Yep, Bin Laden despises Hussein. He's a secular ruler who has persecuted the Shi'ite marsh Arabs and is an obstacle to the instigation of Shariah law in Iraq. Shariah law is the very cornerstone of Bin Laden's crusade against the West.
During the last Gulf War, he wanted to send his nut-jobs to go take out Saddam, but Saudi Arabia wouldn't let him. Maybe his men would have succeeded - afterall they were CIA trained. Makes you wonder how much influence the Saudis have over him.
Strange how this hasn't been mentioned by Blair and Co. Instead we are lead to believe they are best buds, and are godfathers to each other's sons or something. If Al Queda were in Iraq, they could well have been there to subvert the government, just like they do with any other secular state.
Some other interesting facts:
1) Poison gas was cleared for use against Iraqi tribes in 1919 by the British, but lack of an effective delivery system prevented deployment - the intent was there
2) Indescriminate bombing of women and children in Iraq was a tactic espoused by Churchill himself
3) We scoff at Hussein's rigged elections. The British put a king on the throne without any mandate from the people 60 years ago.
Hardly safe moral high ground upon which to perch.
What disgusts me about this inevitable war, is the way Bush linked Iraq to the WTC attacks on the VERY day of the anniversary of the attack. That made me angry. Here's a man, along with half of his administration, that has deep ties with the oil exploration and exploitation industry, using the death of 3000 of his own people to justify an attack on one the most oil rich countries in the world. It stinks to high heaven.
Saddam is undoubtedly a threat, but North Korea is so nuts, even the Chinese have distanced themselves from the regime. They send 20 scuds to Yemen, a country with strong links to Al Queda, and the story disappears within days. They reinstate a nuclear weapons program and threaten war, while throwing inspectors out, and the US and UK send another 50,000 troops to the Gulf. We're told diplomacy will work with Korea, but not with Iraq. The former is run by a man who is quite prepared to watch millions of his people starve, but he's deemed a reasonable participant in a diplomatic effort?
