It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iraq never invaded Kuwait?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
I watched a video on history in the middle east.

The video claimed that Iraq never really did invade Kuwait.

It claimed that the satellite photos showed no troops.
It said there were no troops massing at the airport and there were supposedly no tracks in the desert from tanks...


Here is the video. Video
Go to 16:50, thats where it starts talking about this.

Any old timers out there, or anyone in the know about this, please share your oppinion.

I am having a hard time believing that the Bush Sr. Admin could pull of such a deciet back in the day.

BTW, mods I'm not sure where this goes so if it is in the wrong forum...




posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
There were troops there allright, the Kuwaity government are the ones who requested US assistance and advisory help. They wanted protection, and we were the first ones hey knew would responce without hesistation.

Back then in Desert 1, many more countries were on our side and stayed the whole duation, witch was surorisingly short, maybe that effects this wars alliances, I dont know just suspect it.

Saddam did attack, I've seen the footage of the dead mustard gassed troops. In 1989 and 87 I recall the pre war ( prior to us involvement, their war was going on, we did not join till 90/91 "officially"), info being mention in the media and it wasnt good.


There are many more details but just off the top pof my head, that is what I know.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Well, I'm on dial-up so I'm not gonna download that video. But, sheesh. Iraq never invaded Kuwait? I think Saddam would have something to say about that claim!



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:33 PM
link   
You know, I just realized I misstook the words.

It was saying that the threat to Saudi Arabia that the U.S. convinced Saudi Arabia wasn't real. It's also saying that when the ground troops finally went in they were met with a surpisingly small resistance compared to what the US was saying.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow

I am having a hard time believing that the Bush Sr. Admin could pull of such a deciet back in the day.


Oh the invasion was the real deal alright if it would not have been we would never have gotten the full support of the Arab world.

It is just too bad Bush Sr did not listen to Stormin Norman. If he had we would not be in the situation we are today.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by Techsnow
I am having a hard time believing that the Bush Sr. Admin could pull of such a deciet back in the day.

Oh the invasion was the real deal alright if it would not have been we would never have gotten the full support of the Arab world.


Well, bin Laden thought the Saudis were traitors to use Western troops instead of mujahideen. So surely not every part of the Arab world was thrilled about the prospect of American troops on Middle Eastern soil, especially in Saudia Arabia where some of the holier lands are located.

[edit on 28-9-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
The invasion of Kuwait was extremely real.

UN Security Council Resolution .660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, 677, and 678 all deal with the invasion. In addition, the actions taken by the United States in Desert Storm where requested by the UN, I don't think the UN would allow the US to gain more power do you? I mean they hate our guts

www.un.org...

[edit on 28-9-2006 by BlackJackal]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

Well, bin Laden thought the Saudis were traitors to use Western troops instead of mujahideen. So surely not every part of the Arab world was thrilled about the prospect of American troops on Middle Eastern soil, especially in Saudia Arabia where some of the holier lands are located.


Who cares what bin laden thought. That is not relevant because he had other motives like being tried in absentia and sentenced to death by the Saudia's . What is relevant, is the fact that the majority of the Arab world backed the US during Desert Storm.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
I watched a video on history in the middle east.

The video claimed that Iraq never really did invade Kuwait.

It claimed that the satellite photos showed no troops.
It said there were no troops massing at the airport and there were supposedly no tracks in the desert from tanks...

Oh yeah, yes, of course.....that video is the end all of proofs.....!
Thats right, I forgot, instead of "in-vading," Iraq was simply 'in-vited'.....my bad, Bush's bad, the UN's bad, the Coalitions bad....ultimately, the Kuwaitis bad.

Perhaps your not comprehending what the video is trying to push off?
In my little corner of the world, its called propaganda and disinformation, maybe even apologist historical revisionism.........!!




Any old timers out there, or anyone in the know about this, please share your oppinion.

Yeah, I was there.
As such, you were so objective in presenting this falsehood of a video that you forgot to post up those pictures and videos, located all over the internet, showing Iraqi troops looting, pillaging, and their after-kills....all the while they were in Kuwait. I guess that is what those dern Kuwaitis get for in-viting them in, huh?




I am having a hard time believing that the Bush Sr. Admin could pull of such a deciet back in the day.

I am having a hard time believing that people will swallow as truth any thing they read and see on the internet. Thats beyond "decietful" (ie: deceitful) to me....


Hey, maybe you can obtain and show a video of Bush and Saddam shaking hands while they enjoy a Martini/drink together after Saddam was pulled out of his vacation foxhole, or maybe a video of Bush and Cheney as they were pushing the demo button on WTC7?

[edit on 28-9-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I don't know what your trying to imply Seeker.

Were these Iraqi troops looting AFTER the after math of the war?

Please tell me why, after the war, did the U.S. impose sanctions on Iraq to deny Iraq people medicine???

Why are there reports now that the U.S. supposedly used depleted uranium in the war?

Why did we tell Saudi Arabia that Sadam was planning to attack them, when in fact there was no evidence of this?

There are so many questions here... I am just now starting to research the Gulf War and I have many more questions than answers.

[edit on 28-9-2006 by Techsnow]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
I don't know what your trying to imply Seeker.

What, huh?




