Dust & Dawn

1312 to 1337 is considered the most wealthy individual of that time. This is a very big topic that we will discuss separately because its history is on a different level. Timbuktu became a major center of learning. East Africa: The Swahili Coast participated in Indian Ocean trade, where many countries conducted business, including Arabs, Indians, and Persians. At that time, it was considered the largest empire, and ports like Zanzibar became famous. The South Bantu migration brought agriculture and iron working to South Africa."That in that era, Great Zimbabwe (11th-15th century) established its original powerful strength, then later, in the period between 1500 and 1900, the Portuguese began to conquer by creating small settlements. In the 15th century, the Portuguese started to seize coastal areas (like Angola and Mozambique). During that same century, the era of slavery began, which subjected the local people to severe oppression that I can't even describe. Many Africans fell into the slave trade, where they were sent from Africa to America for slavery. At least 10 to 12 million people were sent from Africa to America solely for slavery. Just think about a country or an empire that is so wealthy and has everything that people need, yet Europe come in and do all this to those people, meaning oppressing them, killing them, raping, or enslaving them, so much that I can't even express. But it is also necessary to say that all this was happening, but there was another conspiracy being plotted, which was arranged in Berlin regarding how to loot those people."And the people there do not even know that Europe countries divided Africa among themselves in the 1880s at the Berlin Conference. Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, and Italy considered Africa their own piece to be divided like a piece of meat; this was in the year 1880, and after this, oppression increased significantly. In 1870, 10% of Africa was under their control, and by 1914 it had become 90%. But it is not that the people of Africa did nothing; they bravely fought wars. Only Ethiopia and Liberia remained free. Then, King Leopold II of Belgium created a massacre in the Congo Free State. Britain governed South Africa and Nigeria, France governed Algeria and West Africa, and Germany governed Tanzania. Resources such as gold, diamonds, and rubber were plundered. Resistance: Samori Toure (West Africa), Menelik II (Ethiopia), and Zulu leader Shaka fought for their people." "Ethiopia defeated Italy in the Adwa battle in 1896, which shows how much oppression has occurred within Africa that is regrettable. However, this is not the only concern; we will eventually find out whether this humanity is true or some beasts. But such people are even lower and more contemptible than animals, who perpetrate such oppression. I have noted in my other article whether we are more dangerous than animals, that is, we humans are more cruel and tyrannical than animals because animals do not possess what we humans have: the ability to think, consciousness, and intellect, which animals do not have. Yet despite this, humans still oppress other humans and illegally seize their rights, which is a matter worth contemplating. However, since we are discussing Africa, we should first know what the countries of Europe have plundered, that is, what they have taken or stolen from Africa. What was looted? "Britain, France, Belgium, and Germany plundered valuable items such as gold, rubber, and ivory, and devastated the jungles of Congo for rubber, coercing local people into forced labor. If a worker did not meet their quotas, such as being late for work, they were punished, and even if someone fell ill, they were still required to work; otherwise, people were killed. If tasks like gold extraction were not completed, their hands and feet were cut off. Such cruelty was inflicted by Belgium's King Leopold II, who employed Africans in the Congo Free State like slaves for rubber and ivory."Between the years 1885-1908, according to estimates, more than 10 or 12 million people had lost their lives due to this oppression. If anyone denied it, as in saying I will not work or I will not be a slave, or even attempted to rebel, they would be killed or their children would be imprisoned. This was a very severe atrocity. Let me tell you that there is a series about this, particularly focused on black people, called 'The Roots'. It is a very historical series that should be watched at least once. Regarding its devastation: In the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, Europe countries divided Africa among themselves like a cake, without asking the African people. This brought 90% of Africa under their control, and local communities were removed from their own lands; their villages were burned, and many lives were devastated. What impact did it have on culture and religion? "Indeed, if there has been oppression on the people of Africa for a long time, it is evident that there has been an effect on their culture and religion. Thinking correctly, let us now discuss culture and religion. Now, whether Christian missionaries suppressed local religions and forcibly spread Christianity, as it was forbidden to speak African languages in schools, and attempts were made to make the local people forget their own culture while trying to eliminate traditions. It is also important to note that traditions and civilization are not the same word, but they can be similar to some extent. The people of Africa were compelled to forget their languages, which were a part of their identity and culture; we can also say that there were attempts to erase their civilization."And when African tribes like the Herero and Nama (Namibia) fought against Germany from 1904 to 1908, genocide was committed against them, with 90,000 or 70,000 Herero people dying. After this, France killed 1.5 to 1.8 million people in Algeria from 1830 to 1962, meaning they were murdered without reason. When locals fought for freedom, many died from starvation, and poverty led to famine in some areas. During work, when people would leave due to illness or hunger, others were forced to take their places. At times, diseases spread in many areas, such as smallpox and measles, causing people to die. In terms of count, millions died from smallpox and measles. The reason was that African people had no treatment for such diseases.The question also arises whether African people did anything for their freedom. The answer is yes, they did everything that every human should do for their country and their people. Wars were fought and victories were achieved, such as after World War II in the 20th century: in the 1940s and 1950s, independence movements started. Under the leadership of Kwame Nkrumah, Algeria gained its independence from France in 1962, and in South Africa, they freed themselves from apartheid from 1948 to 1994. The original meaning of apartheid is to create "separation" or "racial discrimination" among people. It refers to a policy or system in which people are separated based on their race, color, or ethnicity, and are treated differently. This term is particularly associated with the system in South Africa that lasted from 1948 to 1994, where there was strict discrimination between white and black people, and against this."Nelson Mandela also fought and in 1994 received freedom. Some brave leaders like Julius Nyerere (Tanzania) and Kwame Nkrumah worked for African unity. Today's Africa is still plagued by poverty, civil wars, and corruption, and there are still some heroes who are fighting for their rights and their people's freedom. Many heroes have sacrificed their lives for their people and fought for their freedom, which should not be forgotten. Africa, with 54 countries, is a major player in the UN and is participating in climate change and trade. If these heroes had not fought for their people's freedom, today these 54 countries would not exist, which is a significant matter. This was oppression and a small means of slavery that I have written about. Now we come to the question of what this colonialism is and what name does this affliction have. Was it solely France's hand in this or the whole of Europe’s? If I say that only France's hand was involved in colonialism, then that is incorrect; the whole of Europe was involved. So let's talk a bit about colonialism and its historical role. Historical Timeline of French Colonialism in Africa17th Century "France took its first step in Africa through small trading posts established in places like Senegal. In the 1650s, this marked the beginning of the slave trade and commerce. In the 1930s, France invaded Algeria, which was its first major undertaking to create an African colony. This was a turning point in French colonialism. From the 1880s to the 1900s, during the scramble for Africa, France expanded its colonies in West and Central Africa, and during the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, Africa was divided among Europe powers, with France receiving a large portion, including Guinea, Ivory Coast, Chad, and Gabon. Let's go in a bit more detail about the role of the French here, but we need to understand what 'Fea' is. In fact, 'Fea' refers to French Equatorial Africa. French Equatorial Africa was a colonial federation by France that was established in 1910 and included four territories: Gabon, Middle Congo, now the Republic of Congo, and Ubangi-Shari, now the Central African Republic. This federation ended in 1958 when these regions began to move towards independence. France administered these areas together."But each region had its own administrative structure. Guinea and Ivory Coast were not part of French Equatorial Africa; both these regions were part of French West Africa, which was a separate colonial federation of France. French West Africa included Guinea, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Mali, Benin, Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mauritania. West Africa and French Equatorial Africa had two different administrative structures, and each country had its own characteristics. French West Africa gained independence in 1958. During the French colonial period, Guinea faced economic exploitation, especially in the agriculture and minerals sectors, while Ivory Coast was part of French West Africa and gained independence in 1960. Yamoussoukro, formerly Abidjan, was economically important for France because it was a major center for the production of cocoa and coffee. French Equatorial Africa fought for its independence in 1960 as well, and Djibouti and Chad were considered underdeveloped regions but had strategic importance for France due to their geographical position. They also gained independence in 1960. Well, there are countries and regions like this elsewhere. "Those who have achieved freedom through their own struggle show us that these people have faced many difficulties for their rights and freedom, and because of many sacrifices, they are now free and have their own state. It is only because of this possibility that all this happened. The more you delve into it, the more you will find, because the countries of Europe took control of all of Africa, whether East, West, South, or North, solely for their own benefit in order to exploit or steal. This is like someone breaking into your house despite your refusal, causing trouble for your family and stealing all necessary things. What would you do in that situation? You would fight to protect your family to ensure they are not harmed, no matter where you go. This is the same; it's just a difference in perspective. "But this is also something to think about: Did the people of Africa feel the impact of the countries that gained independence from Europe? The answer is yes, the impact is still there. Just as after World War II, the colonial system weakened, today all these countries are free; despite this, France’s influence and power can still be seen in their economic and political systems, especially in Francophone countries. But brother, where is Ibrahim Traore in this? And what is his role in today’s era? This is a brief yet very important history of Ibrahim Traore. Who is Ibrahim Traoré and why is he doing this? What benefits will he gain from it? Ibrahim Traore was born on March 14, 1988, in the Bondokuy area of Burkina Faso, which is a small village. Ibrahim Traore received his early education in his village and then studied at a secondary school in Bobo Dioulasso, the second largest city in Burkina Faso. In 2006, he obtained his degree in Ouagadougou.Ibrahim Traore has obtained a degree in geology from Joseph Zerbo University."He passed there with his Honors and now let's move towards a military career. In 2009, he joined the military of Burkina Faso and received his training from the Georges Namoano Military Academy. After becoming a lieutenant in 2014, he joined the peacekeeping force MINUSMA in Mali's jungles. In 2018, his bravery was recognized during the rebel attacks in the Tombouctou region, and in 2020 he was promoted to captain. He participated in operations against jihadist insurgency in the northern part of his country, such as the Djibo and Otapuanu offensive, which escalated in 2019. At the beginning of 2022, Ibrahim Traore led a coup alongside Lieutenant Colonel Paul Henri Sandaogo Damiba, which ousted President Roch Marc Kaboré; at that time, he was the head of the artillery regiment. Ibrahim Traore distanced himself from his colonial master France and promoted Pan-Africanism. He helped establish the Alliance of Sahel States, which includes Mali and Niger. He nationalized gold mines and initiated a gold refinery to utilize the country's resources for its own benefit. He rejected loans from the IMF and World Bank. He initiated mobilization against jihadist insurgency and strengthened the Volunteers for the Defense of the Fatherland. Now let's understand what this means. Volunteers for the Defence of the Fatherland VDP "In fact, there is a governmental organization within Burkina Faso in Africa, which was established after the apocalypse in 2020. Its main purpose was to arm and train the local population against terrorists and militants in their rural areas to protect their regions. VDP workers receive 14 days of training where they learn the use of firearms, human rights, and discipline. These individuals work for the protection of their villages and provide information in collaboration with security forces, or respond to opposing attacks. This organization serves as auxiliary support for Burkina Faso's security forces since the military there is facing a shortage of resources and manpower. Anyway, this is a small group known as Volunteers for the Defence of the Fatherland (VDP). Now, let's talk about Ibrahim Traore. His anti-imperialist stance and the comparison to the famous revolutionary Thomas Sankara are increasing his popularity, especially among the youth. On January 7, 2025, at the inauguration of the president of the GANA, he received the most applause, and Ibrahim Traore's passion for his people remains strong. However, there have been some individuals who have propagated allegations against Ibrahim Traore, but all these allegations and propaganda are failing before him. So far, there is little information about Ibrahim Traore's family, but in the region, Ibrahim Traore is a Muslim and belongs to the Mossi tribe. This is the matter of Ibrahim Traore's life. But what is his mission? Essentially, Ibrahim's goal is to advance his people and move his country forward; strengthening the economy is Ibrahim Traore's primary objective, and instilling awareness among his people is truly his goal. Let's understand this deeply." The Mission of Ibrahim Traoré "Mission 1 Ibrahim Traore, who is the transitional president of Burkina Faso, aims to free Africa from the influence of colonial powers and to create a strong, self-reliant, and united continent. Ibrahim Traore's focus is that African countries control their own resources, economy, and destiny." Mission 2 Anti-Colonialism and Sovereignty "Ibrahim Traore's greatest goal is to free Burkina Faso and Africa from western, particularly French control. He closed French military bases, expelled the French ambassador, and imposed bans on western media outlets like Radio France International and Voice of America. Ibrahim Traore believes that Africa should reclaim its political and economic freedom. This is a vision that represents a direct fight against colonial history." "Mission 3: Our own people should get work, not foreign people, and make our own currency." "Ibrahim Traore's goal is that his own people get work instead of foreign people. Ibrahim Traore's plan is for Africa to take control of its resources and create a western financial system like the CFA; this is an essential part of economic independence." Mission 4 Pan-African Unity "To bring together African countries and people politically, economically, and socially in order to achieve common goals, to free them from the effects of colonialism and neo-colonialism, and to ensure the political and economic independence of African countries, such as reducing poverty and unemployment through economic development, trade infrastructure, and economic

The Iraq we are seeing today was not like this before. The Iraq we see today is the same Iraq where writing first began. This is the same Iraq where many inventions first happened. But today we are seeing the Iraq of this time it was not like this before. Even in 1960, Iraq had a strong power of its own. Then came Saddam — in front of him, every country, whether Europe or Saudi countries, all feared Iraq. During Saddam Hussein’s time, Iraq’s force was powerful, and during Saddam Hussein’s time, Iraq’s economy was also quite good. But then what happened — in 2003 everything went wrong. Many people were killed — according to estimates, 1 or 2 million people were killed without reason, whether they were Yazidi, Shia, or Sunni. But before all this history, we must know the full history of Iraq. Because this is the same Iraq which, many centuries ago, was one of the richest countries, and great cities and inventions happened here. So let’s go towards the full history of Iraq. Iraq’s Ancient History and Architecture of the World So, Iraq’s ancient history and architecture belong to one of the oldest and richest civilizations of the world, which started around 6000 BC. This was in an area of Iraq, and that area’s name was Mesopotamia — or the valley between two rivers. This civilization is important for human history. Why is that so? Because here, writing, urban systems, and law began. I already mentioned this above earlier, anyway… First of all, we will learn about Mesopotamia: the condition of civi lizations. Mesopotamia: The Cradle of Civilizations Iraq — the region that is today’s modern Iraq — was the center of the ancient world. This valley of Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, is considered the birthplace of human civilization. The reason for this is that the fertile land and the water from the rivers were suitable for farming and settlement. Then after this comes the Sumerian Civilization (4500–1900 BC). Sumerian Civilization (4500–1900 BC) Reason for Fame: The Sumerian civilization is considered the world’s first civilization. These people lived in cities like Uruk, Ur, Lagash, and Nippur. Cuneiform Writing: The world’s first writing system, which was written on stones and clay tablets. Then comes the Ziggurat — these tall structures were built in the form of temples, which are an important symbol of the Sumerian civilization — like the Ziggurat of Ur. When the Sumerians invented the wheel, it proved revolutionary in transport and trade. Law and State: For the first time, a system of government and law was created. In Sumerian cities, houses, temples, and ziggurats made of mud bricks were important. The Ziggurat of Ur is still present in Iraq today, and it reflects its glory and magnifice nce. Akkadian Civilization (2334–2154 BC) Sargon of Akkad — Sargon was the first to unite the Sumerian cities under one central government and formed the Akkadian Empire. The language and literature were in the Akkadian tongue, a Semitic language that was blended with the Sumerian language. In this era, the beginning of literature and poetry took place. Even today, if we go and see in Iraq, we can still find tall walls and royal palaces in Akkadian cities, which reflect their political and military st rength. Babylonian Civilization (1894–539 BC) Do you remember something now or not? Actually, this is the same Babylonian Empire where Zulqarnain brought his army into Iraq — but that is a separate topic, we will talk about it separately. So, in Babylon, there was the era of Hammurabi (1792–1750 BC), and Hammurabi was a very famous king of Babylon. He created the Code of Hammurabi — the world’s first legal document written on stone. Tower of Babel: This was a ziggurat which has been mentioned in ancient literature. In the Bible, it is known by the name To wer of Babel. Hanging Gardens of Babylon: One of the Seven Wonders of the World, which is believed to have been built by Nebuchadnezzar II for his wife — just like Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal for his wife Noor Jahan. It’s somewhat similar — or maybe Shah Jahan was inspired by Nebuchadnezzar II to build the Taj Mahal — this is also possible, perhaps. Anyway, though the actual existence of the gardens is still debated. And the city gates and walls of Babylon, which are famously known as the Ishtar Gate, were decorated with blue tiles and carvings of animals and creatures. After this, we come to the knowledge and arts. In fact, the Babylonians showed great achievements in mathematics, astronomy, and medicine. Their calendar system still has infl uence even today. Assyrian Civilization (2500–609 BC) The center of Assyria was in northern Iraq, where cities like Nineveh and Ashur were important. The Assyrians were famous for their military power. They built a huge empire that stretched from Egypt to Iran. In Nineveh, the royal palace — with stone carvings (reliefs) and massive gates — can still be seen today at archaeological sites. The Library of Ashurbanipal, which was in Nineveh, was the world’s first systematic library, where thousands of cuneiform tablets were stored. The Assyrian civilization played an important role in poetry, history writing, and fine arts. Persian Civilization and the Rule of Alexander (539–331 BC) In 539 BC, the Achaemenid Empire was established when Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon, and Iraq became a part of the Persian Empire. (As I mentioned above) Some people know this king as Cyrus the Great, and some know him as Zulqarnain as well. Anyway, this period was a time of peace and prosperity. That is, when Cyrus the Great took control of Babylon, his rule brought great peace. During the Persian rule, they built roads, bridges, and a qanat system — which were underground water channels. Then came Alexander the Great. In 331 BC, Alexander defeated the Persian Empire and took control of Iraq. After this, Hellenistic influence became part of Mesopotamian civilization. Parthian and Sassanid Era (247 BC–651 AD) The Parthians made Iraq their center, and Ctesiphon was their capital. The Sassanid Empire was the second phase of Persian rule, which lasted until the rise of Islam. The Taq-e-Kisra (Iwan-e-Mada’in) in Ctesiphon is still a visible architectural landmark in Iraq today. During the Sassanid era, large buildings were constructed — such as madrasas (educational institutions) and sacred fire temples. Islamic Era and the Rise of Baghdad (750–1258 AD) In 750 AD, during the Abbasid Caliphate, Baghdad was made the capital. This era is considered one of the most beautiful periods in Islamic history, and even today, this time is described in many books as a glorious golden age. However, during this same period, many people also suffered great oppression, and some were given such punishments that still send shivers through the body when heard. Anyway, that too is a separate topic — we will discuss it separately. Baghdad was built in a circular design, which was a unique architectural experiment of its time. Bayt al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom) was actually the center of knowledge, where Greek, Persian, and Indian knowledge was translated. In the field of knowledge and arts, it is written that Baghdad saw advancement in mathematics, astronomy, medicine, and philosophy. Mongol Invasion and Decline (1258 AD) In 1258, the Mongols attacked Baghdad and destroyed Bayt al-Hikmah. This was a great loss for the civilization of Iraq. After this, Iraq remained under different ruling powers — like the Ilkhanids, Ottomans, and Safavids. But none of them remained settled in one place for long — either another empire attacked, or for some other reason, they left Iraq. Even today in history, a temple from the Sumerian era still exists, and many such structures still stand, showing signs of empires that once ruled Iraq like some remains of the Mongols, some remnants of Babylon, and signs from the Persians can still be seen. But the famous gate of Babylon, that gate is now in Germany’s Pergamon Museum. However, its original design is still in Iraq meaning, what’s in Germany is just a replica, right? And after that, another famous landmark is Taq-e-Kisra in Ctesiphon, which is an important sign of the Sassanid era which maybe still exists today, or maybe not. And after that, there is the Malwiya Mosque of Samarra, from the 9th century — its minaret is famous for its spiral Modern Iraq and Its Ancient Heritage But when war strikes a country, many famous empires' landmarks are destroyed, erased, or damaged — this is something that always happens in war. This has become a common reality. Unfortunately, Iraq's ancient architectural sites today are also under threat — because of war and looting — as I mentioned earlier. Although UNESCO has declared Babylon and Ashur as World Heritage Sites, there is still a need for more efforts to protect them. But in the years that followed, what happened in Iraq — its people and even the people of Iran — can never forget. Because a dark era began — the era of Saddam Hussein, who passed laws and took control of the entire media. Anyone who raised their voice against Saddam Hussein was killed. And during this same period, the Iran–Iraq war began. Then came the invasion of Kuwait. And later came involvement with Saudi Arabia. But let me ask — who benefited the most from all this? Come on, tell me! Was it Iran? Was it Saudi Arabia? Was it Kuwait? Okay, okay, I’ll tell you — don’t stress your mind too much — your brain veins might burst. Actually, none of these countries benefited. But one country and one man did. The country: America. And the man? Come on, who? You guessed it — Yes George Bush. Bush was not only the Governor of America, he was also involved in the oil business. Got it? You’ll learn more about this later. But for now, let’s move forward — together, let’s explore the history of Saddam Hussein. Was Saddam Hussein a good man? Or was he a very cruel and evil dictator? So let’s begin learning about Saddam Hussein Education (1937–1957) In fact, Saddam Hussein ibn Majid al-Tikriti was born on April 28, 1937, in Al-Awja, near Tikrit, in northern Iraq, into a poor rural family. His family was Sunni Muslim, but Iraq’s majority was Shia — meaning most people in Iraq were Shia, which later influenced political decisions. But Saddam Hussein’s childhood was very difficult. His father, Hussein Majid, died either before he was born or shortly after. His mother, Subha Tulfah, remarried. His stepfather, Ibrahim al-Hassan, treated him harshly. Saddam Hussein got his early education in Tikrit and Baghdad. In 1955, he went to Baghdad and enrolled in Karkh High School. In 1957, at the age of 20, he joined the Ba’ath Party, which was based on Arab nationalist and socialist ideology. This was the beginning of his political career. In fact, the goal of the Ba’ath Party was Arab unity and socialism. Saddam Hussein quickly made a place for himself in the party, especially due to his bravery and inclination toward violence. In 1959, he took part in a failed attempt to assassinate Prime Minister Abdul Karim Qasim. After that, he was wounded and fled Iraq — first to Syria, then to Egypt. There, he began studying law at Cairo University, but did not complete it. Eventually, in 1963, the Ba’ath Party overthrew Qasim’s government, and Saddam Hussein returned to Iraq.But the Ba’athist government was soon overthrown, and Saddam Hussein was imprisoned in 1964. He escaped from prison in 1966. In 1968, the Ba’ath Party regained power, and Saddam Hussein took the position of Deputy Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council under his cousin, General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr. Saddam Hussein strengthened the Ba’ath Party, eliminated his opponents, and took control of the intelligence and security apparatus known as Jihaz al-Mukhabarat. He created a cult