Middle East thread

[Lexicus]

Iraq's army was primarily equipped with weaponry it had previously purchased from the Soviet Union and its satellites in the preceding decade. During the war, it also purchased billions of dollars' worth of advanced equipment from France, China, Egypt, Germany and other sources. Iraq's three main suppliers of weaponry during the war were the Soviet Union followed by China and then France.

The United States sold Iraq over $200 million in helicopters, which were used by the Iraqi military in the war. These were the only direct U.S.-Iraqi military sales. At the same time, the U.S. provided substantial covert support for Saddam Hussein. The CIA directed non-U.S. origin hardware to Saddam Hussein's armed forces, "to ensure that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war. And "dual use" technology was transferred from the U.S. to Iraq.

West Germany and United Kingdom also provided dual use technology that allowed Iraq to expand its missile program and radar defences.

According to an uncensored copy of Iraq's 11,000-page declaration to the U.N., leaked to Die Tageszeitung and reported by The Independent, the know-how and material for developing unconventional weapons were obtained from 150 foreign companies, from countries such as West Germany, the U.S., France, UK and China.

Iraq's main financial backers were the oil-rich Persian Gulf states, most notably Saudi Arabia ($30.9 billion), Kuwait ($8.2 billion) and the United Arab Emirates ($8 billion).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_aid_to_combatants_in_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War#:~:text=Iraq's%20three%20main%20suppliers%20of,direct%20U.S.%2DIraqi%20military%20sales.

I'm sorry, was this supposed to disprove or dispute what I said? I ask because it is in fact evidence for what I said.

There was the United Arab Republic and that didn’t last. And I don’t get the desire to pretend like the last 100 years didn’t happen and the map should be redrawn again. Why?

The point is less about how the map should look and more that Gulf War I did not have noble motivations.

 

[NovaKart]

I don’t believe there was any single point to this thread. It’s a variety of discussions

 

[Birdjaguar]

I don’t believe there was any single point to this thread. It’s a variety of discussions

Moderator Action: It is for discussion of more general news and actions in the Middle East.

 

[REDY]

*shrug* Kuwait is a dynasty of *******s that, like the House of Saud, have their own state because it was useful to the British for them to have it. (and btw it had nothing whatever to do with lebensraun - have you looked at Kuwait on a map? - and everything to do with the oil).

I wonder if Kuwaiti people see Great Britain and British royal family in same way

https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2022/nov/05/how-qatar-bought-up-britain

 

[EvaDK]

I'm sorry, was this supposed to disprove or dispute what I said? I ask because it is in fact evidence for what I said.

Well, you left out the fact that the West wasn't the main weapons supplier to Iraq during the war; Iran wielded more Western produced weaponry than Iraq did in 1980, acquired before the Islamic revolution, especially aircraft. Iran still have F-14s in its air force.

The vast majority of weaponry used in the war, was produced by the Soviet Union.

 

[Lexicus]

I wonder if Kuwaiti people see Great Britain and British royal family in same way

https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2022/nov/05/how-qatar-bought-up-britain

I see the British royal family as a dynasty of *******s too for sure.

 

[Lexicus]

Well, you left out the fact that the West wasn't the main weapons supplier to Iraq during the war; Iran wielded more Western produced weaponry than Iraq did in 1980, acquired before the Islamic revolution, especially aircraft. Iran still have F-14s in its air force.

The vast majority of weaponry used in the war, was produced by the Soviet Union.

Except I never said the West was the only or even the main supplier of weapons to Iraq, I said the West had no problem feeding Iraq weapons and intelligence to help it invade Iran. Only when it invaded Kuwait did national sovereignty and the "rules-based international order" suddenly become important.

 

[innonimatu]

Except I never said the West was the only or even the main supplier of weapons to Iraq, I said the West had no problem feeding Iraq weapons and intelligence to help it invade Iran. Only when it invaded Kuwait did national sovereignty and the "rules-based international order" suddenly become important.

Imo the 1991-2 gulf war was a cynical, but smart, demonstration of power by the US government of the time wanting to take advantage of the ongoing withdrawal of the USSR from world affairs. Its final breakup had not yet been anticipated, or Iraq might have been spared the abuse of being used as demonstration.

It was also not some big conspiracy either, but just the fact that the group which would later be known as neconocs, the PNAC group, managed to have their way at a time when they found no opposition to their agenda of demonstrative power. The world was changing fast, the USSR was no longer a worry, why not go on an expeditionary adventure? Everyone who mattered knew Iraq was not "the world's third greatest army" as some (western) propaganda of the time described it. It was weak, it had just lost its war with Iran. Easy target. That propaganda, btw, gave the game away.

The expedition happened because no one was worried enough about bad consequences to block it. Many stupid things happen that way. That 1991 one, I will have to grant the neocons, was immoral but smart - they got exactly what they aimed for. A rare instance of that.

 

[Ajidica]

Imo the 1991-2 gulf war was a cynical, but smart, demonstration of power by the US government of the time wanting to take advantage of the ongoing withdrawal of the USSR from world affairs. Its final breakup had not yet been anticipated, or Iraq might have been spared the abuse of being used as demonstration.

