Name: SFU2236 2007-01-01 3:37
The first Iraq war, Iraq's promise to destroy Isreal, Iraq's aggression towards its neighbors, Iraq's intent on creating a nuclear warhead/bomb and stockpiling of other WMDs like chemical weapons, the U.S.'s interest in ridding Iraq of Saddam's control (political reasoning), and Saddams crimes against humanity.
I'll deal with the all mighty "There where no WMDs" theory, first. Most Americans, when told Iraq was looking for WMDs, instantly assumed that Iraq was just trying to make nukes. Since the U.S. had previously sold chemical weapons to Iraq, and Iraq had used some chemical weapons against its own people (blamed on Saddam, hence the crimes against humanity), and was obviously looking for a nuclear bomb or warhead.
Iraq only had one mighty element which granted it political power and leverage. Oil. Oil leads to money, and the French LOVE money. Iraq managed to get France on their side and help them produce a nuclear reactor, something you don't really need in a nation mostly without power. The lead scientist on the team was a part of France's nuclear weapons program, and most definetaly knew his nukes. During construction of the reactor, Iraq had expressed a promise to destroy Isreal. Isreal, in return, launched a special operation involving specially trained pilots and modified F-16s to menuever in on the reactor, destroy it, and return home safetly. The operation was a success, however Iraq was still intent on moving forward. Iraq had constructed facilities and purchased equipment necessary to develop nuclear weapons. Isreal was so convinced that Iraq was attempting to obtain "the bomb", and that Iraq would use it against them, they launched that attack against the reactor.
The U.S., at the time of the first Gulf War, was simply adhering to treaties and promises and kept Iraq out of Kuwait. During this operation, Iraq was facing major civil rebellion. The Kurds in the north, especially, where rebelling with everything they had. After the operation, the U.S. had PROMISED the rebelling forces, especially the Kurds, that they would invade Iraq and aid them in their toppling of Saddam. The U.S. would not invade, instead provide relief, by helping Kurds evacuate, attempting to supply them, and pinning down Iraq air support. However, randomly, the U.S. decided to let the Iraqi's use their air support, and the rebels suffered huge casualties. The U.S. shortly stopped their own relief, and talk of invasion was minimal. It was assumed that the rebellion would do the work for them, so they sat it out.
The rebellion, of course, had failed. Now with political figures stepping up to the plate and constantly talking about ridding the world of Saddam, and with an increasing interest with Isreal, the U.S. would officially decide to go to war with Iraq. For whatever reason, it was determined that declaring war with Iraq shortly after 9/11 would rally U.S. support more, and thus the war was on.
MASSIVE MISTAKES MADE LEADING UP TO THE WAR:
The Kurds and rebels where promised U.S. support, and assumed that they would just wait it out and hold their own until the U.S. had shown up. The minor relief actually just made a few Kurds U.S. citizens, and supplied Iraqi troops. Leaving for the years that the U.S. had, the majority of the rebellion wasn't proud to recieve the support on the rise. America assumed the rebels would welcome them in open arms simply because they where fighting for the common goal and had bargained to help each other, though it was broken, which would cause the bitter hatred from the rebels. It was the old rebels, Saddam's extremists, and anti-american muslim extremists that had caused most of the small attacks on U.S. forces.
Deploying an invasion just after Desert Storm would have provided the U.S. with support from the Iraqi citizens and rebels, and would have allowed the U.S. for a potentially easier victory.
During planning of the Iraq war, no official plan was made for AFTER conventional combat and for occupation. It was assumed that occupation would be simply, and could just be planned out "in small doses" as that time had arrived. Additionally, a pre-existing plan was made during Desert Storm which detailed a massive, 300,000 U.S. troop strong force invasion of Iraq, which supposevely would have accounted for a total victory. Rummsfield, in all his glory, despised this plan.
Rummsfield had argued with nearly every general and political figure with power. He would force onto the invasion plan a smaller force, which was lesser equipped, and with a hastier plan to get the "job done with fewer numbers involved". Improper planning for occupation, obviously improper use of force, the creation of an enemy within Iraq (rebels), all just led to a clusterfuck of lengthy anguish.
The conventional war was a rediculous success, and the toppling of Saddam was supreme. The U.S. had first striked against oil plants owned by Iraq, and preserved them, to help pay for the reconstruction of Iraq, and so that it may be handed back over to the Iraqi people at a later time. If you forgot, maybe you should reread where I said that Iraq only really has ONE thing, OIL. If the U.S. assaulted, didn't preserve the oil rigs, Saddams forces (present on the rigs at all times) would have destroyed them, which would have cripped the reconstruction of Iraq (hundred and hundreds of billions in its reconstruction, all mostly paid in thanks to the oil), and then it would have cripped Iraq's economic situation post-war.
I'll deal with the all mighty "There where no WMDs" theory, first. Most Americans, when told Iraq was looking for WMDs, instantly assumed that Iraq was just trying to make nukes. Since the U.S. had previously sold chemical weapons to Iraq, and Iraq had used some chemical weapons against its own people (blamed on Saddam, hence the crimes against humanity), and was obviously looking for a nuclear bomb or warhead.
Iraq only had one mighty element which granted it political power and leverage. Oil. Oil leads to money, and the French LOVE money. Iraq managed to get France on their side and help them produce a nuclear reactor, something you don't really need in a nation mostly without power. The lead scientist on the team was a part of France's nuclear weapons program, and most definetaly knew his nukes. During construction of the reactor, Iraq had expressed a promise to destroy Isreal. Isreal, in return, launched a special operation involving specially trained pilots and modified F-16s to menuever in on the reactor, destroy it, and return home safetly. The operation was a success, however Iraq was still intent on moving forward. Iraq had constructed facilities and purchased equipment necessary to develop nuclear weapons. Isreal was so convinced that Iraq was attempting to obtain "the bomb", and that Iraq would use it against them, they launched that attack against the reactor.
The U.S., at the time of the first Gulf War, was simply adhering to treaties and promises and kept Iraq out of Kuwait. During this operation, Iraq was facing major civil rebellion. The Kurds in the north, especially, where rebelling with everything they had. After the operation, the U.S. had PROMISED the rebelling forces, especially the Kurds, that they would invade Iraq and aid them in their toppling of Saddam. The U.S. would not invade, instead provide relief, by helping Kurds evacuate, attempting to supply them, and pinning down Iraq air support. However, randomly, the U.S. decided to let the Iraqi's use their air support, and the rebels suffered huge casualties. The U.S. shortly stopped their own relief, and talk of invasion was minimal. It was assumed that the rebellion would do the work for them, so they sat it out.
The rebellion, of course, had failed. Now with political figures stepping up to the plate and constantly talking about ridding the world of Saddam, and with an increasing interest with Isreal, the U.S. would officially decide to go to war with Iraq. For whatever reason, it was determined that declaring war with Iraq shortly after 9/11 would rally U.S. support more, and thus the war was on.
MASSIVE MISTAKES MADE LEADING UP TO THE WAR:
The Kurds and rebels where promised U.S. support, and assumed that they would just wait it out and hold their own until the U.S. had shown up. The minor relief actually just made a few Kurds U.S. citizens, and supplied Iraqi troops. Leaving for the years that the U.S. had, the majority of the rebellion wasn't proud to recieve the support on the rise. America assumed the rebels would welcome them in open arms simply because they where fighting for the common goal and had bargained to help each other, though it was broken, which would cause the bitter hatred from the rebels. It was the old rebels, Saddam's extremists, and anti-american muslim extremists that had caused most of the small attacks on U.S. forces.
Deploying an invasion just after Desert Storm would have provided the U.S. with support from the Iraqi citizens and rebels, and would have allowed the U.S. for a potentially easier victory.
During planning of the Iraq war, no official plan was made for AFTER conventional combat and for occupation. It was assumed that occupation would be simply, and could just be planned out "in small doses" as that time had arrived. Additionally, a pre-existing plan was made during Desert Storm which detailed a massive, 300,000 U.S. troop strong force invasion of Iraq, which supposevely would have accounted for a total victory. Rummsfield, in all his glory, despised this plan.
Rummsfield had argued with nearly every general and political figure with power. He would force onto the invasion plan a smaller force, which was lesser equipped, and with a hastier plan to get the "job done with fewer numbers involved". Improper planning for occupation, obviously improper use of force, the creation of an enemy within Iraq (rebels), all just led to a clusterfuck of lengthy anguish.
The conventional war was a rediculous success, and the toppling of Saddam was supreme. The U.S. had first striked against oil plants owned by Iraq, and preserved them, to help pay for the reconstruction of Iraq, and so that it may be handed back over to the Iraqi people at a later time. If you forgot, maybe you should reread where I said that Iraq only really has ONE thing, OIL. If the U.S. assaulted, didn't preserve the oil rigs, Saddams forces (present on the rigs at all times) would have destroyed them, which would have cripped the reconstruction of Iraq (hundred and hundreds of billions in its reconstruction, all mostly paid in thanks to the oil), and then it would have cripped Iraq's economic situation post-war.