Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: What was it like internationally when the Soviet Union fell?

  1. Top | #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    386
    Archived
    5,525
    Total Posts
    5,911
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Playball40 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    Saddam Hussein was led to believe by American diplomats that the US wouldn't intervene if he annexed Kuwait. He thought the Americans were on his side, having supported him in his long war against Iran. And the Americans were unnecessarily vague about their opinion of his 'recovering' the territory he felt was stolen from Iraq by Kuwait.

    The invasion and subsequent war could easily have been averted by a clear and unequivocal statement by the US, warning Iraq not to invade.

    And once he invaded, there wasn't any particular reason why the US should have done anything about it - as long as the oil kept flowing, the US had no reason to get involved in this local war.

    It's not like America has intervened in all the other places where territory has been invaded or annexed, or in every other local conflict around the world. Sure, there was a moral argument to act; but the Americans have turned a blind eye to plenty of those, before and since.

    The US went to war because they wanted to. They weren't harmed, or even threatened; they were just showing off.

    It was an opportunity to show the world that they were the only remaining superpower, and that if they said 'jump', everyone was expected to say 'how high?'. Shock and awe wasn't for the edification of the Iraqis. It was supposed to shock and awe the entire world.
    There was more to it than that even. Once we set up there 'to protect Saudi Arabia,' we never left, which was a complete insult to devout Muslims (really pissed off an unknown at the time by the name of Osama Bin Laden). Plus they were pulling oil from Iraq by bore drilling. There was a lot of strategic/economic intention with Kuwaiit - more than just the US being dicks.
    I'm not saying Saddam was a 'great' guy but he did have a secular government and there were more WOMEN college graduates from Iraq than ANYWHERE in the ME.
    I think the opinions of religious fanatics are irrelevant. Who cares if devout Muslims are insulted? They are probably insulted by the fact that you have to converted to Islam. Will you then do it in order to not be a "dick"?

    To hail Saddam Hussein as some sort of secular savior is disingenuous. There was religious influence in his government, that increased over time as he pandered more and more to religious fanatics. Also, ever heard of Uday Hussein, Saddam's oldest son? Look him up.

    You can start here:

    Uday: career of rape, torture and murder

    He was a monster even by the standards of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a sadist with a taste for cruelty so extreme that even his father was forced to acknowledge that his first-born son would not be a worthy heir.

    And yet for all that Uday Saddam Hussein symbolised the brutality of the Iraqi regime, his powers were severely circumscribed. Although he retained the privileges of the much-indulged son of a dictator, he was shunted from the real centres of power in the military and security services by his quieter, younger brother Qusay.

    Although Uday nominally had a role in politics - following his election to parliament with 99% of the vote in 1999 - he was studiously absent from Iraqi television during the dying days of the regime.

    It was clear controllers realised that showing too many pictures of the most hated man in Iraq was hardly going to spur resistance.

    It was not the life that Uday had intended. Of Saddam's two sons, he was the flamboyant one - towering well over 6ft, with a penchant for fast cars and loud and drunken parties, expensive suits and flowing robes, as well as murder, rape and torture.

  2. Top | #32
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,857
    Rep Power
    12
    What religious extremists think does matter.

    Bin Laden's inspiration was US infidels in the holy land, even though we probably saved SA from being over run by Iraq.

  3. Top | #33
    Intergalactic Villainess Angry Floof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sector 001
    Posts
    9,181
    Archived
    14,435
    Total Posts
    23,616
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    What religious extremists think does matter.
    Yes, but respecting their contrived offendedness does not. That was the point.
    The Authoritarians

    GOP and Trump supporters will not be able to say they didn't know. Vote in numbers too big to manipulate.

  4. Top | #34
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    1,671
    Archived
    2,829
    Total Posts
    4,500
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Tammuz View Post

    I think the opinions of religious fanatics are irrelevant. Who cares if devout Muslims are insulted? They are probably insulted by the fact that you have to converted to Islam. Will you then do it in order to not be a "dick"?

    To hail Saddam Hussein as some sort of secular savior is disingenuous. There was religious influence in his government, that increased over time as he pandered more and more to religious fanatics. Also, ever heard of Uday Hussein, Saddam's oldest son? Look him up.

    You can start here:

    Uday: career of rape, torture and murder

    He was a monster even by the standards of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, a sadist with a taste for cruelty so extreme that even his father was forced to acknowledge that his first-born son would not be a worthy heir.

    And yet for all that Uday Saddam Hussein symbolised the brutality of the Iraqi regime, his powers were severely circumscribed. Although he retained the privileges of the much-indulged son of a dictator, he was shunted from the real centres of power in the military and security services by his quieter, younger brother Qusay.

    Although Uday nominally had a role in politics - following his election to parliament with 99% of the vote in 1999 - he was studiously absent from Iraqi television during the dying days of the regime.

    It was clear controllers realised that showing too many pictures of the most hated man in Iraq was hardly going to spur resistance.

    It was not the life that Uday had intended. Of Saddam's two sons, he was the flamboyant one - towering well over 6ft, with a penchant for fast cars and loud and drunken parties, expensive suits and flowing robes, as well as murder, rape and torture.
    Since I never hailed Saddam Hussein as anything, not sure what your ranting about. Also, never once mentioned his son so again, a non-issue.

    As far as offending religious fanatics such as OBL, it was a statement. Period. Not sure why we needed to take up permanent residence if the reason was to push Iraq back. We did that. Perhaps there was MORE to it? <sarcasm>

  5. Top | #35
    Member aupmanyav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    New Delhi, India
    Posts
    141
    Archived
    18,926
    Total Posts
    19,067
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
    For those who were old enough to be aware of it happening, I'm curious how people in the U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, and Western Europe reacted when it happened?
    Would you be interested in a view from India. My view was "Why did they do that?" Gorbachov was a weak-willed person.

  6. Top | #36
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    21,553
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,030
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by aupmanyav View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
    For those who were old enough to be aware of it happening, I'm curious how people in the U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, and Western Europe reacted when it happened?
    Would you be interested in a view from India. My view was "Why did they do that?" Gorbachov was a weak-willed person.
    The world needs more weak willed people.

    People who refuse to kill large numbers of other people for a mere ideology are the sort of people we should be celebrating.

  7. Top | #37
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    South Pole
    Posts
    9,169
    Archived
    3,444
    Total Posts
    12,613
    Rep Power
    69
    The Berlin Wall coming down was a BIG deal, on all the news. Everything else you could have easily missed if you weren't into international politics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •