View Full Version : Did Desert Storm Work?
King
3 December 2000, 03:48
O.K., I know this doesn't really have to do specifically with Army SF, but this fourm is so popular. This is the first and (as far as I can tell) last time I'll do this. I'd like some responses fairly quickly.
Anyway, was the Persian Gulf War worth it? Did it work?
Well... it worked because we won militarially, Iraq gave up, Kuwait and a great deal of oil was secured and kept out of the hands of a unfriendly nation. I think America thought Saddam would have used Kuwait as a staging point for something bigger. The west runs on oil, so for the most part I consider it an economic war. America wouldn't have gotten involved simply if human rights were being abused but only if western interests were threatened. I think that the idea that America is the world's police for is overblown. Many conflicts the U.S. interfers with have some sort of American connection.
So I think that yes, the Gulf War did secure Kuwait and damage Iraq in the short run, but in the long run it was a farce. I think they should have done the job right the first time. Air strikes are all well and good, but they only damage Iraq's response time, Saddam gets to poke his finger in America's eye and is seen as a "hero" in the Islamic world.
NMBR5ML
3 December 2000, 09:38
You should take a trip to Kuwait and meet some of those guys who were around to get overrun by Iraq. Or look at some of the CIVILIAN buildings that were destroyed. The Kuwaiti military had basically stood down to invite diplomacy with Iraq (I know, stupid=hindsight) Iraq invaded a friendly sovreign state and showed a serious lack of humanity. The goals (protect Saudi Arabia, liberate Kuwait) were achieved. The goals were clearly defined beforehand and the military leaders stuck to those goals. Removing Sadaam Hussein from power was not one of those goals. There are no "peacekeepers" on the streets of Baghdad. This is the way wars SHOULD be fought. If you think it was an economic war, you're partially right. The decisive victory helped prevent an economic crisis. Sadaam is contained, we're keeping him that way with patrols (and bombing his ass on a regular basis) and he is not a major threat in the region. At this point, that is the best we can hope for in Iraq. His popularity is still high among Iraquis and other Islamic states. My $0.02 worth...
FutureRanger2000
3 December 2000, 11:29
Regarding Hussein's extremely high approval rating, somewhere around 94% I believe, I think Colin Quinn (former anchor on Saturday Night Live's Weekend Updaate)put it best: Iraq's Government census takers are usually huge angry men with machetes. They come to your door, pull out a giant machete and ask if you like Hussein. What would you say?
Whammer
3 December 2000, 12:41
You have to realize, that if we did press on during the war and committ ourselves to eliminating Saddam (which would have required a considerable amount of resources to pin Saddam's location), and if we were successful, then the landscape of perception of the war would be radically different. Those who now say we didn't finish the job, would have been the first ones to say we went too far and were tyrannical if we took out a foreign govt leader. I think your perception would be changed by the spin associated with that type of scenario.
[This message has been edited by Whammer (edited 12-03-2000).]
Gunny Hicks
3 December 2000, 14:31
The purpose of Desert SHield/Storm was not Regicide. The U.S. Goverment does not practice or condone Regicide as a policy aim of warfare.
Ted
3 December 2000, 17:53
Regicide = assassination of a foreign head of state?
Conservative
3 December 2000, 18:00
I think the Executive Order banning assasinations is STUPID. What is the cost of one (bad) life at the expense of millions of civilian lives? Take out Sadam.
Gunny Hicks
3 December 2000, 18:11
Rgeicide = Murdering a king. Or in modern terms, yes..the head os state.
Conservative...or Dictator...kind of extremem aren't you. Don't you know that we comfort ourselves by pretending that we fight war in a gentlemany manner, and that this little rule helps us sleep better at night.
King
3 December 2000, 22:08
America didn't solely liberate Kuwait because of human rights violations. Look at Sierra Leone or East Timor, no U.S. involvement there whatsoever dispite human rights violations.
America, like any other nation committs itself to a military operation because they have something to gain. The Middle East is valuable, economically and politically, so is Eastern Europe, that's why America takes such a great interest in the Balkands and has troops there as we speak.
I'm not saying Saddam didn't deserve to have his ass kicked, he did. But he is still around. He still tries to bully America around gets huge amounts of credit from Arabs for pissing the west off.
I think given the circumstances America should have killed Saddam. They killed much more innocent Iraqi soldiers who were "just following orders." Go after the man who gave them to them.
Enfield
3 December 2000, 22:49
COULD the Allies kill Saddam? If the order was given tomorrow, could they put a laser-guided bomb into his lap or round into his head? Didn't they try in the Gulf War to kill him, but couldn't find him?
