Is Saddam Hussein insane? Claims victory 10 years after Gulf War.

There is a difference between a less then perfect policy decision and the proper execution of a military campaign.

Anyone who would attack the effectiveness of the job that our military did should realize that by extension you also attack the GW vets. I’m giving the benefit of the doubt here (as the rest of us should) assuming that was not; nor will be anyone’s intention in this thread.

In the Gulf War the US military demonstrated overwhelming superiority in planing, execution and firepower.

Further, to “do it right” (i.e. continuing US military action) would have included sending my unit up the Tigress–Euphrates to Bazaar and then into Baghdad for some great house to house fighting among civilians. Thanks but no thanks I’m glad we stopped when we did.

It was the right call.

Policy that left Iraq the use of hellos and our non support of the short attempt at a coupe by various Iraqi internal groups, not to mention a bungling Clinton administration, is what has left us where we are with Iraq. Not the execution of any task by our military.

And yes … Sadam has always been insane.
 
Well, given what Saddam has gotten away with, I'd say that he's pretty clever. "Insane" does not equal "stoopid". Where Big Bush and his advisors were wrong--ain't 20/20 hindsight wonderful?--was in thinking that Hussein with his butt kicked would stay home and behave.

The thinking behind leaving him in place was that he would be a balance of power against Iran. Iran was and is a threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf area. Were Hussein gone, there could be a splitup of Iraq, with Iran taking control of the southeastern part of the country. That would make export of the Iranian Shiite revolution into Kuwait and Saudi Arabia rather easier than at present...

Thumper, while I can agree with much of your attitude, we all gotta remember that political leaders do not look at war in the same manner as those who must do the fighting. "Limited Objective" is one phrase, for instance. (Whether or not I agree with this is beside the point. It's just the way the world has always worked and always will work.) Political leaders don't necessarily want total surrender; that usually means the costs of occupation duty--which is why I'm puzzled by our continued presence in both South Korea and the Balkans. But then, I never accused Clinton of knowing what he was doing, either...

And so it goes,

Art
 
Thumber: I hope by now you have cooled down a bit. First let me say thank you for your service 10 years ago. Yes, we did win a victory, but I think that even Bush the elder has admitted that not taking out Saddam was a mistake. In WW2 we defeated the Nazis and saved the Germans, as in the Cold War we defeated the Communists and saved the Russians. During the Gulf War we defeated the Iraqis in Kuwait, BUT we did not defeat the whole Iraqi army and Saddam still rules and plots. Remember in Vietnam we always won the battles, but lost the war. Remember war is only an extention of politics.

Oh, ten years ago I was a 50 year old fart, so that makes me a 60 year old fart today.
 
See what you started, Mr. Big... :) - Good participation!

BTW: Pls chk ur profile email addr - I sent you a msg several times a couple months ago and got non-deliveries - it's still the same.

-Andy
 
Woops! Email address corrected. I haven't had that old one in many many moons! Sorry bout that!

I don't post too much...but when I do I try to make it a good one!
 
*sigh*

We ran his forces out of Kuwait with their tails between their legs, and we did it with minimal casualties to American forces.

A miniscule victory, to be sure, but still a wictory.
Click to expand...

Read the last line with a touch of irony.

LawDog
 
Boys (and girls)l...

I'm sorry. I'm guilty of running my mouth with a hot head.

I think a lot of the frustration I've shown here is a result of listening to some of our enemies spouting the same kind of things in a different context.

I forget that I'm among friends here. I should have thought this through a little more before responding.
I guess it's better to be an a** among family than out in public.

Again, I apologize.
 
We won the first battle. There is another to come. Saddam now has 1000 modern tanks, rather than the 600 obsolete ones he had before. His army is larger than ever. He has enormous oil revenue. He is acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Us, we have a greatly reduced military compared to the time of the gulf war. We are switching away from the M1 Abrahms, the best tank ever built, to small quasi-tanks that provide no protection for the occupants. Saddam is watching our military decline, while he builds his. We are being reduced to having Israel have to fight our wars for us the next time Saddam attacks. Israel would probably not go to war for Kuwait, and I doubt we have the ability to fight the gulf war again. Make no mistake, that murdering pyschopath will attack again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top