Way off topic, but it has do to with the French

On Feb 28, 4:36*am, "Jay Honeck" wrote:


Now, of course, you can argue that success took too long, and cost too many
lives, and we shouldn't have invaded, and any of a hundred other
postulations -- but the bottom line is this: *At this point we need a
stable, peaceful, Iraq, allied with us against AQ and radical Islam. *

Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?

Cheers

WingFlaps wrote:


Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?

Cheers


Bull$hit myth.

In late July 1990, as negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait stalled, Iraq
massed troops on Kuwait’s borders and summoned American Ambassador April
Glaspie to an unanticipated meeting with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
Two transcripts of that meeting have been produced, both of them
controversial. In them, Saddam outlined his grievances against Kuwait,
while promising that he would not invade Kuwait before one more round of
negotiations. In the version published by The New York Times on
September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
Saddam Hussein:

"We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
the late ’60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen
to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using
any suitable methods via [Chadli] Klibi [then Arab League General
Secretary] or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these
issues are solved quickly. With regard to all of this, can I ask you to
see how the issue appears to us?

"My assessment after 25 years' service in this area is that your
objective must have strong backing from your Arab brothers. I now speak
of oil. But you, Mr. President, have fought through a horrific and
painful war. Frankly, we can see only that you have deployed massive
troops in the south. Normally that would not be any of our business. But
when this happens in the context of what you said on your national day,
then when we read the details in the two letters of the Foreign
Minister, then when we see the Iraqi point of view that the measures
taken by the U.A.E. and Kuwait is, in the final analysis, parallel to
military aggression against Iraq, then it would be reasonable for me to
be concerned. And for this reason, I received an instruction to ask you,
in the spirit of friendship -- not in the spirit of confrontation --
regarding your intentions.

"I simply describe the position of my Government. And I do not mean that
the situation is a simple situation. But our concern is a simple one."

On Feb 29, 3:38 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:

Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?

Cheers

Bull$hit myth.

In the version published by The New York Times on
September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
Saddam Hussein:

"We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
the late '60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
associated with America".

Yes that's about the core of the problem but this quote is not what
was actually said but rather the carefully spun recollections of a
(failed) diplomat. Despite this seeming indifference to the rising
tension between the corrupt Kuwait and Iraq, in June 1990 General
Norman Schwarzkopf was conducting sophisticated war games pitting
thousands of U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions. Some say
that the US wanted the war as an excuse to bring the Arab states into
line -I doubt we will ever know the real truth.

My point was that before Iraq was destroyed, Iraq was a modern,
secular state, with most advanced status of women in the region, non-
sectarian Universities and extensive religious freedoms, high rates of
economic growth, and some of the highest standards of living, health
and literacy rates in the Arab world. Free speech was allowed, as long
as it was not directed against the regime.

Cheers

WingFlaps wrote:
On Feb 29, 3:38 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:

Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?
Cheers
Bull$hit myth.

In the version published by The New York Times on
September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
Saddam Hussein:

"We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
the late '60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
associated with America".

Yes that's about the core of the problem but this quote is not what
was actually said but rather the carefully spun recollections of a
(failed) diplomat. Despite this seeming indifference to the rising
tension between the corrupt Kuwait and Iraq, in June 1990 General
Norman Schwarzkopf was conducting sophisticated war games pitting
thousands of U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions. Some say
that the US wanted the war as an excuse to bring the Arab states into
line -I doubt we will ever know the real truth.

Of course Schwartzkopf was war gaming US v Iraq. He was also war gaming
US v Iran, US & Israel v just about anyone with a towel on their head.
What do you expect the commander of CentCom to do when there isn't a war
on?



My point was that before Iraq was destroyed, Iraq was a modern,
secular state, with most advanced status of women in the region, non-
sectarian Universities and extensive religious freedoms, high rates of
economic growth, and some of the highest standards of living, health
and literacy rates in the Arab world. Free speech was allowed, as long
as it was not directed against the regime.


I think that last sentence says a bunch.