The Gulf Wars Revisited: Who exactly benefitted from American removal of Saddam’s Sunnis in Iraq?

Frontpage Mag ^ | 08/14/2020 | Joseph Puder

[NorseViking]

Iran. That is an easy question.

[M Kehoe]

+1

5.56mm

[Redwood71]

I hope his books are placed in the science fiction department. His theology is so full of personal fed manure it could never act as fact.

I don’t know where he was during freeing of Kuwait or the direct attack on Iraq, but he didn’t say five things that were factual or could have been.

rwood

[PGR88]

There was never a question about the necessity to topple Saddam Hussein, who was responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi-Sunni’s, Shiites, and Kurds, as well as thousands of Kuwaitis.

This is a nonsense, hypocritical premise. Saddam was, if not our friend, at least considered acceptable, when he was bleeding Iran’s army in the early 1980s.

Moreover, while we can never know counterfactual history, The ensuing civil wars, rise of ISIS, genocide of Christians and massive flow of migrants out of Iraq and Syria has caused far more death and chaos than Saddam every committed.

[nonliberal]

ISIS, John McCain and the military industrial complex. May they all rot in hell.

[dfwgator]

Kuwait as it turned out, was “drinking Saddam’s Milkshake” which was part of the reason Saddam invaded in the first place.

We should never get involved in intra-Arab squabbles.

[foreverfree]

bump

[rdcbn1]

Iran is the obvious winner, at least short term.

Ultimately, Iran may be the biggest loser as their attempts to take over Iraq may prove to be over reach for a failing terrorist state near economic collapse.

They can barely keep their own country afloat and Iraq is bleeding them.

This will change if they can consolidate power in Iraq and begin to exploit it economically - a certainty of Joe Biden is elected President.

As long as President Trump is in office, Iran will continue to bleed and it's ambitions in Iraq will remain unfulfilled. it's operations in Iraq will become economically untenable and Iran will be forced to withdraw or face economic collapse.

President Trump is executing a very sophisticated strategy against Iran in the region and it's working.

It's not for nothing that a powerful array of interests are so desperate to remove Trump from office. This election is by far the most important in our recent history.

We are now at a pivotal point in history, geo politically, economically and technologically.

The choice is simple - re elect Donald Trump with his MAGA agenda or see the country fundamentally transformed into a failing Neo Marxist state built on economic redistribution based racial spoils and identity politics

[NorseViking]

His daddy did it too.

[AndyJackson]

First, let me say that this is a badly written article. When you ask enticing question, answer it in the first sentence of your article, and then make me want to read more. I don't want a whodunit for my news or political commentary.

Second, yes, the whole policy was a disaster and deBa'athification, not having an actual plan for Civil Restoration after taking down Sadam shows how short-sighted GWB was. That the follow on policies were largely executed by Cheney is no excuse. They didn't have a plan.

We might not like Sadam, but he let us know well ahead of time that he was keeping the lid tight on Pandora's box. We took him out and opened the box. We already knew some of what was in there.

[NorseViking]

Iran is a state actor with its limits. There were a lot who benefitted primarily the terrorist international. Al-Qaeda, ISIS and the rest of McCain’s friends.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: the whole policy was a disaster and deBa’athification, not having an actual plan for Civil Restoration after taking down Sadam

So, if we had a post-Saddam takedown plan that was NOT a disaster, would it have been a good idea to invade? Or was the entire invasion policy totally wrong?

I’m not sure what the issue is — the invasion, or the post-invasion implementation.

[AndyJackson]

Well I think the whole idea was a disaster from start to finish. It was strategic over-reach of the order of the Syracuse invasion by Athens which cost them their naval fleet, their empire and their democracy.

I am merely pointing out that another part of the insanity was that the idiot neo-cons didn't even have a plan for what comes next. I guess they though liberal democracy was going to break out in the Middle East once Sadam was gone. Wishful thinking is not a plan.

[NorseViking]

“” “” I guess they though liberal democracy was going to break out in the Middle East once Sadam was gone. Wishful thinking is not a plan.”” “”

Nobody is learning. Then we had Arab Spring.

[Bonemaker]

Don’t forget dear old uncle Jimmy Carter who subverted the Shah of Iran which led to his downfall and subsequent takeover of Iran by the moslem maniacs.

[Bonemaker]

Don’t forget dear old uncle Jimmy Carter who subverted the Shah of Iran which led to his downfall and subsequent takeover of Iran by the moslem maniacs.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

Yup. We spent American blood and treasure helping Iran.

[PapaBear3625]

Iran may have benefited, but I think the main intended beneficiaries were Saudi Arabia and Israel, both of whom had bad relations with Iraq.

[NorseViking]

I don’t think that the resulting chaos is what they were looking for.