[TigerLikesRooster]

Re #12

The easy way Iraq fell, also makes more sense with this assumption.

I beg to differ here. The reason Iraq fell so easily was because Saddam ruled only by mind-numbing fear. He did not have real charisma, which could inspire people. There was no patriotic ferver around which Iraqis can rally around, even if they hated Saddam.

It should be also considered that Iraq population is basically war-weary.

Incidentally, these two components, mind-numbing fear and war-weariness, also contributed to the swift downfall of Taliban regime in Afghan.

[FairOpinion]

I don't think our opinions are inconsistent, they could both be true.

Saddam was a figurehead, and his Russian-trained security police was what kept people in line, but when the US coalition forces were coming, that wasn't enough to get them to fight.

I venture to guess that the "training" entailed more than "surveillance techniques" and some such, Russia may well have been planting double agents into Iraq, who were reporting to Russia.

[capocchio]

the reason Iraq fell

The reason Iraq fell was their military wasn't worth bull doinkies, there leadership wasn't worth bull doinkies, and their training wasn't worth bull doinkies.

Further, our military was GOOD. It was well trained, well equiped, well led and it's well thought out plan was well executed.

And we had fewer troops there than did Iraq.

Note to other dictators who think their military "juggernaut" could have done better. It might take months rather than weeks, but the conclusion would still be as Sancho Panza said. "Whether the rock hits the bowl, or the bowl hits the rock, the end result for the bowl is the same" (well, sorta something like that).