SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (41369)9/2/2002 2:47:21 AM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
Hi Nadine Carroll; Ah, the Iraq Attack, the attack that never seems to come despite the evidence that it is only a few months away!

Re: "With little fanfare, an event of deep significance has taken place in Dubai. Kuwait has signed a deal worth $2.1 billion to purchase 16 AH-64D Apache attack helicopters, along with four spare engines for each, weapons, and targeting systems.
...
Now, suddenly, the deal has been approved. (Isn't that interesting?)
"

Steven den Beste's suggestion that the sale of Apache helicopters to Kuwait is a sign that they're agreeing to an attack on Iraq is ludicrous. Kuwait's been buying US arms for decades, and the 16 Apache helicopters is old news that predates the WTC attack.

DefenseLINK, November 20, 2000
U.S. officials said Kuwait plans to upgrade its defense capability by purchasing 16 Apache Longbow helicopters for $640 million.
defenselink.mil

It's been congress that has held up the Apache sale, not the DoD or the administration, and it dates to 1994:
defenselink.mil
defenselink.mil

Nor are Apache helicopters that big of a deal. We've already supplied the things to Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. In other words, Kuwait is pretty much the last nation to get them that we're on friendly terms with:
fas.org

But my favorite is the reasoning in this paragraph:

"All the nations in that area have publicly condemned our plans to attack Iraq, but in some cases it appears it was only posturing. All Iraq's neighbors have had to publicly come out against such an attack for fear that they might face Iraqi military retaliation before the US was ready to go. But in the case of Kuwait, that condemnation was muted. Mostly the Kuwaitis are trying to keep out of the spotlight."

(1) Yes, nations don't mind posturing even though it makes them look like spineless idiots.

(2) Yes, Iraq (which barely has enough to eat) is a major threat to its neighbors even though it's surrounded by US forces, and the US is just grasping for an excuse to conquer it. Right now Saddam is quite certain the US is not going to attack. Even more certain are Iraq's neighbors who damn well know that Saddam isn't going to attack them.

(3) Sure, the US isn't "ready to go", but the US has prepositioned weapons all through the area for 10 years. Some of them were used in Afghanistan (and are now being resupplied), but there is plenty of stuff there to protect the locals from Iraq. This is what the purpose of US foreign policy in the region has been for 10 years.

(4) That Kuwait's condemnation is muted is simply because the Kuwaitis aren't so sure that they'd mind seeing a war that eliminated Saddam. They still remember being invaded so they're still pissed off and are more willing to accept the blowback.

-- Carl
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext