Saddam Hussein is overthrown in 1991

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
What would the effects have been had the US continued onto Baghdad in 1991 or at the very least supported the Shiite and Kurdish rebels in Iraq in 1991 to such an extent that they would have captured Baghdad and overthrown Saddam Hussein? What effect would an overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 1991 have had on Iraq, the rest of the neighborhood, the US, and the rest of the world?
 

Isoroku295

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
8,511
In the Past
I would imagine Iran may tempt fate and push for far greater regional power. I think the real question is what would rise up in Saddam's place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Chlodio

Forum Staff
Aug 2016
4,768
Dispargum
Iraq would have been thrown into chaos, especially if the Coalition forces had stayed near Kuwait and Sadam had been overthrown in a revolution. Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds all wanted a dictator to come from their own group. Iraq could have easily broken up into three smaller countries if no one man could have held it together. The country had no experience or cultural tradition of democracy. No one would have thought to hold an election unless elections were imposed on them from the outside as happened after 2003.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
Iraq would have been thrown into chaos, especially if the Coalition forces had stayed near Kuwait and Sadam had been overthrown in a revolution. Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds all wanted a dictator to come from their own group. Iraq could have easily broken up into three smaller countries if no one man could have held it together. The country had no experience or cultural tradition of democracy. No one would have thought to hold an election unless elections were imposed on them from the outside as happened after 2003.
So, you're suggesting that the best move would have been for the US to send its own troops into Baghdad and impose democracy on Iraq by force?

Also, the Libyan rebels in 2011 implemented democracy in Libya after they overthrew and killed Gaddafi. True, this democracy didn't last for very long, but there were free and fair elections in Libya in 2012.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
Depends on the rebels. There were more than one faction with ideas, even within the same general movement.
So, infighting among the Iraqi rebels after they will overthrow Saddam? If so, might this motivate the US and/or Iran to step in--either directly or indirectly?
 

Chlodio

Forum Staff
Aug 2016
4,768
Dispargum
So, you're suggesting that the best move would have been for the US to send its own troops into Baghdad and impose democracy on Iraq by force?
No, I'm not a fan of democracy in places that do not want it or do not understand it. British and American democracy is the result of hundreds of years of political tradition. Look at what happened to France in the century after 1789, or Germany after 1918, where democracy proved unsustainable. You can't create or impose democracy overnight. Bush was right to stay in Kuwait and not get involved in Iraq's internal affairs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartakus X

Isoroku295

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
8,511
In the Past
So, infighting among the Iraqi rebels after they will overthrow Saddam? If so, might this motivate the US and/or Iran to step in--either directly or indirectly?
The US most likely. Iran might have tried to gain greater footing, or support from the rear, but they weren't ready so soon after the Iran-Iraq war to invade Iraq with the US so close by
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,750
SoCal
No, I'm not a fan of democracy in places that do not want it or do not understand it. British and American democracy is the result of hundreds of years of political tradition. Look at what happened to France in the century after 1789, or Germany after 1918, where democracy proved unsustainable. You can't create or impose democracy overnight. Bush was right to stay in Kuwait and not get involved in Iraq's internal affairs.
Iraqis are still eager to participate in democratic elections (as are Afghans), no? As for France, I'm not sure that it had genuine democracy until the 1870s (with the exception of 1848)--did it? As for Weimar Germany, their democracy actually worked pretty well until the Great Depression hit.