Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Second Gulf War 1990 ( without US and NATO)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • craven
    replied
    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
    No, I mean all the Afgan guerrillas he bankrolled during the 1980s.

    Still a joke no matter how you slice it, and the Saudis treated it that way.
    I understood what you were saying just used AQ because it made for a simple identifier of them

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    That would of been an interesting scenario. I do not see AQ having a lot of luck against the Iraqis.
    No, I mean all the Afgan guerrillas he bankrolled during the 1980s.

    Still a joke no matter how you slice it, and the Saudis treated it that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • craven
    replied
    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
    Saddam was actually a secular kind of guy, he didn't jump on the Jihad band-wagon until he was hurting badly.

    Osama bin Loudass offered to use his Afghan Muj to throw Saddam out of Kuwait, and the reaction to that idea is what turned him psycho.
    That would of been an interesting scenario. I do not see AQ having a lot of luck against the Iraqis.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Saddam was actually a secular kind of guy, he didn't jump on the Jihad band-wagon until he was hurting badly.

    Osama bin Loudass offered to use his Afghan Muj to throw Saddam out of Kuwait, and the reaction to that idea is what turned him psycho.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by nastle View Post
    Thats a great point !
    How about this, Saddam has a change of heart embraces the "wahabi" ideology and the Saudis are willing to use him as hired muscle against their enemies?

    saddam will be happy to get the endorsment of the saudi royal family as the protector of their house and indirectly of Mecca.

    How will other moslem countries view this ? esp Iran, Turkey , egypt ?
    If Saddam plays the 'Pan Arab' line skillfully he might go far with this gambit. By assuring his neighbors they are not the next 20th Province of Iraq and playing to Arabic pride a lot of diplomatic points can be gained. The trick is Saddam was a bit uneven in diplomatic skills. For every gain he made there was a miscalculation setting him back. That counters his gains with the usual suspicion, plotting & power plays endimic to any international diplomacy & with the usual Arab or Middle Eastern flavor. Over the long haul he wont be any better at herding cats as anyone else.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_MaJDK3VNE

    If the Middle Eastern oil producers become too aggresive in weilding the oil card it forces Europe & the US to accelerate exploitation of other sources of oil, & makes alternatives like nuclear power ect.. more competitive or attractive. It also throws cold water on the economic boom times of the 1990s. Growth & investment will take different courses.

    Leave a comment:


  • nastle
    replied
    Saddam Hussein doesn't have to invade Saudi Arabia to be the big dog in the neighborhood. IIRC, it was Colin Powell informing the Saudis that the US would deploy over a hundred thousand troops that made them willing to confront Saddam. Saudi would have toed the Iraqi political ine, IMO, with increasing oil rices and an icreased pressure on Iran over disputed areas in the Persian Gulf. I doubt there would be any effort toward Israel any time near the invasion as securing the rest of his Arab Gulf neighbors in oppostiton to Iranian interests would have taken higher priority as I see it.
    Thats a great point !
    How about this, Saddam has a change of heart embraces the "wahabi" ideology and the Saudis are willing to use him as hired muscle against their enemies?

    saddam will be happy to get the endorsment of the saudi royal family as the protector of their house and indirectly of Mecca.

    How will other moslem countries view this ? esp Iran, Turkey , egypt ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberknight
    replied
    Had the US and coalition not intervened militarily in the Gulf, not only does Kuwait cease to exist as a nation, Iraq has a huge amount of credibility with the rest of the Arab nations in the ME.

    Saddam Hussein doesn't have to invade Saudi Arabia to be the big dog in the neighborhood. IIRC, it was Colin Powell informing the Saudis that the US would deploy over a hundred thousand troops that made them willing to confront Saddam. Saudi would have toed the Iraqi political ine, IMO, with increasing oil rices and an icreased pressure on Iran over disputed areas in the Persian Gulf. I doubt there would be any effort toward Israel any time near the invasion as securing the rest of his Arab Gulf neighbors in oppostiton to Iranian interests would have taken higher priority as I see it.

