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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: RMF who wrote (50295)8/6/2013 9:32:06 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 85487
 
As I said "the coalition in 2003 had fewer (non-American) members, providing fewer resources"

In 1992 it was a different story. Iraq had been the AGRESSOR against Kuwait and the whole western world was against that.

Much of the world, was against Kuwait being absorbed in to Iraq. But most of those who supported the effort to kick Iraq's forces out of Kuwait, where not particularly keen about invading Iraq, esp. not to the extent of participating in or openly supporting the effort.

Of course "how much support would other countries have given", is far from the only criteria to use to evaluate the situation.

and put our OWN Sunni guy in charge.

Replacing one dictator with another one would have made the effort less popular both in the US and most of the rest of the world, probably including Iraq. Putting another Sunni dictator in place would have ticked off the majority of Iraq's population.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News