It was also not some big conspiracy either, but just the fact that the group which would later be known as neconocs, the PNAC group, managed to have their way at a time when they found no opposition to their agenda of demonstrative power. The world was changing fast, the USSR was no longer a worry, why not go on an expeditionary adventure? Everyone who mattered knew Iraq was not "the world's third greatest army" as some (western) propaganda of the time described it. It was weak, it had just lost its war with Iran. Easy target. That propaganda, btw, gave the game away.

The expedition happened because no one was worried enough about bad consequences to block it. Many stupid things happen that way. That 1991 one, I will have to grant the neocons, was immoral but smart - they got exactly what they aimed for. A rare instance of that.

I'm not sure I would go that far. Gorby was plenty enthusiastic for a UN Force, operating under the command of the UN Security Council and its Military Staff Committee. Once it was clear America was not going to put its forces under the UNSC and was looking for UN blessing to conduct a thoroughly American led invasion, the Soviets pulled back their support for armed intervention.

 

[REDY]

Many stupid things happen that way. That 1991 one, I will have to grant the neocons, was immoral but smart - they got exactly what they aimed for. A rare instance of that.

How it was immoral?

 

[saamohod]

How it was immoral?

It was done by the USA, duh.
On the other hand when Russia invades neighbors for living space and a little accompanied genocide, Inno is like "Let me post a wall of text explaining why it is totally moral and justified"

 

[Estebonrober]

Moderator Action: Content removed. No need to post here and in the Israeli Hamas war thread. Birdjaguar

 

[Henri Christophe]

There was the United Arab Republic and that didn’t last. And I don’t get the desire to pretend like the last 100 years didn’t happen and the map should be redrawn again. Why?

First the map need to be redraw because there is no Kurd state in Middle east.
And also 100years is nothing in the 5000 years of history of the middle east.

 

[NovaKart]

First the map need to be redraw because there is no Kurd state in Middle east.
And also 100years is nothing in the 5000 years of history of the middle east.

Who’s going to do it then? These countries aren’t going to give up their territory. Even Kurdistan in Iraq has not been able to survive without its budget from Baghdad and there’s the trouble over what will happen with Kirkuk.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Who’s going to do it then?

Acctually they should do it alone.
I hope in third milenium is possible to do it without a war, but is also good to be prepar to one war if needed.

 

[innonimatu]

How it was immoral?

How? Because the designation of Iraq as punching bad obviously would led to killing many, many people there.

Do you remember the testimony to the US Congress, broadcasted to the rest of the world, with a "kuwaiti nurse" accusing iraqis of murdering babies? It turned out to be propaganda designed by a washington firm hired by kuwait's royals, the losers of the invasion, delivered by the kuwaiti ambassador's own daughter - wholly made up lies. But they served its purpose in justifying the lauching of the war against Iraq. I bet few people recall the episode, and very few at the time realized it was lies.

Do you recall when an interviewer asked secretary of state Madeleine Albright if half a million dead iraqui children, the estimate of the death toll of the "coalition war" against iraq, the destruction of the country's physical infrastructire and economic blockade preventing of its rebuilding? Dhe did not dispute that widely agreed upon number. She just said that yes, half a million dead iraqui children were worth it. You sould still be able to search and find that video and see it - if you bother.

So, do you have any doubts about immorality still, or have I answered you?
One side is accused of killing some dozens of children. Falsely, as it turned out. The other openly admits it is glad to have decided to kill hundreds of thousands and would do it again. It was a victorioys war for the "coalition". It left behind a monstruous amount of human sufering. Memory-holed, I think, judging from your question?

Who’s going to do it then? These countries aren’t going to give up their territory. Even Kurdistan in Iraq has not been able to survive without its budget from Baghdad and there’s the trouble over what will happen with Kirkuk.

Realism is smart. Smarter to be an equal member of a larger community, free to have its own sub-community inside (language, cultural peculiarities, etc) that to be fighting wars and risking dissappearance. If kurds can get that suffficient degree of freedom within existing countries, do not blow it by going for all-or-nothing in a losing strategic situation.

 

[r16]

america , like for totally honestly humanitarian reasons have been fighting non-stop in the Middle East for the last 30 odd years to create a National State for Kurds , which will cause further destruction and whatnot . But for something that happened nearby , they were last threatening their bestest allies to stop doing things against the oil the Kurds steal (this from Syria) . Even if their bestest allies were doing it in the name of heart eaters , the so called Moderate Muslims who are not exactly moderate in calling us Turks as not Muslims and all .

 

[Birdjaguar]

The people, regional nations and major powers have been waging war in the Middle East steady for the last 100 years for a variety of changing reasons: religion, ethnicity, oil, nationhood, colonialism, ego, and Jerusalem. Why do you think it is going to change?

 

[r16]

that the entire US foreign policy is STILL centred on creating a Kurdish Nation State for the purposes of making more war for the sake of war , the pivot to the Pacific became a self fullfilling prophecy because Barack spineless jerk Obama used that to start the Arab Spring saying America would be busy elsewhere and it was open season on anyone who wasn't a Sunni Arab with an oil well or two . The Chinese were quite offended .

 

[NovaKart]

It is not, usa constantly bends over backwards to ease Turkish paranoia over this issue to no avail and constantly ignores Turkish air strikes and drone strikes with barely a protest from the USA, the KRG or the Iraqi government. I don’t know why I bother responding because I’ll just get a wall of incomprehensible text