Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Middle Eastern and African History Middle Eastern and African History Forum - Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and all nations of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 3rd, 2017, 06:36 AM   #61
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2017
From: Belgium
Posts: 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by starman View Post
US vital interests were not at stake in 2003. WMD were just a pretext; even if Iraq had what shrub claimed--which it didn't--the US had more than ample deterrent capability. The war was a neocon attempt to benefit Israel primarily not the US. The real fantasy world was the alleged Iraqi threat and the supposed benefits of toppling Saddam, as per the neocon scheme.
So you would have preferred to just keep bombing Iraq on and off like in the 1990's?

A lot of criticism can be levelled at the 2003 invasion and especially its aftermath. But it is a fact that Iraq remained a threat to its neighbours.

The main mistake was made in 1991 when the first Bush administration violated the old adage that war is too important a thing to leave to generals and let General Schwarzkopf deal with the ceasefire-terms (which were not well thought through).
BelgianMaster is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 3rd, 2017, 10:57 AM   #62

starman's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2014
From: Connecticut
Posts: 3,058

Quote:
Originally Posted by BelgianMaster View Post
So you would have preferred to just keep bombing Iraq on and off like in the 1990's?
No way! The US should've abandoned its silly bogeyman view of Saddam and negotiated.

Quote:
A lot of criticism can be levelled at the 2003 invasion and especially its aftermath. But it is a fact that Iraq remained a threat to its neighbours.

Absurd. The clear lessons of the Iran-Iraq war and the Kuwait adventure were that attempts at expansion didn't work. The Iraqis weren't retarded. By March 1991 their armed forces were severely degraded and the US had stationed forces to ensure their containment.
The US should've reached an understanding with Saddam, lifted sanctions and reestablished Iraq as a bulwark against Iranian expansion, as it was before. It could've maintained the relative stability of Iraq, kept Iran out of it and avoided the horrific mess since 2003.

Last edited by starman; March 3rd, 2017 at 11:00 AM.
starman is offline  
Old March 4th, 2017, 07:03 AM   #63
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,661

Quote:
Originally Posted by starman View Post
Hafez Assad didn't get power until about 1970. Under him, Syria fought in two wars against Israel--'73 and '82.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
macon is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Middle Eastern and African History

Tags
arbic, east, fall, middle, middleeast, nowadays, relation, saddam, spring



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Relation: Sykes-Picot agreement and Middle East nowadays FSchaling Middle Eastern and African History 56 December 10th, 2016 07:23 PM
Relation: Pasha regimes and Middle East nowadays FSchaling Middle Eastern and African History 6 December 5th, 2016 09:44 PM
Middle Eastern Refugee Crisis With a Surviving Saddam Hussein Futurist Speculative History 10 December 14th, 2015 03:29 PM
Fall of Oberndorf spring 1945 M9Powell War and Military History 4 November 6th, 2014 05:42 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.