last May that Israel might come to regret its support for the American
led invasion in March 2003.

"When you dismantle a system in which there is a despot who controls his people by force, you have
chaos," Diskin said, unaware that the meeting was secretly recorded. "I'm not sure we won't miss
Saddam." The tape was later broadcast on Israeli television.

http://www.forward.com/articles/israeli-experts-say-middle-east-was-safer-with-sad/

[CJCRANE]

1. We had Saddam in a box

with the No-Fly zones and his WMD destroyed or degraded.

OK, it wasn't an ideal situation but compared to the current SNAFU...

[fujiyama]

4. The US had more control of Iraq before

than they do now.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

5. that's the truth! nt

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. Has they say

be careful what you wish for.

[theoldman]

3. An interesting comment since only Israel had to fear Saddam.

Another reason to question our attack on Iraq if the country that had the most to lose was not worried.

[meow mix]

6. that be said, we now want you to take iran

while we get syria.

[Spazito]

7. Hmmm, the country that was loudly cheer-leading the illegal

invasion and occupation of Iraq now is trying to distance themselves from it, fat chance. That's okay though, they are now loudly cheer-leading if not outright demanding the US attack Iran. I am sure that will go as swimmingly as Iraq and Afghanistan has gone.

[TomClash]

11. I think you are half-right

Israel would loudly cheer an attack on Iran.

Israel had little to do with the US invasion of Iraq. It is quite true that Israel had misgivings about the invasion. Israel had come to a tacit understanding with Saddam and by 2003 Iraq really was no longer a threat to Israel. Sharon understood this well - any cheerleading was simply an attempt to side with the US to accomplish other goals.

[Spazito]

13. I beg to differ, Israel was definitely cheerleading the invasion

of Iraq:

Israel


Israel will support the US if it attacks. In response to Saddam's agreement to allow weapons inspectors back into the country in September, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said 'inspectors and supervision only work with honest people. Dishonest people know how to overcome this easily.' Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has threatened to retaliate if Israel is attacked with chemical or biological weapons. In an interview in December, Sharon said: 'We have taken all the measures necessary to protect the population of Israel.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,873140,00.html

Ehud Barak, the former Israeli Prime Minister, who supported the Bush Administration’s invasion of Iraq, took it upon himself at this point to privately warn Vice-President Dick Cheney that America had lost in Iraq; according to an American close to Barak, he said that Israel “had learned that there’s no way to win an occupation.” The only issue, Barak told Cheney, “was choosing the size of your humiliation.” Cheney did not respond to Barak’s assessment. (Cheney’s office declined to comment.)

In a series of interviews in Europe, the Middle East, and the United States, officials told me that by the end of last year Israel had concluded that the Bush Administration would not be able to bring stability or democracy to Iraq, and that Israel needed other options. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government decided, I was told, to minimize the damage that the war was causing to Israel’s strategic position by expanding its long-standing relationship with Iraq’s Kurds and establishing a significant presence on the ground in the semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan. Several officials depicted Sharon’s decision, which involves a heavy financial commitment, as a potentially reckless move that could create even more chaos and violence as the insurgency in Iraq continues to grow.



Israeli intelligence and military operatives are now quietly at work in Kurdistan, providing training for Kurdish commando units and, most important in Israel’s view, running covert operations inside Kurdish areas of Iran and Syria. Israel feels particularly threatened by Iran, whose position in the region has been strengthened by the war. The Israeli operatives include members of the Mossad, Israel’s clandestine foreign-intelligence service, who work undercover in Kurdistan as businessmen and, in some cases, do not carry Israeli passports.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/040628fa_fact?040628fa_fact

The bottom line, imo, is that Israel was very supportive of the US invading Iraq, did cheerlead them on until it was clear the occupation was an unmitigated disaster. Then, and only then, did Israel start voicing it's concern and did that by beginning to beat the war drums on Iran.

[w4rma]

16. The primary goal for invading and occupying Iraq wasn't protecting Israel.

Israel was used. Supporters of Israel who helped start this war were used. Some of them seem to realize that now.

[Spazito]

17. My point was toward the cheer-leading of Israel prior to and at the

start of the illegal invasion of Iraq as opposed to distancing themselves from it as is shown in the OP article. I said nothing about the protection of Israel being the cause of the invasion, I voiced no opinion on that. Whatever the reason, rationale, excuse for the attack on Iraq, the Israeli leadership was supportive of the move and for the leadership to now say Israel would be safer if Saddam was still in charge is pathetic, imo, although their statement is true given the current firestorm in Iraq and it's affect on the surrounding countries.

[w4rma]

18. My point, and TomClash's point, is that they were used for a different agenda. (nt)

[Spazito]

19. Neither you nor TomClash negated the fact that the Israeli

leadership was cheer leading the illegal invasion of Iraq which was my point. The issue of whether the cheer-leading for the attack on Iraq and the cheer-leading for the attack on Iran are because of different agendas is a side issue.

Again, the OP is regarding statements made that Israel would be safer if Saddam was still in charge which is a "distancing" from their previous supportive position. They have, in fact, moved away from cheer-leading the invasion/occupation of Iraq and onto pushing for an attack on Iran which is what my original post was referencing.

[w4rma]

20. Noone is trying to negate that fact. That happened also. (nt)

[Spazito]

21. Thank you for responding, it is much appreciated n/t

[TomClash]

22. Ok I'll be more specific

Israel did not cause the war and they weren't exactly clamoring for it. Of course, they were going to support their patron - the United States. No surprise there.

On the other hand, Israel is a major player in the impending Iranian conflict and may initiate the conflict itself.

[Usrename]

15. haha, this would be a lot funnier except for all the dead bodies.

"Israel had little to do with the US invasion of Iraq."

[hollowdweller]

8. Wonder why they told Cheney and Bush to Invade then?

[Mark E. Smith]

9. Do we really know that is true?

I'm not so sure.

[Roland99]

10. The AIPAC/PNAC connection cannot be dismissed.

[UTUSN]

12. But but but the PNAC/Neo Con agenda said that this was all for Israel's benefit n/t

[leesa]

14. Careful what you wish for, huh? One would think we would learn this lesson

sometime soon.