of personality around himself and gained control over the media. And from around 1970, perhaps we can say that more difficulties began to arise in Iraq, because during that time — in 1970 — Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait started to have slight tensions with each other, which also raised the fear of war. So basically, the point is that in the 1970s, Saddam Hussein nationalized the oil industry, which increased Iraq’s oil revenues. He began spending on infrastructure, health, and education, which became a reason for his popularity among the public — meaning he became more well-known and liked among the people. However, he maintained strict control over the Shia, Kurdish, and other opposition groups, which eventually led to rebellion against him. In July 1979, Saddam Hussein forced Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr to resign and became President himself.He immediately accused 68 key members of the Ba’ath Party of treason and had 22 of them executed — which sent a clear message to his opponents. If we look at it, Saddam Hussein's rule was an extremely strict regime. It was essentially a one-party dictatorship where the Ba’ath Party had complete control. He placed members of his own family and the Tikriti tribe in key positions. His intelligence agencies and the Republican Guard used violence and mass killings to crush opposition. After this, on 22 September 1980, Saddam Hussein launched an attack on Iran — which marked the beginning of the Iran-Iraq War. His goal was to capture the Shatt al-Arab waterway and Iran’s oil-rich Khuzestan region. In my opinion, this was a very foolish move by Saddam Hussein (I will explain why later, but for now, the topic is different). Another goal was to stop the threat of Iran’s Islamic Revolution from spreading. Saddam Hussein believed that Iran, which was still in chaos after the 1979 revolution, would be an easy target.He thought Iran would be easily defeated — but the opposite happened, and this turned out to be a wrong decision. Saddam Hussein strengthened his army with weapons from the Soviet Union, France, and Arab countries — especially Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. He used chemical weapons like mustard gas and sarin — particularly in Halabja in 1988, where at least 5,000 Kurdish people were killed. This turned out to be Saddam Hussein’s second major mistake — how, you’ll find out later — and these weapons were also used against Iranian soldiers and civilians. The war ended in 1988 in a stalemate — Iraq didn’t gain any major territory, but Saddam Hussein still declared it a victory. If we look at it, Iraq suffered massive losses during the Iran-Iraq War — and so many people died for no reason, especially among the Iraqi population, including Shias, Kurds, and Yazidis. When the war ended, between 105,000 to 200,000 Iraqi soldiers and civilians had been killed, and Iraq was burdened with a $14 billion debt, which later became one of the main reasons behind the invasion of Kuwait. Economic destruction and damage to Iraq’s infrastructure had severely weakened the country from within. But in August 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait — his goal was to seize Kuwait’s oil reserves and wipe out Iraq’s debt. He declared Kuwait to be Iraq’s 19th province. This invasion angered the international community — and gave them the perfect excuse and opportunity to act against Iraq.The international powers were already preparing to attack Iraq — all they needed was a chance. And Saddam Hussein gave them that chance — yes, by mistake, but he gave it. So they imposed harsh sanctions on Iraq. Then, in January–February 1991, the U.S. and allied forces launched Operation Desert Storm against Iraq. Iraq’s army was quickly defeated, and Kuwait was liberated. In response, Saddam Hussein set fire to Kuwait’s oil fields, which caused massive environmental destruction. Iraq’s military was destroyed, and the sanctions crippled Iraq’s economy completely. According to estimates, 500,000 Iraqi children died because of these sanctions — which was not a good sign, even for those who were against Saddam. Meanwhile, there were Shia and Kurdish uprisings against Saddam Hussein, but he did nothing to help them — instead, he crushed them with brutal force. In northern Iraq, Saddam launched the Anfal campaign against the Kurds — which is recognized as genocide. In this campaign, chemical weapons and systematic mass killings were used. And this became Saddam Hussein’s third major mistake: 1. First — attacking Iran 2. Second — invading Kuwait 3. Third — turning against his own people From this, it becomes clear that Saddam Hussein did not understand politics — for him, anyone who spoke against him should be kidnapped or killed. During this period, extreme oppression was carried out against the Shia population — so much so that many Shias were forced to flee their homes and migrate to other countries. The same was true for the Kurds. Yes, I agree — Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis often don’t get along — but that doesn’t mean that if I’m a Shia, I should be killed, expelled, or abducted just because of my beliefs. Everyone has their own thinking, their own worldview, and that diversity lives within all of us — and it’s necessary too. When Saddam attacked Iran, all Shias got angry — whether they were from Libya, Syria, or Lebanon. Even the Kurds were angered, including those living in Arab countries like Syria, Lebanon, Libya, etc. Then Saddam alienated other Arab nations too — including Saudi Arabia, Dubai, and others. And who got the perfect opportunity? Americ a. Simple. And what did the American soldiers do next? Many people were abducted, many were killed, and countless women were raped — some as young as 9 or 14 years old. It didn’t matter. In front of the American forces, this was just a mission. A mission that lasted from 2003 to 2011. And if I call Saddam Hussein a brutal leader, would I be wrong? I don’t think so. Because if you really analyze what Saddam did during his time, think about it deeply — you'll likely come to the same conclusion I did. Yes, under Saddam’s rule, Iraq saw development. Roads were built, schools opened, hospitals were constructed, companies emerged, and infrastructure improved. But the real question is: who benefited from all this? No one. Every country does infrastructure work — China, Saudi Arabia, Iran — they do it for their own people. But in Iraq, even though Saddam built all this, did the people truly benefit? Maybe yes, maybe no. In my view, they didn’t. Why? Because he did it all just to please some powerful Arab nations. To keep them happy, he crushed his own people — imprisoned them, tortured them, even killed them. Just to show loyalty to those countries. Take Iran, for example. Saddam was once close to Iran. They were allies. But then, suddenly, he turned and attacked. Why? What changed? These may seem like small things, but when you truly start observing them, the real truth begins to unfold. I’ve already written about the Halabja attack — in March 1988, around 5,000 Kurdish civilians were killed in one day. And in total, between 50,000 to 100,000 Kurds lost their lives. Is that a small number? No — it’s horrific. These weren’t insects or animals — they were humans. Real people. Living lives, just like us. And yet, sadly... some people still consider Saddam Hussein a hero. Maybe because he once launched a missile at Israel in support of Palestine. But does that one act justify all the horrors? Just because he did one “heroic” thing, does that erase everything else? Entire villages were wiped out. Hundreds of thousands were displaced. That’s why Saddam Hussein was declared a war criminal on the international level. And his conflict with the Kurds still affects Iraq’s political situation today. In March 2003, the U.S. and its allies launched an invasion of Iraq, accusing Saddam of possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and claiming that he had ties to Al-Qaeda. Both of these claims were proven false later. In April 2003, Baghdad fell. Saddam fled. Then, on December 13th, 2003, Saddam Hussein was captured near Tikrit — hiding in an underground bunker. His image — bearded, defeated — was shown to the whole world. He was tried for crimes against humanity and genocide. The key charge was the 1982 Dujail Massacre, in which 148 Shia civilians were killed. In November 2006, the Iraqi Special Tribunal sentenced him to death.On December 30, 2006, Saddam Hussein was hanged in Baghdad. The video of his execution was leaked — and it quickly became controversial across the world. But… but don’t ever make the mistake of believing that the U.S. forces — or those so-called weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) — came to Iraq as heroes. No. They didn’t come to liberate Iraq. They didn’t bring peace. And they certainly didn’t leave with honor. The same WMD excuse — and the army that used it — brought destruction, torture, and humiliation upon the Iraqi people. (And I will speak about that later as well.) So don’t just sit comfortably and think the story ended with Saddam’s fall. This isdeeper than that. Much deeper Now, about Saddam Hussein’s personal life — his marriage, his family, and his personality cult. Saddam married Sajida Talfah in 1963. Together, they had five children — two sons: Uday and Qusay, and three daughters: Raghad, Rana, and Hala. In 2003, during the U.S. occupation, Uday and Qusay were both killed by American forces in Mosul. Saddam was also infamous for building a personal cult of power. His posters and statues stood tall across every corner of Iraq — from city walls to government buildings. He