Another point of view

[chuckwoww]

Things were fairly quiet after the initial invasion. I'd say it was stuff like Abu Ghraib and the kick-ass attitude that brought on the insurgency. Bad PR in other words.

[Flashermac]

Maybe ... but can you expect stability in a country composed of Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and Kurds -- all of whom hate each others' guts? Sadam had stomped on all opposition, so it took a while for the factions to get the courage to start killing each other off.

 

Most logical solution is autonomy (at the least) for the Kurds. But the Turks will never let that happen.

[chuckwoww]

Flashermac said:

Maybe ... but can you expect stability in a country composed of Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and Kurds -- all of whom hate each others' guts? Sadam had stomped on all opposition, so it took a while for the factions to get the courage to start killing each other off.

 

Most logical solution is autonomy (at the least) for the Kurds. But the Turks will never let that happen.

 

I lived in Iraq for a few years. This was before the Iran/Iraq war and the attack on Kuwait. It was perfectly stable. Saddam knew how to deal with religious crazies and Kurdish bandits. The streets were clean. There were well equipped hospitals and schools. It was possible to sit by the river in Baghdad and eat carp from the river and drink beer. Women did not have to wear veils. There was a lot of intermarriage between Kurds, Sunnis and Shi-ites.

 

Now it just looks like a mess to me for all kinds of reasons. Mainly I think because the Sunnis have lost control. The Kurds want their own country ....plus Kirkuk and Mosul of course. The Shia want a theocracy. The central government is a shambles and the Iraqi security forces are basically ethnic militias. I don't think the US has a clue about how to fix it.

 

This is where somebody tells me Saddam eats babies for breakfast, he had palaces full of anthrax and he tried to kill Bushs' dad.

[Flashermac]

My father -- a WWII combat vet -- once remarked to me that if Hitler had died in 1938, he'd probably have gone down in the history books as a great leader who brought "his" country out of a terrible depression and restored its pride. Dictators do have their uses, if they know when to quit. Sadam's biggest mistake was attacing Kuwait, just as Hitler's was in attacking Poland. Both had misread the west and thought they could get away with it!

 

p.s. In case folks have forgotten, I did not support Bush's invasion of Iraq. Unlike Bush, I've been to war myself.

[chuckwoww]

Saddam almost got away with the attack on Kuwait. I don't think the US cared about it much. If Mrs.Thatcher (and BP) hadn't called Bush Senior a wimp Kuwait would be part of Iraq.

 

I think his biggest mistake was compensating the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

[Old Hippie]

I might be wronghere, but I seem to recall Sadam petitioning the UN and what ever world agencies to be allowed to annex a certain region of kuwait, long disputed territory, or to share the oil revenues from that region. His atytempts to have the case heard were muffled...

 

There is no way in my book that the rest of the world didn't see this comming, and could have intervened...he had publically threatened military action. My understanding is, he was happy to stop with just the desputed region, and wanted the case heard, but this was also ignored...frankly, this seems like one big effort to create an excuse to go to war and take the oil...problem is, to many other obsticles in the way.

 

Regarding Hussain, yeah, he might have been what ever, but like Marcos and whateverother dictators, he kept an unruly mob in line. The old saying regarding prison guards "...you have a bunch of bad sick tweisted people to keep in line, you don't go hirer a choir master for the job, you hirer a crazier, more twisted crazier guy..." Hussain might have been nuts and gone over board, but he did keep the country running...in hind sight, they should have heard his case for the disputed territory...why they didn't is obvious, sadly, so are the results of that failure...

[Flashermac]

That wasn't too cool. Made it look like Sadam was financing the bombers.

 

Also turns out that a lot of the alleged atrocities the Iraqis were supposed to be committing in Kuwait were propoganda invented by Kuwaitis in Washington!

[chuckwoww]

There were several reasons why Iraq invaded Kuwait. A glance at a map will show that Iraq still lacks adequate deep water access to the gulf.

 

There is also an unresolved issue where Kuwait province was under Ottoman jurisdiction therefore an Iraqi province. The border was a line drawn by the British. 'Kuwait' means fort. That is what was there until oil was discovered. An old mud fort.

 

The Iraqis tried to lease some islands for an oil terminal from the Al Sabahs but were refused. The Kuwaitis were diverting Iraqi customers from Iraq and stealing Iraqi oil by drilling under the border. These things are common knowledge among oil people working those fields.

 

Saddam warned them many times. He discussed the matter with the US Ambassador, April Glaspie, who more or less said it wasn't US business.

 

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html

 

The rest as they say is history. Saddam invaded Kuwait. Mrs. Thatcher went to see Bush. Baker built a coalition. Something like half a million troops arrived in Saudi Arabia. The Iraqis got 40 days of bombing. Kuwait was liberated. 12 years of sanctions for Iraq. Bush son elected. WMDs etc, etc. Iraq invaded. Saddam captured. Freedom and democracy installed.

 

These are just verifiable facts BTW before anybody accuses me of defending Saddam.

[David_66_UK]

Pretty much my understanding of "History".

 

I also recall that when the British created Kuwait that it was done with a large input from the oil company BP. Back in the late 1980,s after BP was privatised the Kuwaitis tried to buy it. Kinda weird in it's own way.

 

I suspect that the West were in fact quite happy for old Saddam to play silly buggers along the Kuwaiti and Saudi Borders, to help remind them that they needed Uncle Sam & the West..........and it was just a complete fuckup that Saddam accidently got the green light to invade / was too dumb to immediately withdraw.

 

My solution for Iraq is..........invade Iran for a few months, dismantle their Nuclear capablities and bomb them back 30 years whilst doing this. Then withdraw from Iran AND Iraq. (Can always attack Iran again from the Afghan side!)

 

But before leaving divide Iraq into the 3 countries it actually is, and also give the Kurds the Kurdish part of Iran in exchange for them giving up any claim to Turkey. If they do not, just explain to them how the world works, in 1 years time no one in Washington will be able to spell Kurd, let alone find them on a map.

 

I love this THINK TANK stuff!! :D

[BelgianBoy]

David66UK said:

My solution for Iraq is..........invade Iran for a few months, dismantle their Nuclear capablities and bomb them back 30 years whilst doing this. Then withdraw from Iran AND Iraq. (Can always attack Iran again from the Afghan side!)

AHA.... another specialist !

 

How exiting Iran through Afganistan to make sure the job would now be done properly ????

 

BB