Enfield
Gunny Hicks
3 December 2000, 23:44
King:
I'll make this as plain and clear as possible. Their are no INNOCENT SOLDIERS on the batlefield. Whether they are there 'FOLLOWING ORDERS' or not is irrelevent. If they are an armed combatant of an enemy force, on a battlefield equipped with weapons to kill, they are not innocent. Whether they die from bombs dropped form the stratosphere, or die from direct fire at 200 meters, they are not innocent.
LRSC Grunt
4 December 2000, 01:09
I remember my world politics professor (a retired infantry col) showing us just how much the rest of the world added up when compaired to Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi in terms of crude oil producing countries. NO ONE EVEN COMES CLOSE!!!!! The war was meant to protect our societies most vital product. If one person can manipulate the price of crude oil world wide, they can effect everyones pocketbook.
If I can find my old textbook ill post the differences.
Terry Jones
4 December 2000, 01:44
I have to second Gunny Hicks on that. I remember discussing that issue in college,
and I think I upset some dainty liberal when
I told her that an armed enemy combatant is a legit target. She said that because of our
technological advantages in the gulf, it was
essentially unfair and tantamount to murder. As far as I am concerned, fair means you and yours come home alive.
VodkaChaser
4 December 2000, 03:08
Firstly, I only fancy myself as an amateur analyst. I make no assertion that the following is "the poop". Having made that statement, I await the flames...
Although the prospect of cancelling saddam's christmas seems delightful, even at this late stage in the game, it could be catastrophic. In the 80's the US gave military hardware and training support to Iraq because they were in they fray with Iran. The idea was that since Iraq was a lesser evil, they would be the country to back.
On a strategic level it seems, Iraq rates as one of the more modern and progressive of the middle eastern states.
It is likely that due to this, the US would rather continue to have a known entity remain contained and observed. Otherwise he could be replaced by a greatly unknown fundamentalist leader unifying a radical zealot population of the middle east and the potential scenarios that may offer.
DFC5343
4 December 2000, 05:11
Gulf War was a success...yes! Lower gas prices? I paid $1.21 a gallon at the onset of Kuwaiti invasion....rose to $1.49 during and dropped to $1.23 at the end. Now I pay $1.59 because the Saddam bastard is still kickin! These prices are approximate and in no way reflect any arabic anamosity for my gas usage for recreation. http://www.specialoperations.com/ubboard/biggrin.gif
[This message has been edited by DFC5343 (edited 12-04-2000).]
King
5 December 2000, 12:23
Gunny Hicks,
I know, all soldiers are targets, I understand what your saying. "Innocent" was probabely a bad choice of words. However, blaming individual Iraqi soldiers for their nations involvement in the Gulf War is like blaming drafted Americans for going to Vietnam.
Vodka Chaser,
You raise an interesting point. America knows Saddam and militarially at least they keep him pretty well contained. But would it be in the best interests of America and the west to push Saddam out of the way and oversee the installation of a more accountable (to both Iraqi's and I suppose to America as well) leader? I think the CIA funded Kurdish rebels shortly after the Gulf War and that the SF (now we're getting more on topic for this fourm) trained them. America has tried to oust Saddam before, even if in secret.
Gunny Hicks
5 December 2000, 22:32
King: I concur. The military is all to often just the implement to inforce the policy of the Govt. In that sense, the individual soldier can not be held resposnsible for the horrific policies of his govt. Such as the Weimarch soldiers of Germany in 1939, and yes, even the poor conscripted kurdish goat herder that was sent into Kuwait.
DFC5343
6 December 2000, 00:56
Police action or war? Flip a coin...
TANGOisinKOREA
6 December 2000, 13:16
If anything it helped clear out all of the old MREs ensuring that "new" ones were younger than 5 years old.
Chas
NMBR5ML
6 December 2000, 13:21
I wish.... A 1000 year old tuna fish w/ noodles still pops up every now and then. Sucks balls when you get no heater you can't make a bomb.
MARK92A
6 December 2000, 14:38
If you are still getting Tuna with Noodles or any MRE thats in a dark brown wrapper, your TISA is doing you WRONG, and needs to be checked out ASAP by the on post vet...
--Mark
Gunny Hicks
6 December 2000, 18:17
I still prefer the old
C-Rats....Beefsteak...Mmmmmm.
DFC5343
7 December 2000, 04:32
Gunny...beans and franks
Gunny Hicks
7 December 2000, 09:22
I must admit...the Cornbeef hash and the Eggs with chopped ham were a little...uh...undesirable...but the other meals were good...
