Simply put, it is what benefits us as a nation whether it be security, militarily, economically, culturally, etc.
Please be specific and quote the appropriate politician, executive order, policy memo, law or any other pundit you care to.
LOL. It depends upon the circumstances in terms of specific actions. Under the Constitution the President is charged to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Our national interests stem from that basic responsibility of our government.
Yes Iraq went into Saudi Arabia briefly - are you implying that Saddam was going to invade them as well? Really? Based on what?
Yes, we really did believe that Saddam was going to invade the Eastern Province as well and seize the Hanma oil fields and the port of Dhahran. There was very little to stop him. Saddam had invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990 with 120,000 troops and 2000 tanks. The Saudis did not have the land troops to stop them. The United States Navy mobilized two naval battle groups, the aircraft carriers USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and USS Independence and their escorts, to the area, where they were ready by August 8. 48 US Air Force F-15s from the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, landed in Saudi Arabia and immediately commenced round the clock air patrols of the Saudi-Kuwait-Iraq border areas to prevent further Iraqi advances. The US rushed in the 82nd Airborne to Saudi Arabia six days after Iraq invaded Kuwait. They would have been hard-pressed to stop the Iraqis had Saddam considered to keep on going. Those of us at the embassy in Riyadh were preparing evacuation plans for USCITSs and non-essential USG personnel and dependents. We were all taken by surprise by the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. And so was our Embassy staff in Kuwait. They were trapped in the Embassy.
The fact is that Saddam did not go into Kuwait until AFTER he talked to us first. Mixed signals, wrong impression, tacit approval - who knows - but the result was that Saddam invaded Kuwait and believed he had no opposition from us. While you were posted in Saudi Arabia did Saddam consult with any of his neighbors for their views prior to his invasion?
You seem to believe that Saddam was rational and would not have entered Kuwait if we had not provided him with the signal, mixed, tacit, or otherwise. That just doesn't make any sense. Certainly, it was not US policy, official or unofficial, that we would condone or approve a forcible takeover of Kuwait by Iraq. Kuwait is a sovereign nation. We have had an Ambassador accredited there since 1962 and an Embassy in Kuwait since 1967. Our Embassy staff in Kuwait was seized by the Iraqis when they took over the country in August 1990 and taken to Baghdad for eventual release.
If Saddam was as rational as you posit, why didn't he leave Kuwait when we made it clear to him in no uncertain terms that we would not allow that takeover to stand? Over a six month period, we built up a huge force in Saudi Arabia as part of Desert Shield. Approximately 500,000 US forces and another almost 400,000 personnel from 35 countries were arrayed against Saddam. The signal in this case was unambiguous. Yet, Saddam was blustering about the Mother of all Battles and the rivers running red with our blood. He refused to leave Kuwait.
America is not to blame for Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. Saddam miscalculated whether due to hubris or because he believed that the US was a paper tiger and would not respond. After all, he saw the US humiliated by Iran for 444 days holding our diplomats hostage and taking over our Embassy in Tehran. He saw the Soviets being defeated in Afghanistan. He saw the US flee Lebanon after the bombing of the Marine Barracks in 1983. Saddam had six months to witness the buildup of coaltion forces and yet he still chose to fight.
I am not aware of any prior consultation with other countries prior to Saddam's decision to invade Kuwait. I do know that the Saudi's closed their embassy in Kuwait a few days before the invasion.
Saddam miscalculated a second time when he defied 16 UN Resolutions and played games with the UN inspectors. If he had recognized that he was playing a losing game, he might have saved himself and his sons their fate. I find your assertion, Had he [Saddam] known about retaliation for Kuwait he would have stayed home." to be one of the most ludicrous, laughable statements I have ever read. I suppose if Hitler had known in September 1939 that his invasion of Poland would end with him committing suicide in a bunker in Berlin six years later in a totally destroyed Germany he might have changed his mind about invading Poland. What is it with you Paulistas that wants to blame America for the actions of monster like Saddam?
