[eklipse]

Iraq fights a territorial war with Iran, backed financially and militarily by Russia, France, Germany, the US, several Arab countries (including Kuwait) and others; the war ends in a stalemate; Kuwait demands reimbursement; Iraq contends that the money was repaid in protection as Iraq had defended Kuwaiti territory along with its own.

Meanwhile, Kuwait's overproduction of oil (against OPEC agreed limits) has forced crude oil prices down, further devastating Iraq's war-torn economy; Kuwait begins slant drilling into Iraqi oil fields (to effect some sort of self-reimbursement); Iraq gets (understandably) pissed off; Iraq invades Kuwait.

Did Iraq have equal or greater justification for it's invasion of Kuwait (the event that apparently sparked the whole US/Iraq love-affair off) than the US had for it's invasion of Iraq?


Discuss!

[OAW]

Iraq had plenty of justification to bitch-slap Kuwait for the slant-drilling. They had warned the Kuwaitis repeatedly ... but the Kuwaitis wouldn't listen. A brief incursion over the border, perhaps to destroy the slant drilling facility and then immediately withdraw would have been "condemned" internationally ... but not too loudly nor with any significant consequences. And more importantly, the message would have been sent to the Kuwaitis to get their act together.

However, Iraq simply went overboard. You don't jack an entire country over some slant-drilling conflict. The other Arab countries in the area were understandably nervous so they simply supported the US in its effort to give Saddam Hussein enough rope to hang himself with.

Having said all that, I don't think either country had justification for a full-scale invasion.

OAW

[Spliffdaddy]

Iraq should have taken its case to the UN, waited 12 years for no resolution to the problem, then bitch at the US for taking the matter into its own hands.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Iraq should have taken its case to the UN, waited 12 years for no resolution to the problem, then bitch at the US for taking the matter into its own hands.

Yup, that's right. Screw diplomacy, just attack. Awesome foreign policy

[Spliffdaddy]

Failure = 12 years of diplomacy

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Iraq should have taken its case to the UN, waited 12 years for no resolution to the problem, then bitch at the US for taking the matter into its own hands.

.....at which point you would no doubt turn round and label Saddam Hussein a liberal, pinko, peacenik?

[adamk]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Did Iraq have equal or greater justification for it's invasion of Kuwait ...

surely we can't blame them. they were simply protecting their vital interest, which kuwait happened to be stealing.

many conflicts have been justified on this premise alone. i believe that military intervention should be a last resort, after other avenues have been exhausted.

however, i don't think the US can say that that intervention was not justified. recently, bush has been citing 'to protect our interests in the region' as a goal/reason for the [iraq 2003] war.

adam

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Failure = 12 years of diplomacy

There wasn't really 12 years of diplomacy.

The US stalled for most of it... and spend the majority of it, creating tension in the UN over the situation.

Only the last 30 days were actual diplomatic efforts towards working it out.

The rest was puppetry.

To call it 12 years of diplomacy is a bit of a misnomer.

[lil'babykitten]

I'd tend to agree with OAWs stance on this.
However, it's interesting to note that Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was probably more justified that the US invasion of Iraq!
Funny how things turn out, eh?!

[eklipse]

Also interesting is the lengths the US government went to paint Saddam as the evil-boogeyman-devil-incarnate. They tirelessly remind us of how 'he attacked and threatened his neighbors' and 'how he ruthlessly gassed entire villages' - rarely do they put things in the proper historical context. Kuwait was committing an open act of war by stealing Iraqi oil - they got what was coming to them. The Shi'ite rebellion in 1991 was a foreign instigated attempt to overthrow the ruling power in the country - what present day government do you know of that wouldn't respond swiftly and decisively to avert a threat to it's own stability - especially a threat promoted by a country that you were currently/recently at war with?? What do you think Bush would have done in Saddam's place?

As OAW noted with regards to Kuwait, Saddam had a tendency to go too far - fine, criticize based on that - but don't deny or attempt to gloss over the details of the situations - it only makes ones arguments look weak.

[finboy]

Originally posted by adamk:
surely we can't blame them. they were simply protecting their vital interest, which kuwait happened to be stealing.

I'm sure that all the pillaging and looting was in the name of "fairness" too, plus the Shiite and Kurd purges that occurred -- all the in name of Iraqi manifest destiny.

I never thought I'd hear folks apologizing for Saddam Hussein, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[adamk]

Originally posted by finboy:
I'm sure that all the pillaging and looting was in the name of "fairness" too, plus the Shiite and Kurd purges that occurred -- all the in name of Iraqi manifest destiny.

i guess you missed my point. and the rest of my post. to reiterate, i think military intervention should be a last resort, after all other avenues are exhausted. i am not sure that saddam attempted to do this.

to me, saddam's invasion was based on protecting the "interests" of iraq. and "interests" that existed in his own country, even, that were being stolen. which makes more sense to america's WoT, in which othe interests we are defending are largely in other countries and not ours to begin with. though we rely heavily on them.

adam

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by finboy:
I'm sure that all the pillaging and looting was in the name of "fairness" too, plus the Shiite and Kurd purges that occurred -- all the in name of Iraqi manifest destiny.

I never thought I'd hear folks apologizing for Saddam Hussein, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

hell. I'm not.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by finboy:
I'm sure that all the pillaging and looting was in the name of "fairness" too, plus the Shiite and Kurd purges that occurred -- all the in name of Iraqi manifest destiny.

I never thought I'd hear folks apologizing for Saddam Hussein, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

The unwillingness to see the entire picture, warts and all is downfall, not a virtue.
Would you prefer to deny the slant drilling never happened...just sort of stick your fingers in your ears and go NANANANANANANANAN?