So true

Both Saddam and Qaddafi were installed by the USA. They were USA puppets at a time in the 1950's and 1960's where the USA favored 'radical socialist strong men' to take over from post colonial Arab monarchies (Nasser Egypt)....and Syria.
Exceptions being the GCC countries and Jordan, who enjoyed greater integration with the British empire, and thus protection from that country from any American political engineering. ......also monarchist Iran under the Shah.

This changed in the 1970's when Zionist British super spy, Bernard Lewis from the British Foreign Office started the 'Clash of Civilization' meme in Washington, from an American university...and as a British counter move of American backing of Radical Arab strongmen.

Because he was Jewish, a Rothschild agent of influence, had a British accent, spoke in Grand sweeping eloquent prose, and posed as an 'expert of Islam'.......the USA in the 1970's was all ears, especially from the Atlantist Jimmy Carter administration onward......it sounded all so clever then.....getting rid of pro USA ally's regimes.

Shah of Iran 1979 (Not an Arab state, but in the Greater Middle East)

Backing for Afghan Mujaheddin against the Communist government from 1979 (Not an Arab state, but in the Greater Middle East)

The Grand Mosque putsch in Saudi Arabia...1979.

Sadat of Egypt 1981.

Muslim Brotherhood coup in Syria 1982.

Coincidentally the Yinon Plan also appeared in 1982, which stated that Israel's borders were not limited to the 1967, borders, but to Etrez Israel.

Through spreading destabilization using the fifth column of Islamic terrorism, Eretz Israel would eventually emerge from a Balkanised stateless Arab Middle East.

Interesting to observe the stupidity of Americans into buying the Clash of Civilisation meme from an old Jew fart from the UK, exchanging stable pro-American regimes for destabilized hostile statelets...with little or no communication with the USA.

No doubt a certain percentage of Americans will say that it indeed was worth while and clever to topple the Shah, and bring in the mullahs....if only so that America could eventually attack and occupy Iran and its oil for free. ....have negligible trade between the two states exist to this day after 36 years...with $100 billions of trade lost forever...whilst the British still have an embassy in Iran and are touting for MORE trade with that country, beyond that of the USA. The embassy hostage crisis for 444 days involving 52 diplomatic staff...

I suppose different people have different definitions of being clever.

And the stupidity of GCC Arab states backing 'al-Qaeda' and ISIS.


Trump: Middle East Would Be More Stable With Saddam and Gadhafi

Says Ousting Assad In Syria 'Going to Be the Same Thing'

by Jason Ditz, antiwar.com
Speaking today on NBC’s Meet the Press, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump cautioned against further intervention in Syria, noting that the US largely has no idea who these rebels they’ve been funding and arming are, and predicting that Syria would go the way of Libya and Iraq, toward more chaos, if Assad was ousted.
Pressed on whether this meant he believed the region would be more stable with Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein still in power, he confirmed it was “not even a contest,” saying Libya isn’t even really a country anymore, and ISIS came out of the removal of Saddam in Iraq.
Trump said he was glad Russian President Vladimir Putin is ‘bombing the hell out of ISIS” in Syria, but predicted that he would get bogged down in such an effort just as everyone else who has tried to go into the Middle East on such interventions has.
Though Trump denied that he “trusts” Putin, he did say he believes the Russian leader would be targeting ISIS, because of concerns about ISIS expanding northward into Russian territory.
Trump has been campaigning, like materially all of the Republican field, as a hawk, but is showing a lot more nuance in recent weeks, including unveiling an economic plan that would cut the defense budget, with an eye on massive savings to be achieved by eliminating corruption and fraud in spending.
Indeed, at this point Trump’s protestation that he’s “militaristic” probably needs reexamining, with his aversion to military adventures in the Middle East putting him in a position that starkly contrasts with the rest of the candidates out there.