And while we have the largest economy does that mean we can do whatever we want wherever we want when it suits our “national interest”? If that is the case then our national interest can best be described as arrogant. Is that your world view? What is your standard?
Sorry, but I am not going to feel guilty or apologetic about our economic success. The entire world benefits from it. I would much rather be the 800 LB gorilla than the 98 LB weakling.
“Simply put, [national interests] is what benefits us as a nation whether it be security, militarily, economically, culturally, etc.”
Try to be a little more specific with regards to the topic at hand - if it helps you could just confine yourself to the Middle East.
“LOL. It depends upon the circumstances in terms of specific actions. Under the Constitution the President is charged to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Our national interests stem from that basic responsibility of our government. “
LOL. Again, the word “specificity” comes to mind. What do YOU think our national interests are?
“Yes, we really did believe that Saddam was going to invade the Eastern Province as well and seize the Hanma oil fields and the port of Dhahran. There was very little to stop him. Saddam had invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990 with 120,000 troops and 2000 tanks.”
LOL. Who is this “we” you keep referring to here? Were you part of the National Command Authority, SOCOM, CENTCOM, NSA or DIA/CIA? At that stage of the invasion no one knew anything for certain except that Iraqi forces had invaded and occupied Kuwait and had gone no further. Was there any radio traffic, satellite imagery, or human sources on the ground in Kuwait that positively told you that the Iraqis were just taking a brief pause before continuing on to Saudi Arabia? What is your inside scoop here? Of course you would be looking to evacuate personnel in such a case - I am sure that was in your Standard Operating Procedures.
“You seem to believe that Saddam was rational and would not have entered Kuwait if we had not provided him with the signal, mixed, tacit, or otherwise. That just doesn’t make any sense.”
Of course it doesn’t make any sense from your viewpoint. You need to think like a megalomaniac here. I didn’t say he was rational either. It just seems odd that before the actual invasion he chose to ask us about it, however indirectly. I am sure that Mrs. Glaspie didn’t tell him “sure, go for it” but I am also fairly certain she did not tell him that the US would not condone any invasion of a sovereign nation. Saddam didn’t talk to anyone else - just us. It may not fall under your definition of “rational” but it indicates he was thinking about possible repercussions.
“If Saddam was as rational as you posit, why didn’t he leave Kuwait when we made it clear to him in no uncertain terms that we would not allow that takeover to stand? “
Not to make a broad generalization here but once he went in it would be almost impossible for him to save face by leaving. Could you hear Saddam (or anyone else, for that matter) saying essentially, “Oops, my bad, we really didn’t mean to go in like that, terrible mistake and all, we’ll just be on our way, sorry about the mess...”. I don’t think so.
“I find your assertion, Had he [Saddam] known about retaliation for Kuwait he would have stayed home.” to be one of the most ludicrous, laughable statements I have ever read.”
Well I am glad to have given you a good laugh. It’s an opinion, no more or less valid than yours. We can agree to disagree and since we can’t turn back the clock to find out then you may continue to laugh all you want.
“What is it with you Paulistas that wants to blame America for the actions of monster like Saddam? “
Please go back and find where I implied or stated that we are to blame for Saddam’s actions at any point. And what’s with the name calling thing again?
“Sorry, but I am not going to feel guilty or apologetic about our economic success. The entire world benefits from it. I would much rather be the 800 LB gorilla than the 98 LB weakling.”
I did not ask nor did I expect you to feel guilty or apologetic. And being an 800 lb gorilla doesn’t get you everything you want - the current world situation ought to be proof enough of that.
I also realize that Okinawa is part of Japan. There’s still only 10,000 +/- Marines there...
And better minds than ours have thought up all sorts of contingiencies to keep China from invading Taiwan. And of course the Chinese have thought up all sorts of options to minimize the effect of the current US forces arrayed in the immediate vicinity. I believe it will take just a wee bit more than the Seventh Fleet and 10,000 Marines to keep the Chinese at bay. But that’s just an opinion and if want to laugh again...be my guest.
Enjoy your evening... ;-)