Why do l believe we should go into Baghdad in 1991 to take out Saddam Hussein instead of just libera

I believe that we should have chased the fleeing Iraqi Army troops out of Kuwait into Baghdad in 1991 and depose Saddam Hussein's Regime there. That way we could conduct a major occupation along with the Arab States with more troops on the ground and sponsorship talks between two factions as well as preventing Iran to back insurgents, therefore we would have prevented a rising insurgency. Plus Al-Qaeda then wasn't strong in 1991. Al-Qaeda still reaks the presence in 2003 Iraq now.

I know it wasn't the mission back then because of the UN mandates only allowed the liberation of Kuwait, Dick Cheney said in 1994 about quagmire and instability(mostly because if they had went alone in 1991 with no Allied support), most of our allies don't want to go into Baghdad, etc but you know i believe we should went into Baghdad in 1991. Al-Qaeda wasn't as strong back then and Iraq back in the 1990s would have been a first world class like Kuwait for example. It would have prevented 9/11 attacks and the 2003 Iraq War.

How about minding our own damn business, past, present and future? What a novel idea.

Also, learn to proofread.

sadly hindsight is 20/20 my friend and im sure given the current state of our country and in some cases world, if people could go back in time they would and would follow suite right into Bagdad. Though sadly time travel as of yet is not an option so we are stuck where we are.

What was Iraq doing back then that threatened the US? We are not located in the middle east they threatened the US in no way. It is not our job to police the world we have no right to tell another nation what they should be doing. When we invade at the whim of other countries all we do is waste money and American lives. There is no country in the middle east that is worth an American life or an American dollar.

Originally posted by buster2010
What was Iraq doing back then that threatened the US? We are not located in the middle east they threatened the US in no way. It is not our job to police the world we have no right to tell another nation what they should be doing. When we invade at the whim of other countries all we do is waste money and American lives. There is no country in the middle east that is worth an American life or an American dollar.

Your post is very off topic. What i'm talking about during the first Gulf war. Iraq invaded Kuwait, then Iraqi aggression got repelled by UN forces then stopped into achieving liberating Kuwait. General "storming Norman" said that they cannot go due to lack of allied support. This isn't the matter who's world police or not, What i said that if we went into Baghdad and i provided my reasons up there. Your post is extremely ignorant and not relating to this topic.

Actually the way I here it is we should have just kept out of it from way back.

Like it would have been handled from inside Iraq but didn`t do to the forces didn`t act on taking down Saddam Hussein due to they wanted to know what the good old US would do. So while the US took it`s time getting back to them Saddam Hussein killed the entire town the threat originated out of.

So had we not been involved the assasination would have happened although I doubt it would have changed the lifestyle there much. Heck the man is dead and it still hasn`t changed.

Originally posted by Paulioetc15

Originally posted by buster2010
What was Iraq doing back then that threatened the US? We are not located in the middle east they threatened the US in no way. It is not our job to police the world we have no right to tell another nation what they should be doing. When we invade at the whim of other countries all we do is waste money and American lives. There is no country in the middle east that is worth an American life or an American dollar.

Your post is very off topic. What i'm talking about during the first Gulf war. Iraq invaded Kuwait, then Iraqi aggression got repelled by UN forces then stopped into achieving liberating Kuwait. General "storming Norman" said that they cannot go due to lack of allied support. This isn't the matter who's world police or not, What i said that if we went into Baghdad and i provided my reasons up there. Your post is extremely ignorant and not relating to this topic.

The reason why we stopped is because our puppet Hussein decided to toe the line again. You did know we were responsible for him being in office in the first place didn't you?

reply to post by buster2010

You did know we were responsible for him being in office in the first place didn't you?

No, Saddam Hussein got himself in power as the Baath Party leader in 1968 and as a leader of Iraq in 1979. You're so clueless. BTW back to my thread please and stay on topic. Read my information up there and tell me what you think of it.

The reason why we stopped is because our puppet Hussein decided to toe the line again.

Wrong.