Razor
7 December 2000, 11:34
If you're talking the corned beef hash and omlette with ham MREs (and not C-rats), their desirability is situational dependent. Those two were highly sought after in Ranger School, not for taste, but because they came with the most "stuff" in 'em. They were the trump card in MRE trading.
Gunny Hicks
7 December 2000, 21:51
No...I'm reffereing to the old C-rats in a can. Complete with guerrila cookies and sh*t disks.
The MRE's are pretty good, but you just can't be as creative a chef with them, and the MRE sleeves just can't be used as creatively to booby trap your perimeter (although the rubberized sleeze is useful as an insulater in your battery powered booby traps) and the MRE's are a helluva lot lighter, and less bulky.
Scotty
8 December 2000, 13:02
I have NO idea what you guys are talking about with all these "flavours", mine all looked like mush and tasted like Tobasco(tm)!
I still have some of those little bottles, I make them into necklaces and sell them to hippies.
Scotty
"Hippies! Hippies EVERYWHERE! They say they want to save the world but all they do is smoke pot and smell bad" - Cartman, Southpark
bobman
8 December 2000, 19:39
On training and real world ops could someone take along some extra, non-issued food? Like twinkies, candy bars, sandwiches, etc.?
[This message has been edited by bobman (edited 12-08-2000).]
E19
9 December 2000, 00:36
Bobman,
Carrying a pizza along is always a good idea....but hold the anchovies.....they get ripe after a few days.
Sandwichs......can you imagine a tuna salad on rye...after it's been in your ruck foe a day or two....
Gunny Hicks
9 December 2000, 00:43
But a nice thick hickory farms summer sausage (beef sausage or what ever you want to call it) cut a thick slice of of it...mmmm...thems good eatins...
o.k. no perverts out there I hope...I realy am referring food...not some allusion to a sexual perversion....
NMBR5ML
9 December 2000, 06:40
A few cans of Copenhagen is a MUST. BTW overseas it comes in a plastic can. No need to waterproof it. Funny it seems like no one chews tobacco til you're in the ass hole of the world (no 7 elevens) then everybody wants some.
RogueExec
9 December 2000, 21:18
Jeez, Gunny.....guerilla cookies and sh*t disks.....been awhile since I've heard that! No comment on the beef thing.
------------------
"Don't think of it as theft. Think of it as creative augmentation of your operational capabilities."
Jesus Christ
9 December 2000, 21:28
No shit...why buy it when you can beg for it.
Gunny Hicks
9 December 2000, 22:04
Am I aging myself...I know that there are many here abouts on the forums that are a little older and saltier than I.
FLTCREW1
10 December 2000, 15:02
Originally posted by Gunny Hicks:
Am I aging myself...I know that there are many here abouts on the forums that are a little older and saltier than I.
LOL, nope, I think you're the oldest.
Although I do remember attaching a C-rat can to the side if an M-60D (air)(on Hueys) in place of the belt chute, no jams that way.
But you're still older than me. LOL
------------------
NSDQ
RogueExec
10 December 2000, 21:21
With age comes wisdom, eh Gunny?
Gunny Hicks
10 December 2000, 22:28
If nothing else, I've earned the '3-B's' from all these years in the grunts.
They are:
Bad Knees....Bad Back....Bad Attitude....
DFC5343
11 December 2000, 05:21
Beef 'n' Rocks...Beef 'n' Rocks....Yeah man!
JTF Ranger
11 December 2000, 18:44
Originally posted by Gunny Hicks:
If nothing else, I've earned the '3-B's' from all these years in the grunts.
They are:
Bad Knees....Bad Back....Bad Attitude....
Amen bro, don't also forget.... "Bad Hearing"
RLTW
------------------
Don't fear the night, fear what hunts at night.
Gunny Hicks
11 December 2000, 22:15
Hehhhh ? What ? Damn this ringing in my left ear, I though someone said something...
COME HERE MARINE...WHAT THE FU*K DID YOU SAY ?!?!?
[This message has been edited by Gunny Hicks (edited 12-11-2000).]
Disturbance
29 January 2001, 03:16
I love reading the change of flow in a thread after they get real long.
GULF war ............to ......crats.
lol
-Disturbance
Sharky
29 January 2001, 10:32
Originally posted by Jesus Christ:
No shit...why buy it when you can beg for it.
Why beg for it when you can steal it?
------------------
F.I.D.O.
RogueExec
29 January 2001, 10:38
Roger that. But don't think of it as theft, think of it as creative augmentation of your operational capabilities.
------------------
Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and
a laxative on the same night.
vBulletin® v3.8.3, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.