Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Joe Whitey
Sadaam was left in power after the first Gulf War because of Iran. It became very clear- very fast to George Bush I that the Shiites were being infiltrated by Iranians and were looking to Iran for guidance and support. When GWI saw this he figured Sadaam was the lessor of two evils. Further- the large coalition he put together to fight the first gulf war would have collpased if we did more than oust Sadaam from Kuwait. When poeple say GWI "blew it" during the first gulf war by not going to Baghdad they don't understand that he couldn't go to Baghdad and never had any intention of doing so.

And all of this should disturb us in light of of our present occupation of Iraq. GWI's advisors were not at all excited about this war though they only expressed mild concerns. The threat of Shia loyality to Iran is very real. That it seems to have caught Bush II off guard is surreal and depressing.

Now we have the pathetic spectacle of Rumsfeld issuing "guidelines" for building a democratic state (and comparing Iraq to revolutionary America!) in Iraq while threating Iran about broadcasting radio propaganda into Iraq? What country used to complain about radio broadcasts into their territory? Was it the Soviets? If our plans for remaking Iraq into a democrtic state are "threatened" by free speech and some Radio broadcasts from Iran then it has no chance of success and we should leave now.

219 posted on 05/29/2003 6:05:28 PM PDT by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies ]


To: Burkeman1
The U.S. was caught off-guard on this one, in terms of the aftermath of the war itself. Nobody expected the consensus of the Iraqi people to be as follows:

"Thanks for the help, Yankees. Now turn the lights back on and get the f#ck out of here while we go about creating an Islamic State of Southern Iraq, a Kurdish State of Northern Iraq, a Ba'athist State of Baghdad, etc."

There was a retired general who raised some concerns early on that "keeping the peace" would require several hundred thousand troops, but these concerns were dismissed out of hand by no less a military genius than Paul Wolfowitz (sarcasm /off/), who insisted that most U.S. troops would be on their way home by now. Instead, 150,000 troops are going to remain, and they will be supplemented by another 20,000 U.S. troops and 20,000 foreign peacekeepers.

220 posted on 05/29/2003 6:33:59 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson