Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (81353)	3/11/2003 6:51:00 PM
From: Steeny	Respond to of 281500

OK, I will agree that it is very likely we wanted a weaker Iraq pre Kuwait invasion. However, the evidence is clear we wanted Hussein out as well post invasion. I recently saw interviews with Bush1 from 1992-1995 re-aired on BBC. He basically was much more internationally oriented than Bush2. He understood the importance of allies. He believed he did not have the mandate to take Saddam out, even though he wanted to. He also thought the loss of US lives in a street fight in Baghdad would be too great. I am paraphrasing, but he said all of these things. He was convinced the Iraqis would overthrow Saddam themselves.(the US disgracefully turned our backs on the Kurds when they needed our help). In the 1995 interviews, he admits he made a mistake by not continuing onto Baghdad. Bush1 was very conscious of being an "occupying force in an Arab land." He repeats this phrase again & again. I've seen other arguments here that the US oil companies wanted the Gulf War to keep prices high. I believe in the opposite. Bush1 wanted the war to keep longterm oil prices stable & low.