Can someone with more knowledge chime in on my understanding of this:
Saddam Hussein was born Sunni but ruled as secular.
It kept the Sunni extremists happy, because he was Sunni after all, and while Saddam was a brutal ruler, he wasn't extremist to the point of genocide. Therefore the region was somewhat stabilized (relative to today).
This is likely an extreme simplification... But it seems like removing Saddam, a terrible but non genocidal Sunni leader, destabilized the region enough for Sunni extremists to organize and eventually form ISIS. They were happy with a "moderate" leader, as long as that leader was Sunni. Remove the "moderate" leader, and all hell breaks loose.
Is any of that even remotely accurate?
Would ISIS exist in a world where Saddam Hussein is still in power?
The real problem was we went to war to get rid of Saddam with no clear plan on what to do after he was gone. But no Saddam killed 100,000+ people.