Originally posted by Paulioetc15
reply to post by buster2010

 

You did know we were responsible for him being in office in the first place didn't you?

No, Saddam Hussein got himself in power as the Baath Party leader in 1968 and as a leader of Iraq in 1979. You're so clueless. BTW back to my thread please and stay on topic. Read my information up there and tell me what you think of it.

The reason why we stopped is because our puppet Hussein decided to toe the line again.

Wrong.

The CIA was responsible for putting him in office. You are the one that's clueless here.

In early 1963, Saddam had more important things to worry about than his outstanding bill at the Andiana Cafe. On February 8, a military coup in Baghdad, in which the Baath Party played a leading role, overthrew Qassim. Support for the conspirators was limited. In the first hours of fighting, they had only nine tanks under their control. The Baath Party had just 850 active members. But Qassim ignored warnings about the impending coup. What tipped the balance against him was the involvement of the United States. He had taken Iraq out of the anti-Soviet Baghdad Pact. In 1961, he threatened to occupy Kuwait and nationalized part of the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC), the foreign oil consortium that exploited Iraq's oil. In retrospect, it was the ClAs favorite coup. "We really had the ts crossed on what was happening," James Critchfield, then head of the CIA in the Middle East, told us. "We regarded it as a great victory." Iraqi participants later confirmed American involvement. "We came to power on a CIA train," admitted Ali Saleh Sa'adi, the Baath Party secretary general who was about to institute an unprecedented reign of terror. CIA assistance reportedly included coordination of the coup plotters from the agency's station inside the U.S. embassy in Baghdad as well as a clandestine radio station in Kuwait and solicitation of advice from around the Middle East on who on the left should be eliminated once the coup was successful. To the end, Qassim retained his popularity in the streets of Baghdad. After his execution, his sup- porters refused to believe he was dead until the coup leaders showed pictures of his bullet-riddled body on TV and in the newspapers.

Regime Change: How the CIA put Saddam's Party in Power

Originally posted by buster2010
What was Iraq doing back then that threatened the US? We are not located in the middle east they threatened the US in no way. It is not our job to police the world we have no right to tell another nation what they should be doing. When we invade at the whim of other countries all we do is waste money and American lives. There is no country in the middle east that is worth an American life or an American dollar.

The smelly black stuff is always alluring to the U.S.

The U.S is now firmly located in the M.E and personally I think they welcomed the fact that Saddam invaded Kuwait for various reasons.

The reason/s for not going into Baghdad at that time probably had something to do with the fact that there wasn't a concesus from the allies involved in Operation Desert Storm or indeed the U.N. I'm sure that's why Bush senior lost a second term. Well that and 'Read my lips, NO new taxes'.

Funny how the rules changed after 9/11.

If Herod the Great just would sent more men to find the baby Jesus, we wouldn't have had crusades, the europeans wouldn't have claimed North America, nor form the United States, and 9/11 would have never happened.. Stupid Herod.. if only you tried harder.

Originally posted by Paulioetc15
reply to post by buster2010

 

You did know we were responsible for him being in office in the first place didn't you?

No, Saddam Hussein got himself in power as the Baath Party leader in 1968 and as a leader of Iraq in 1979. You're so clueless. BTW back to my thread please and stay on topic. Read my information up there and tell me what you think of it.

The reason why we stopped is because our puppet Hussein decided to toe the line again.

Wrong.

You are the living proof, ignorance is bliss. The only good idea is stay out of all other nation's business and try fixing your poo at home, now and 15 years ago. I even took advantage of the first gulf war, went to the cheap US back then, when you were able to fly to the places actually.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda!

A lot of things blare at you in retrospect.

What's done is done. No going back.

Originally posted by buster2010
What was Iraq doing back then that threatened the US? We are not located in the middle east they threatened the US in no way. It is not our job to police the world

It's our job to police the world if we want to buy resources from them, or uphold our treaty obligations under the UN Charter.

we have no right to tell another nation what they should be doing.

Conducting foreign relations is a necessary and integral part of statehood. Unless your idea of foreign relations is entirely passive, it includes telling other nations what to do.