would invading Iraq have been such a bad idea

[Sava]

The USSR was a Russian Empire David...

And the Russians, while not the imperical force it once was, had an empire hundreds of years before the constitution was written.

[David Floyd]

The USSR was a Russian Empire David...

Either I misunderstood him or you did. Probably I did, but oh well.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Sava,

Apples and oranges. As a government the USSR was far shorter lived the Democratic experiment called the US. regardless of territory claimed the thing David was talking about I beleive is the government in power. In that, the US is one of the older nations of the world.

Now if you want to talk on an ethnical basis thats a different story as the US is a bunch of mutts.

[Sava]

Ah, I see... I was thinking more in terms of the cultural identity of the nation rather than the actual form of government.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Serb, erm, the Soviet Union was a far younger state than the US.

If you mean RUSSIA is older than the US, that's fine, but Russia and the USSR aren't the same, as I'm sure you know

Just a diferent name, but the same meaning- old, good Russian Empire, no matter how it calls- Rus, Russian Empire, Soviet Union or Russian Federation
I though you were sleeping. Seen any nighmares? about me perhaps?

[Kontiki]

Re: would invading Iraq have been such a bad idea

I especially like these lines:

Originally posted by johncmcleod
Saddam is very evil and has made it clear he hates Americans and wants top take over the middle east. We'd have to fight him eventually

Ok, Saddam is most likely evil and certainly hates the US, but can you explain to me when and how he's made it clear he wants to take over the ME and why we (meaning the US/west in general) would have to fight him eventually?

Everything seems to point to Saddam willing to do anything necessary to stay in power. Beyond that, there's nothing to point to him plotting to take over the ME.

[Sava]

Personally, I think the United States is more a threat to world peace than Saddam is.

[DinoDoc]

Re: Re: would invading Iraq have been such a bad idea

Originally posted by Kontiki
but can you explain to me when and how he's made it clear he wants to take over the ME

Well irredentism does have a long history in Iraq dating back to before the rise of Saddam and he has tried to carry on with that tradition.

[Kontiki]

Re: Re: Re: would invading Iraq have been such a bad idea

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Well irredentism does have a long history in Iraq dating back to before the rise of Saddam and he has tried to carry on with that tradition.

That's iffy at best. I suppose you could claim that Saddam invaded Kuwait because historically it had been part of Iraq, or that some small parts of modern Iran were likewise, but I think there's far more compelling explainations. For Kuwait, his primary interest was his massive debt owed to that state, coupled with claims of cross-drilling under the border and a small measure of displeasure over the price of oil. That Kuwait was once a part of Iraq was a bonus. If that were the main reason, why would he have waited until he did?

Regardless, Kuwait and a few miles of Iranian territory, which is basically a non-issue now, is hardly the whole ME.

[Arrian]

Invading Iraq is, IMO, a bad idea.

However, considering that the US government has painted itself into a corner on the issue where it either eventually nails Saddam or loses face in a big way, the changes of it happening remain pretty good (say 50%).

If it does happen, I don't worry so much about the actual fighting as the aftermath. The only post-invasion plan I see as having a silver lining is an Iraqi Marshall Plan, and that: a) is extremely expensive, b) is time consuming, and c) requires a large number of occupation troops. Given the current administration's dislike of nation-building and the current US economic situation, I don't see the Bush administration going for that type of plan. The war itself would cost a pretty penny too. So I worry that if there is a war, we'll just pick some general, hand him Iraq, and bail.

-Arrian

[OneFootInTheGrave]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,859477,00.html

They had a dramatic and immediate effect on a country used to £8.8bn in annual oil revenue. Over the next five years Iraq plummeted back down the development scale. The health and education system crumbled. Water provision and sanitation dried up and child mortality soared.

In 1996 the Oil for Food agreement allowed Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil to buy strictly monitored humanitarian and medical provisions. The decline in health, water and sanitation conditions has been slowly halted. But Iraq's large, well-educated and affluent middle class has been so deeply eroded it has never recovered.

"The sanctions damaged the culture of Iraq. It took away our contact with the outside world," said Mr Hadad. "The whole of our society has been affected." In the early 1990s across Iraq bright young students dropped out of universities to find work as taxi drivers or waiters. Teachers and doctors are now paid barely dollars 10 a month. Most have given up work.

Aid workers are now concerned the vast majority of the Iraqi population is much more vulnerable to a potential conflict than it was before the Gulf War in 1991. Many Iraqis rely on cheap government rations every month but their diets are limited. If there is an attack Iraq's limited electricity supply will almost certainly grind to a halt, affecting water and sanitation plants.

"Immunity levels are very low. The rations may stop if the government is unable to function. A war will have a devastating effect. There is no cushion for the Iraqi population," said Margaret Hassan, a Briton who has lived in Iraq for nearly 30 years and who now runs the office of Care International, one of the few aid agencies operating in the country.

Well this is the reason why the invasion is wrong. And from your own perspective it will multiply the number of people who will be willing to die to harm US/west in any possible way.

[Az]

The US and NATO are the only militaries to issue NV gear force wide

ahem.

[GePap]

The great danger of invading Iraq is not military: the US mlitary would beat the Iraqi army, without question: though at a higher cost than Gulf War 1, which was very low anyway. The great problem is political. We have no vision for Iraq the day after, and every optimistic assumption for the invasion envisions us fighting only the Iraqi army, without the possibiliy of popular resistance. The problem is that without a clear political vision for Iraq, the danges of armed resistance grow, and Israel's experience in the Occupied territories should be a great example of how even a first class military has great problems with low level violence, since all those fancy gadget begin to mean less and less. The US can't afford politically any significant popular resistance to our occupation of Iraq. The political cost to the US in the Arab world, and even at home, would be tremendous.

Everyone says Iraqi's will not fight for Saddam. Fine, but what will we offer them after Saddam? Read the newspapers: we have no one waiting in line, and the Iraqi opposition has already stated that an occupation government of Iraq is not an option they will accet, and I highly doubt it is one the Iraqi people will accept. And for those people who think: who cares, we will make them: look at the occupied territories. Do you really think the US public would accept pictures of Iraqis throwing stones at US soldiers and shooting at them, with US soldiers shoting back and then ask: "what the hell is going on, and why the hell shall we stay, if they don' want us there?". After all, Israel has a far greater interest in staying in the West Bank than we will ever have to stay in Iraq.

[Serb]

They would fight against you, but not for Saddam. They would fight, because you are invaders for them, a strangers, a representatives of different religion and absolutely different culture, the world's Satan at last
I don't see how you guys gonna hold Iraq for years without causalities from your side. There is no proxy army who will do all dirty work for you this time. I highly doubt it could be Kurds. Who will oppress resistance? I bet there will be very strong resistance even if you'll destroy regular military and completely occupy Iraq.
So, how you gonna hold it?

[DinoDoc]

Iraq isn't Afghanistan, Serb. Stop trying to fight the last war.