    Furthermore, with no US military victory in the gulf, I don't see the communists falling in Russia nearly so quickly. Eastern European allies and Russians knew that the claims of "aggressive" American and NATO forces being held off by superior progressive" ones was just so much hot air after 1991. There is no evidence whatsoever that Mikhail Gorbachev was intent on dismantling the USSR during his lifetime. Events simply worked out that way.

    Had the US and NATO not responded to the Kuwaiti invasion, the world wouldlook very different today.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
    Wow, Buster Diggs - even as an Army tanker we knew of him.
    I met him a couple years before the Gulf War. Made a hell of a impression on everyone. Unfortunately he got caught over a some petty matter as a Captain, violating EPA regulations protecting the Mesa Mint plant @ Miramar Naval Air Station. The bad paper from that one suposedly made him uncompetive for promotion beyond Col. He announced retirement shortly after Desert Storm & I assume he did.

    Aside from trampling endangered species his other early claim to fame was commanding the OpFor in the old ArmVal exercises at Ft Irwin.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    One thing could hold the Iraqis back in their initial rush; Airpower.

    They only had about 150 good combat aircraft, if I remember right, and "good" is a relative term. I doubt that the handful of E-15s flown by Saudi playboys could have stopped them, but if we had a carrier nearby that very week, it might have made a difference.

    The wild card is how daring the Iraqis felt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stryker 19K30
    replied
    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
    I used to know the exact answer to that. Unfotunatly fifteen plus years of other questions and failing memories leave me blank. I want to say not in sufficient numbers to make a decent fight of it. Lt Col 'Buster' Diggs & his tankers received the M60s rolling off the prepositioned ships from Diego Garcia a few too many days after Kuwait was fully occupied. He took the first combat ready tank from dockside to the entry to the port thinking "they would have been here by now".
    Wow, Buster Diggs - even as an Army tanker we knew of him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
    Okay, so is the question now- "could the 82nd Airborme beat Saddam to the Emirates?" or is it "could Saddam's Army remain mobile for the week it would take them to occupy all that territory?"

    Or... considering what he did in the end, how could the world prevent him from doing to the whole Gulf what he did to Kuwait's oil fields?
    I used to know the exact answer to that. Unfotunatly fifteen plus years of other questions and failing memories leave me blank. I want to say not in sufficient numbers to make a decent fight of it. Lt Col 'Buster' Diggs & his tankers received the M60s rolling off the prepositioned ships from Diego Garcia a few too many days after Kuwait was fully occupied. He took the first combat ready tank from dockside to the entry to the port thinking "they would have been here by now".

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Okay, so is the question now- "could the 82nd Airborme beat Saddam to the Emirates?" or is it "could Saddam's Army remain mobile for the week it would take them to occupy all that territory?"

    Or... considering what he did in the end, how could the world prevent him from doing to the whole Gulf what he did to Kuwait's oil fields?

    Leave a comment:


  • piero1971
    replied
    Originally posted by Naffenea View Post
    I don't get this part. Are you saying that the US had a sizable military presence in Saudi Arabia, and that's why Iraq invaded Kuwait? Or are you saying that since the US has no forces in SA that Iraq will invade (which is what happened anyways)


    just re-stating the what if presupposition. no USA forces in KSA (after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait). some might say "as planned".!!

    Leave a comment:


  • nastle
    replied
    Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
    I'm not seeing how the US could sit there and do nothing with most of the oil in the middle east threatened. Do you really think the US and Europe would let the Arabs defend their own oil?

    .
    Politically I do admit it seems quite farfetched, but hey its interesting militarily! It evens the odds for the iraqis and brings in some other players

    Leave a comment:


  • nastle
    replied
    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
    Iraq would have no reason to attack Isreal if the US was not part of the coalition, and your scenario has us laying back.
    Without direct US involvement the israelis are not going to be restrained and will respond in some way to the SSM attacks.Israelis cannot directly threaten saddam with their army, and the israeli airforce can only do so much damage at such long ranges.
    I dont see why wont the popular opinion in moslem world would be sympathetic to saddam if he champions the cause of the palestinians and the saudis/kuwaitis are seen as being on the same side as israel.
    Israel will be more than willing to help any arab country to fight saddam the question is will that be politcally acceptable to them ?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X