Were these Iraqui troops looting AFTER the after math of the war?

You must have gotten confused with my word usage of "after-kills"?
That was an expressive word used to describe the photos and videos to be found on the internet that showed dead Kuwaitis, those that were killed after those Iraqis were in-vited into Kuwait.




Please tell me why, after the war, did the U.S. impose sations on Iraq to deny Iraq medicine???

Use Google or your favorite search engine much? Try it out.
I think that in your endeavors to find the answer to that which you ask, you will unfortunately discover that the sanctions brought against Iraq/Saddam were not solely a US action or doing and that the US was not the only nation to IMPOSE those sanctions.




Why are there reports now that the U.S. supposedly used depleted uranium in the war?

Is it banned?
Can you show me the international law that bans the use of DU?




Why did we tell Saudi Arabia that Sadam was planning to attack them, when in fact there was no evidence of this?
According to this video, that is?
Umm, you are one of those that believe anything that they read or see on the internet, huh?


BTW, were you there?

[edit on 28-9-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
No I don't believe everything I read on the net, and please show mercy on me because like I said, I'm just now starting to look into this.

I admit that I posted before I should have. I shouldn't have posted so soon...

I know where you coming from though Seeker but come on.. I think we can both agree that the use of Depleted Uranium in war should be abolished!! I mean the radiation lasts for 4.5 billion years! Why would the US go to that level>?

And you say that other nations supported the sanctions. I must admit that I believe those other nations only went along for certain reasons... be it fear, or propaganda IDK.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 07:50 PM
link   
No matter what, we got involved all over the sake of Oil. Kuwait was scarfing up Iraqi oil and invading Iraqi territory to do it. Their oilfields run under mutual ground, meaning that the oil fields cross borders. They were supposedly only supposed to pump a certain amount of oil per day and the Kuwaitis violated that agreement and pumped out a lot more which drove the price of oil down. On top of that, since the oil fields were on mutual ground, they were actually stealing from the Iraqi's. Saddam Hussein who had been in a great deal of debt at the time could not afford that to happen and soon after invaded Kuwait. Why we were even involved over an oil dispute remains questionable. There will be people who will attempt to say it was out of his madness this was done, but there was a reason as to why he did it.


Like father like son.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
No matter what, we got involved all over the sake of Oil. Kuwait was scarfing up Iraqi oil and invading Iraqi territory to do it. Their oilfields run under mutual ground, meaning that the oil fields cross borders. They were supposedly only supposed to pump a certain amount of oil per day and the Kuwaitis violated that agreement and pumped out a lot more which drove the price of oil down. On top of that, since the oil fields were on mutual ground, they were actually stealing from the Iraqi's. Saddam Hussein who had been in a great deal of debt at the time could not afford that to happen and soon after invaded Kuwait. Why we were even involved over an oil dispute remains questionable. There will be people who will attempt to say it was out of his madness this was done, but there was a reason as to why he did it.

Is this the apologist version or what?
You justifying the actions of Saddam because Kuwait was "scarfing up" more oil than they should have been?

Your Saddam-invading-Kuwait apologist explanation reminds me of the current pro-Iraq war supporters, me included, that justify why Iraq was invaded and Saddam removed: not merely because of oil, but because Saddam was allegedly still "scarfing up" more of those WMD that he was UN mandated not to be doing. In either case and example, you have taken the side of Saddam. Almost as ironic as your last mention of "Like father like son," huh?



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Not only did Iraq invade Kuwait but they took new born babies out of incubators and threw them on the floor to steal the Incubators. Also since most of the Iraqi army was destroyed on the road leading out of Kuwait I cant really see this thread going much further.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
No I don't believe everything I read on the net, and please show mercy on me because like I said, I'm just now starting to look into this.

I admit that I posted before I should have. I shouldn't have posted so soon...

I know where you coming from though Seeker but come on.. I think we can both agree that the use of Depleted Uranium in war should be abolished!! I mean the radiation lasts for 4.5 billion years! Why would the US go to that level>?

And you say that other nations supported the sanctions. I must admit that I believe those other nations only went along for certain reasons... be it fear, or propaganda IDK.


Okay ... Iraq never invade Kuwait ... I'll accept that as soon as you can accept the US never invaded Iraq. Doesn't make much sense.

Lets remember the Gulf War was a UN driven conflict. The UN security council were denied entrance numerous times to examine weapons sites. The UN requested help and the UN imposed sanctions. They were not US sanctions ... they were UN imposed sanctions enforced by a primarily US force.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   
OK..ask any Gulf War veterans if Iraq invaded Kuwait. Bet their story is a tad differant than what has been posted.

Of course Iraq invaded Kuwait. What mindless , senseless and ludicrous idiot manage to quote this?

Guess it must have been a 'new to the news desk freshman' who had ideas above his station eh?



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
My brother was sent to Kuwait and believe me they were invaded. You ask why the ground troops met so little resistance? They were bombed day and night with the largest air attack that has ever taken place. Imagine bombs going off day and night for 45 days? The Iraqi troops suffered extreme shell shock. Search out the effects of shell shock and imagine what it was like for the ground troops during that time, hel i'd throw my gun down and hands in the air just to have an end to it all..




top topics



 
0

log in

join