projected himself as the savior of the Arab world. He even wrote novels — yes, fiction — like “Zabibah and the King”, which was widely seen as a symbolic political allegory that glorified his own leadership and ideology. Saddam Hussein’s Rule (1979–2003): It’s also not true that Saddam Hussein only committed atrocities. He did some good for his country too. But as the saying goes — whether the knife falls on the melon or the melon hits the knife, it’s the melon that gets cut. The result is pain, no matter what. I’ve already written earlier about the cruelty and destruction, but it’s only fair to also mention the good he did for Iraq. History must be told honestly. It shouldn’t be all one-sided — just evil after evil. If there’s truth to be told, I will speak it. I’m not here to twist or distort facts like many TV channels do nowadays — especially some Indian news channels. And let me make this clear: I have no interest whatsoever in Indian media. I just wish they’d stop lying and spreading useless propaganda. And instead, talk about what’s really happening inside their own country. Every time I open YouTube, I see Indian channels pushing the same tired lies about Pakistan. The same old nonsense, over and over again. Brother, please — fix your own country first. Take a good look inside. You have people calling themselves Hindus — yet brutally oppressing Dalits. Just because of caste, because Brahmin Hindus believe they are superior by religion. This isn’t new — it’s been happening for centuries. And yet, these channels stay silent on that issue. But when it comes to TRP (TV ratings), they immediately drag Pakistan into everything. “Indian forces entered Pakistan...” “Modi Ji has captured Karachi...” What kind of logic is that? Why are you trying to defame your own army with these baseless claims? Indian news outlets — use your brain. And don’t even think of messing with Pakistan. Worry about your own people first. Ask Modi real questions: Why hasn’t he truly improved India after all these years in power? Why is he fueling hate between Hindus and Muslims instead of uniting them? But no — instead of asking the real questions, these media houses choose distraction and drama. Modi this, Modi that — so many lies. Honestly, even international news outlets don’t say the kind of things some Indian channels do. Everyone should stay loyal to their own land — that’s natural. But first, take care of your own people. And once again, if my words have hurt anyone, I sincerely apologize from the heart. But the truth is still the truth, and someone has to say it. Sugarcoating reality doesn’t make it disappear. Now, let’s return to the topic — where were we? Yes — Saddam Hussein. For all the horrors and crimes attached to his name, it’s also true that he did do some good for Iraq, especially in terms of development and modernization. During Saddam’s rule, significant investments were made in Iraq’s infrastructure — roads, bridges, schools, and hospitals were built, many of which became part of modern Iraq’s foundation. These projects were largely funded through Iraq’s oil revenues, which at the time were a major source of national income. Now let’s move forward to the next part... Saddam Hussein’s government launched various literacy campaigns, emphasizing free education and literacy programs. Because of this, Iraq saw a significant rise in literacy rates. Now coming to women — Saddam Hussein gave women access to government positions. Then comes the matter of economic policies — and surprisingly, Iraq’s economy was actually good during Saddam Hussein’s time Because in 1972, Saddam nationalized Iraq’s oil industry, which gave the country economic stability and greatly boosted Arab nationalism. Now let's talk about regional influence it’s a fact that many Arab nations saw Saddam Hussein as a strong leader who boldly stood against Western imperialism and Israel. His supporters respected him for this and saw it as a positive trait. Now let’s talk about Saddam Hussein’s dark side — his rule was authoritarian and totalitarian. Political opposition was brutally suppressed, and even criticizing the regime could lead to a death sentence. Now on the topic of human rights — under Saddam’s regime, torture, arbitrary arrests, forced disappearances, and mass executions were common — almost routine. According to human rights organizations, Saddam’s regime was responsible for the death or disappearance of an estimated 250,000 to 290,000 Iraqis. Now let’s talk about wars and instability — Saddam initiated the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) and the invasion of Kuwa it in 1990. The wars Saddam Hussein launched caused massive economic and human losses. One of his biggest mistakes was the use of chemical weapons, which shocked the world. When it comes to minority persecution, his regime carried out systematic repression against the Shia and Kurdish communities. Religious freedom was crushed, and opposition parties faced nothing short of death penalties. Saddam built a personality cult around himself — with his statues and portraits spread all across Iraq. The media was strictly controlled, and there was no room for dissent or criticism. Under Saddam’s regime, Iraq’s Shia majority population — nearly 60% of the country — was targeted, especially after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, when they were viewed as an ideological threat due to their ties with Iran. Around 200,000 Iraqis were forcibly deported to Iran, and their businesses were seized by the government. After the Gulf War, the Shia uprising in southern Iraq was crushed with brutal force. It is estimated that 200,000 Shia Marsh Arabs were killed, and to erase their hiding places, Saddam had the marshlands drained — destroying an entire ecosystem and a w ay of life. Saddam Hussein committed so many crimes that if I started checking them off one by one, my entire notebook would be filled — yet even then, the list wouldn’t end. One of the most brutal incidents happened in 1982, when an assassination attempt against Saddam led to the mass execution of 148 Shia civilians in the town of Dujail. It was this case that ultimately led to his death sentence. But this was just one part of a much deeper oppression. Under his rule, the Shia population of Iraq faced constant, targeted discrimination. Restrictions were placed even on their religious practices — Friday prayers were banned, Shia literature and religious broadcasts were outlawed, and thousands of Shia prisoners were executed without fair trials. The truth is, it’s almost impossible to confirm the exact number of innocent Shia Muslims who were killed or disappeared under Saddam’s regime — but according to estimates, over 200,000 Shia Iraqis were either killed, executed, disappeared, or deported as a result of uprisings, purges, and systemic repression. So when I speak about the cruelty and injustice carried out by Saddam Hussein, even that feels like an understatement. Now comes the turn to talk about the atrocities and killings carried out against the Kurds. Under Saddam Hussein’s regime, brutal campaigns were launched against the Kurdish population, which made up nearly 20% of Iraq — especially during the infamous Anfal Campaign of 1988 and the horrific Halabja chemical attack. I briefly mentioned this earlier, but let’s be clear: the Anfal Campaign was an eight-stage genocidal operation. It involved the use of chemical weapons, mass executions, and forced deportations, all with the aim of erasing the Kurdish presence in northern Iraq. According to human rights estimates, between 50,000 to 100,000 Kurds were killed — but Kurdish sources place the death toll even higher, as much as 182,000 people. The scale of the cruelty was unimaginable. Saddam’s forces used mustard gas and nerve agents on civilians. Survivors were rounded up and thrown into detention camps. The Halabja Chemical Attack (1988) alone killed 5,000 innocent Kurdish civilians using poison gas, while another 10,000 were injured. The world recognizes this attack as both genocide and a crime against humanity. But it didn’t stop there. Around 300,000 Fayli Kurds were deported to Iran or executed, simply because Saddam’s regime considered them to be ethnically aligned with Iran. Then there’s the Barzani Clan Killings of 1983, where 8,000 men and boys from the Barzani tribe were kidnapped and executed — just wiped out. All in all, during the Anfal and related campaigns, an estimated 50,000 to 182,000 Kurds were killed, over 4,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed, and the infrastructure of nearly 90 Kurdish regions was completely erased. And when you count together the deaths of Shia, Kurds, Yazidis, Sunnis, and other groups — the total death toll under Saddam Hussein’s rule reaches a horrifying estimate of 161,000 to 295,000 people. The 2003 Iraq Invasion and What Came After The year 2003 was no ordinary year for Iraq. It was the year when the U.S. and its allies invaded under the banner of WMDs and freedom, but ended up killing thousands of innocent people — whether they were Sunni, Shia, Kurd or Yazidi. This was the same year that Saddam Hussein’s regime was toppled, but it also raises many deep questions. How did it happen? What did the U.S. really gain? And most importantly — did Iraq finally find peace after Saddam was captured? Let’s begin, but one thing must be said clearly from the start: > Whether the U.S. gained anything or not, one can’t ignore the possibility that Bush’s real plan was oil — control Iraq’s oil fields once Saddam was out of the picture. I don’t claim this as absolute truth — maybe it’s speculation, maybe not. But when you really think about it, this entire approach feels like a European colonial playbook: Go into a country, plunder it, destabilize it, and then walk out. The U.S. seemed to follow a similar path in Iraq. --- The Invasion Begins: Operation Iraqi Freedom On March 20, 2003, the United States — backed by the UK, Australia, and Poland — launched a massive military assault on Iraq, naming it "Operation Iraqi Freedom." It was one of the biggest armed conflicts of the modern era, launched under President George W. Bush, as part of the broader “War on Terror” after the September 11 attacks in 2001. I mentioned this earlier — the U.S. just needed an excuse, and 9/11 gave George Bush exactly that: > A golden opportunity to attack, and he took it. --- The False Justifications The Bush administration gave two main reasons for the invasion: 1. Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) — including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. 2. Iraq had ties to terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda. But both of these claims turned out to be completely false. > There was no credible evidence of WMDs. No connection to Al-Qaeda. Just lies to justify war. Even UN weapons inspectors (UNMOVIC) couldn’t find a single piece of real evidence. Yet the invasion happened anyway. Saddam Hussein had no link with Al-Qaeda. But the real question is—if no WMDs were found, then why did US forces remain in Iraq until 2011? We have to think about this. In reality, the American military itself began to look like a terrorist organization, because it started doing the same things Saddam Hussein had done to his own people. The invasion was launched with the “Shock and Awe” bombing campaign, where Baghdad and other cities were hit with heavy airstrikes. The coalition forces (America, UK, Australia, and Poland) began a ground invasion and quickly defeated the Iraqi army—but at the cost of many innocent lives. Because whenever war begins in any country, it is the innocent who suffer the most. The same happened in Iraq. By April 2003, Baghdad was captured, and Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist government collapsed. Saddam fled, but in December 2003, he was found hiding in a small house near Tikrit. He was arrested, tried, and in 2006, executed by hanging. Now, logically, after his execution, US forces should have returned to their own country. But that didn’t happen. Why? Because Iraq’s oil-rich areas were still under their control, and they also wanted to “train” local forces. So then, who was the real dictator—Saddam or Bush? Who was the real oppressor—Saddam’s supporters, his regime, the US forces, or the WMD myth? The same cycle was repeating. Saddam had oppressed his people, and then Bush continued the same cycle in another form. Both leaders supposedly wanted to eliminate terrorism in Iraq and bring peace to the people. But did that actually happen? No. Let’s understand what the US did in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. After the invasion, the US and its allies began the occupation of Iraq, which continued until 2011. This period was full of insurgency and sectarian violence, creating near civil war conditions between Sunni and Shia groups. The US established the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), an interim government in Iraq. However, key decisions by the CPA—like disbanding the Iraqi army—only fueled the insurgency further. In 2007, the US adopted the “troop surge” policy, sending 30,000 extra troops to Iraq in an attempt to control the violence. This brought some degree of stability—yes, but at the cost of countless innocent lives. The sectarian rift between Sunnis and Shias was deepened, and they were made to fight each other. Eventually, this led to the formation of groups like ISIS. America was just hiding its failures—everyone knows this now. Insurgency and Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) attacks continued. The shocking thing is that Al-Qaeda wasn’t even present in Iraq before, but somehow emerged during the chaos. Maybe some small groups already existed, but they weren’t this active. Finally, in late 2011, President Barack Obama announced the complete withdrawal of American forces from Iraq on December 15, 2011. By that time, around 50,000 American troops were still present in Iraq, who remained there for training and support purposes. But in 2014, a deadly organization called the Islamic State (ISIS) emerged, which proved to be extremely dangerous inside Iraq. This group was responsible for killing a large number of people — including Sunnis, Shias, Yazidis, and Kurds. As a result, America had to once again intervene in Iraq, though this time on a limited scale. However, this doesn't mean that the American forces suffered no losses. They did. And many people died without any clear reason. During the Iraq War, the human loss was enormous. At least 4,500 American troops and over 200 allied troops were killed. More than 32,000 American troops were injured. And according to various estimates, between 100,000 and 300,000 Iraqi civilians lost their lives. Some sources even estimate this number to be as high as 461,000. After all this happened, did America ever find any weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)? Meaning, did they discover chemical weapons or anything similar? No — they found nothing. At one point, I even misunderstood WMDs to be a terrorist group, as I had mentioned earlier — which was a big mistake on my part. I thought WMDs were the name of a militant organization, but in reality, WMD stands for Weapons of Mass Destruction. These are extremely deadly weapons, such as nuclear weapons (atomic bombs) — the kind that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These cause the most massive destruction known. And this is something I sincerely apologize for — if some words in the article were wrongly written due to that misunderstanding. Even when I try to edit them, some words still appear out of place. But the mistake was genuine, and I own up to it. Biological weapons — these involve the use of viruses, bacteria, or other germs to spread disease and cause death. For example, using Anthrax or Plague as weapons. Anyway, in 2003, to verify the presence of such weapons, the United Nations had already set up UNMOVIC (United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission) back in 1999, specifically to inspect Iraq for WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction). When suspicions arose that Saddam possessed WMDs, UN inspectors entered Iraq. They searched labs, factories, military bases — looking for evidence. They had full security and permission to inspect wherever necessary. UNMOVIC operated from 1999 to 2003, and they repeatedly reported that no WMDs were found in Iraq or in Saddam Hussein’s possession. But despite these findings, the U.S. denied it. Later, in February 2003, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell gave a major presentation at the United Nations, where he presented “evidence” of Iraq’s WMD program. However, it was later proven to be false — based largely on the lies of an Iraqi defector codenamed “Curveball.” UNMOVIC’s inspections didn’t find any real WMDs — only some outdated materials (like 50 liters of old mustard gas and a few warheads) that had already been previously declared. In 2004, the Iraq Survey Group’s Duelfer Report confirmed that Iraq had no active WMD programs, and this revelation became a major controversy for the U.S. administration — because the main justification for war was proven false. But despite all this, if we look at the reality carefully, did the U.S. gain anything? Yes, some benefits were achieved. Let’s be honest: Iraq holds the world’s third-largest oil reserves. That alone is a powerful reason. And yes — the U.S. must have taken something from it. Maybe not direct oil theft, but certainly influence. On one hand, America gained, but on the other hand, it also suffered — especially in terms of global hatred from its own citizens, something we even saw later with Trump. Now let’s talk about the benefits first: After the fall of Saddam Hussein, major oil companies like ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, and Halliburton received contracts to develop Iraq’s oil fields. The U.S. didn’t directly loot the oil, but they wanted a stable, pro-Western government in Iraq that would give these companies long-term contracts and secure supply lines. Halliburton, a company connected to Dick Cheney, received billions of dollars worth of contracts. Similarly, the Military-Industrial Complex in the U.S. benefited enormously from the Iraq war. Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing made huge profits through arms and military supply deals. At the same time, new weapons systems were tested, and billions of dollars were spent on training and arms sales. Contractors also profited from Iraq’s rebuilding projects — including schools, power grids, and other infrastructure. So in a way, it wasn’t entirely for America’s own benefit — some efforts were made for Iraq too. But what’s the point, when it was the U.S. itself that created the chaos in Iraq, only to clean it up afterward? Later, America tried to establish a permanent military presence in Iraq. They built large military bases around Al Anbar and Baghdad, allowing them to keep an eye on Iran and maintain control over Middle Eastern geopolitics — especially the Gulf oil routes. All of this was part of a bigger strategic plan — to contain Iran and strengthen U.S. influence in the region. Now let’s come to the costs, which I’ve mentioned earlier too: More than 2 trillion dollars were spent. Over 4,000 American soldiers lost their lives. And inside America itself, it sparked hatred and deep division amon g the people. And inside America itself, hatred began to rise — even among the American people. If America had spent that $2 trillion on its own citizens, maybe this division and hate wouldn't have happened. And at the same time, America could have built better relations with Muslim countries and done business in a positive way. Even now, America has business ties with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, but there are many other Muslim countries that now hate America because of these wars. After all this, instability in Iraq increased, and ISIS rose to power — a deadly terrorist organization that emerged around 2014. They spared no one — whether Sunni, Shia, Kurd, or Yazidi. If we look at the full picture, America gained both benefits and losses. Yes — they gained: Strategic access to oil Massive profits for defense contractors Geopolitical positioning and military presence in the Middle East But in return, they also suffered: Huge financial costs A damaged global reputation And even more hatred across the Middle East So what was the point of this whole "Bush Brother's Plan"? Poor Bush — maybe he thought: "Let’s send in our troops, loot what we can, and then walk away." But in t he end, everything backfired. Alright, before we move on to ISIS, let’s talk about one of the biggest and most horrifying cases — the American-run prison that became infamous for brutality, where American forces committed atrocities against countless prisoners, including women. That prison was Abu Ghraib. Abu Ghraib is a large prison located around 32 kilometers from Baghdad, in the town of the same name. Even during Saddam Hussein’s regime, it had a dark reputation as a prison for political prisoners — a place known for torture and mass killings. In 2003, when U.S. forces took control of Iraq, they repaired and reactivated this prison, turning it into a military prison. At that time, thousands of Iraqi prisoners were detained there — many of them innocent civilians with no formal charges. According to the Red Cross, 70 to 90 prisoners were knowingly arrested without any crime. When we try to describe what happened to these innocent Iraqis — including Shias, Sunnis, Kurds, and Yazidis — it becomes difficult to even find the right words. The abuse inflicted by American forces went far beyond limits. The torture was physical, psychological, and sexual. Some of the horrific and shameful acts included: Beatings: Prisoners were slapped, kicked, and stomped on while barefoot. A prisoner named Ali Shalal Al Qaysi was electrocuted. He was forced to stand on a box, with wires tied to his hands, and was told he would be shocked if he moved. And this was just one example — many others were tortured without any charges or guilt. Then came the sexual humiliation: Prisoners were stripped completely naked, photographed, and filmed. They were forced to wear women’s underwear, and made to pose in sexually explicit positions. One prisoner, Suhail Al Shimari, shared that he was sexually assaulted and dragged around the prison with a rope tied to his neck. Some female detainees were also stripped naked, forced to expose their private parts, and faced threats of "honor killings" after their release. In a conservative society like Iraq, such sexual humiliation is considered the ultimate disgrace. These actions were intentionally done to psychologically break prisoners, to destroy their honor, and their faith. Were the perpetrators punished? A few were — but the justice was limited. Here are some of the main culprits and their sentences: 1. Staff Sergeant Ivan “Chip” Frederick II Crime: Abuse, conspiracy, violating prisoner dignity Sentence: 10 years (later reduced to 8 years) Details: Found to have supervised and photographed the torture. 2. Specialist Charles Graner Crime: Assault, abuse, sexual violence Sentence: 10 years Details: Considered the ringleader. Photographed beating prisoners and forcing them into sexual positions. 3. Specialist Lynndie England Crime: Conspiracy, abuse, indecent acts Sentence: 3 years + dishonorable discharge Details: Famously seen in photos dragging a prisoner with a dog leash and giving a thumbs-up. 4. Sergeant Javal Davis Crime: Assault, false statements Sentence: A few months + dishonorable discharge Details: Accused of torture and knocking prisoners to the ground. 5. Specialist Megan Ambuhl Crime: Conspiracy Sentence: No jail time, only demoted to Private Details: Present in torture photos and convicted for her involvement. Other Convicted Personnel: Corporal Charles Garner Specialist Armin Cruz Specialist Roman Krol Sergeant Michael Smith Colonel Thomas Pappas (senior officer — only fined, no jail time) Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan — charges mostly dropped These were more individuals from the American forces who were involved in the torture and abuse I mentioned earlier. Some were prosecuted, and a few were punished — but not all faced serious consequences. This wraps up the full Abu Ghraib case, exposing in detail how prisoners were treated and what little justice followed. --- Now, let’s come to what happened after the Iraq War “ended” in 2011. In 2014, war started again — but this time, with a very different ideology and actor. This was no longer about American forces or foreign occupation. This time, a terrorist organization emerged from within Iraq itself, and it called itself: ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) In 2014, ISIS proved to be extremely brutal and dangerous. They began killing countless innocent people, and one of their main targets were the Yazidis. Why? Because Yazidis were seen as different — religiously and ethnically. Even their name reflects that difference — “Yazidi” — some say it refers to a race, others say it refers to a religion. But the truth is, Yazidism is a distinct religion, and Yazidis are a distinct ethnic community. ISIS viewed them as non-believers and justified extreme violence against them. But they didn’t stop there — Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds were also targeted by ISIS. Their ideology was based on intolerance, and they believed anyone who didn’t follow their version of Islam must be eliminated. Iraq and ISIS: The Second Face of War Its full name is Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. It is also known as "Al-Dawla Al-Islamiya Fi Al-Iraq wa Al-Sham." It is considered a Salafi jihadist terrorist organization. But some people say this group was actually created by Israel—which oddly makes some sense. Why? I’ll explain that later. But personally, I don’t believe this is a true Salafi group. Because Salafis are Sunni, and Sunnis don’t kill their own people. Yet in this group, many Sunni people were also killed—along with Shias, Kurds, and Yazidis. They even destroyed mosques—including historical and sacred ones—and demolished entire ancient structures. Some shrines of respected elders were dug up. So yes, this is my own thought, my personal perspective. The historical version shows something else—that ISIS is a Salafi jihadist organization, as you can find in DeepSeek, ChatGPT, or Grok search. But the reality feels different to me. Anyway, let’s come to what ISIS actually did. This group emerged after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, and by 2014, it had reached its peak—capturing large parts of Iraq and Syria. ISIS has its roots in a group called "Jamaat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad," founded in 1999 by Jordanian jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Afghanistan. Note: Historically, it's written that it was established in Afghanistan. But according to my understanding, that could be inaccurate. Why? Because if it was made in 1999, then think—Afghanistan itself was already at war at the time. So how could they have established a new group there? Everyone knows who was fighting whom in that region. And as for the Jordanian jihadist—Abu Musab al-Zarqawi—whether this is a person’s name or an organization, I’m not fully sure. I'm a bit confused about that. But let’s not forget—Jordan itself had killed tens of thousands of Palestinians before, perhaps rebels, perhaps civilians—maybe 10,000 or even 20,000. Whether they did it for ideological reasons or under someone’s pressure, they still killed them. So the point is: Afghanistan is a Sunni Muslim country, and it doesn’t attack its own people. That’s why I doubt this whole setup. But again, this is my perspective. History might show something different—only God knows the full truth. I could be wrong too. Now back to the timeline: after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi went to Iraq and formed "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI). In 2006, Zarqawi was killed in a U.S. airstrike, and leadership of AQI was taken over by Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi. They changed the group’s name to "Islamic State of Iraq." In 2010, both Masri and Omar al-Baghdadi were killed in U.S. operations. Then Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi took over leadership and revived the group. Note this man carefully. In 2011, after the U.S. troops withdrew from Iraq, and the civil war broke out in Syria, a power vacuum was creat ed—ISIS took full advantage of it. And then ISIS expanded into Syria. They tried to merge with Jabhat al-Nusra, which was Al-Qaeda’s Syrian branch, and changed their name to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS). But in 2014, Al-Qaeda officially cut ties with ISIS, mainly due to ideological differences — especially because of Zarqawi’s extremely sectarian ideology. You understand now? Even if ISIS was once linked to Al-Qaeda, eventually, both groups turned against each other. The reason? Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s mindset was completely different from Al-Qaeda’s. ISIS was brutally violent — like a modern version of Nazi leadership — and I’m sure the smart ones will understand what I mean here. Al-Qaeda, in contrast, had a very different approach. At least they never raised a hand against innocent Sunni Muslims. But ISIS? They didn’t spare anyone — not the Shias, not the Sunnis, not the Kurds, not the Yazidis. Their ideology and approach were completely different, and yes, there was even war between the two groups. ISIS kept expanding beyond Iraq and Syria. They carried out attacks in Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, and maybe even in Pakistan, and of course, even the U.S. faced suicide attacks from them. But the majority of ISIS's control was always in Iraq and Syria — that’s why I told you earlier to pay attention to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, because his mindset shaped the group. Then came June 2014. ISIS took over Mosul and Tikrit in Iraq, and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared a global Caliphate, naming himself as the Caliph. They changed the group’s name to simply “Islamic State”. At its peak, ISIS controlled around 100,000 square kilometers of territory — almost the size of Britain — and ruled over 10 to 12 million people, where they enforced their brutal version of Sharia law. The chaos in Syria gave ISIS a safe space, and they declared Raqqa as their capital. They cleverly used social media to influence the youth — especially those young people who were deeply religious or confused. It’s easier to brainwash young minds, and that’s exactly what they did. They inspired recruitment, fundraising, and even global terror attacks from behind screens. --- Now let’s talk about how ISIS eventually collapsed. In August 2014, the U.S.-led coalition launched Operation Inherent Resolve, where 87 countries participated in airstrikes, training, and ground support. Mosul (2016–2017): Iraq’s second-largest city, once a major ISIS stronghold, was liberated with coalition help. Raqqa (2017): The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) recaptured Raqqa, ISIS’s symbolic capital. Baghouz (2019): In March 2019, SDF liberated Baghouz, ISIS’s last territorial stronghold, and that officially ended the Caliphate. By December 2017, ISIS had lost 95% of its territory, including Mosul and Raqqa. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed in a U.S. airstrike in 2019. After him: Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi became the leader until 2022. Then came Abu Hafs al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi from 2023 onward. --- Now let’s look at how many people ISIS actually killed: Global Terrorism Index reports: 2015: 6,141 killed 2016: 9,150 killed Yazidi Genocide (2014): Around 5,000 Yazidi men killed Around 7,000 women and children enslaved Declared genocide by the United Nations Overall in Iraq and Syria: Estimates say 50,000–100,000 civilians were killed by ISIS Includes executions, massacres, bombings, sectarian killings (Shias, Christians, Turkmen), beheadings, and destruction of cultural sites Global attacks included: Brussels Bombings (2016): 32 deaths Orlando Shooting (2016): 49 deaths Nice Attack (2016): 86 deaths Kerman Bombings (2024, Iran): 91 deaths Crocus City Hall Attack (2024, Russia): 145 deaths So in total, some estimates say 50,000+ people globally were killed by ISIS — but honestly, that number may be exaggerated and hard to verify. A more conservative estimate would be 10,000 to 20,000 civilian deaths worldwide (including Iraq, Syria, and international attacks). Even then — it’s not a small number. And yes — ISIS still exists, but not like it used to. It has lost its strength, lost its Caliphate, and lost its territory. It’s just remnants now. This was everything I tried to explain — and yes, I accept I made many mistakes while writing this. Like the confusion around WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction). But I can’t just remove those words now — because if I do, all the effort and flow of the article gets ruined. After all, I wrote this entire piece on my Techno Spark 7 mobile phone. --- Now only the final chapter remains, which is about today’s Iraq. ISIS is mostly finished. America has also left Iraq — yes, a few of their forces remain, but nothing like what it was between 2003 to 2011. So now let’s move to the present: What is Iraq like today? What is its economic and political situation? Let’s begin the final chapter.Everyone knows Iraq holds the third-largest oil reserves in the world. But if we look at Iraq in 2025, it's clear that years of war have deeply affected the country — emotionally, socially, and economically. Oil remains the backbone of Iraq’s economy, and Iraq is still one of the world’s largest oil producers. With the rise in global oil prices, Iraq’s income has improved. Reconstruction efforts are ongoing — new roads, electricity grids, and hospitals are being built, especially in cities like Baghdad, Basra, and Mosul. The IMF and World Bank are also implementing reforms and funding programs in Iraq, which is a positive sign for its future. However, the country still faces several challenges: Corruption remains a massive issue. Public funds are often not used properly for infrastructure or basic services. Youth unemployment is high, and many young people are frustrated due to lack of job opportunities. Iraq’s economy is heavily dependent on oil, so when oil prices drop, the economy suffers immediately. Inflation and food prices also rise from time to time, which hits the poor and working class the hardest. But there are also positive changes: Since the defeat of ISIS in 2017, Iraq has seen relative stability. Life has slowly returned to normal in cities like Baghdad, Najaf, and Karbala. Markets are open, people are out again, and even tourism is beginning to return. Most importantly, Shia-Sunni tensions are no longer as intense as they were between 2006 and 2014. Yet, in remote regions — especially northern Iraq (Nineveh, Kirkuk) and western Anbar province — small ISIS groups still exist and carry out occasional guerrilla-style attacks. Militia groups (PMF) still hold strong influence. Sometimes they act independently of the government, causing tension in governance and security. Drone attacks and cross-border clashes (especially involving Iran and Syria) still happen now and then. In summary, Iraq in 2025 is a country in post-war reconstruction and stabilization: The economy is still driven by oil. Some reforms are being made. But corruption and unemployment remain serious issues. Security in Baghdad and southern Iraq is relatively stable, but border and tribal regions are still fragile. --- If we look back… perhaps, if Saddam Hussein hadn’t made that one big mistake — or you can say, that one wrong step — Iraq might not have suffered so much. Maybe Iraq would have developed just like other countries — look at Japan, a nation once devastated by war, now thriving. But Saddam, in trying to please other Arab nations, ended up destroying his own people and his own country. Later, he unjustly invaded Kuwait, thinking he would become a hero — but in return, he only gained hatred. And if America hadn’t invaded Iraq, maybe such a deadly group like ISIS would never have even formed. But we all know one thing: Every time America puts its hand inside another country, that country ends up broken — its economy shattered, its people destroyed. There’s a famous journalist who once said something powerful in an interview, with a sharp and sarcastic tone: > “We went into Iraq, toppled Saddam like it was nothing… and now look at the mess we left behind.” Yes, it was “nothing” for you. But your country was deeply involved in destroying Iraq — in torture, rape, killings, and the suffering of innocent people. For you, this might be common. But for us — for humanity — this is not normal. First, look at your own country. Fix your own crime, rape, and murder rates. And understand one thing: When you enter another country claiming you’ve come to “save” it — that is not your duty. You are not a hero. Solve your own internal problems first, and s top interfering in other nations like Lebanon, Libya, or Ukraine. Wese bhi ek AUR mashoor shaks ne ek interview me kaha tha We came, we saw, he died Ek aur Bahadur shaks ne kaha tha If you want to destroy any nation without war, make adultery or nudity common in the young generation.” Ek AUR mashoor shaks ne kaha tha Jo Bahadur bhi tha A king can move a man, a father can claim a son, but remember that even when those who move you are kings or powerful men, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God, you cannot say, 'I was told by others to do thus,' or that, 'Virtue was not convenient at the time.' This will not suffice. Remember that." As one well-known figure once famously said in an interview, with cold indifference: > "We came, we saw, he died." And another brave and insightful man once warned the world with these words: > "If you want to destroy any nation without war, make adultery or nudity common in the young generation." And perhaps the most powerful words came from yet another courageous soul, a man of wisdom and strength: > "A king can move a man, a father can claim a son — but remember that even when those who move you are kings or powerful men, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God, you cannot say, 'I was told by others to do thus,' or that, 'Virtue was not convenient at the time.' This will not suffice. Remember that." Article by abdulhafeez