JDN. Re: "There was a major difference. That time the "coalition" specifically agreed NOT to invade Iraq any longer so in a sense our hands were tied."
>>> Not really. The coalition of war fighters (mostly US, US, US, and GB/Australia)... (and the coalition of bill payers: mostly Saudi Arabia, Japan, and Kuwait) agreed to not replace the regime. There was nothing said about not invading Iraqi territory, which we most assuredly did.
>>> Still, the Big Dog always calls the shots, and the decision to stop one day short of the scheduled military end was made by Bush (and was the result of a strong argument from Powell, made in the Oval Office). It was opposed by our military leadership... and, I think, by anyone with half a brain about the realities on the ground in Iraq... and about Saddam's history in general.
>>> One more day - completing the original plan - would have prevented the excape of the Republican Guard to Baghdad... which is what allowed Saddam to survive. (That, and the US making another tragically bad decision: allowing his helicopters to massacre the Shia rebellion in the south, and the Kurdish one in the north.
>>> Please don't blame this misbegotten short-sighted decision on our 'allies', it was all Bush. He called it. The allies could have done nothing to stop the campaign in that last, forgone 24 hours. The strategic failure was Bush's.
>>> In fact, if our forces had gone 24 hours beyond plan, an investment of Baghdad could have been mounted. Without his Republican Guard to support him... Saddam's fate would have been that of the Italian dictator in the waning days of the second world war.
Re: "THIS TIME the USA and the WILLING will HAVE to take responsability for anything that goes on inside Iraq and there will be nothing to stop us from enforcing OUR WILL on Saddams henchmen."
>>> Nothing stopped us the last time, other than bad decision making in the WH. You are right though... this time the expense will be ours.
Re: "I happen to agree that what happened after the Gulf War in 91 was abhorable, goes to show you what a PIECE OF SHIT the UN is. Millions have died all over the world THANKS to the UN and its SILLY RULES."
>>> LOL! Hey, you are not going to get me defending the UN (structurally deficient since it's inception), but they weren't flying 'high cover' over the northern and southern no-fly zones - we were.
>>> It was a US decision to let Saddam's helicopters attack into the exclusion zones, and massacre the people. The US-written treaty that 'ended hostilities' mentioned only fixed wing aircraft... a rather foolish oversight, wouldn't you say? |
