- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
A what if and question about Iraq
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:19 pm
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:19 pm
Curious to see what everyone's opinion if we had never step foot in Iraq how the middle east would look right now? Lets say we did invade Afghanistan but never touched Iraq and Saddam Hussein was still dictator there, would the middle east be more peaceful today than what it is right now, would there still be a big mess in Syria?
Also, my next question is, I was thinking about the Tomb of Jonah being blown up by ISIS in Mosul. Isn't ISIS mostly Sunni like Hussein was? Why didn't he blow it up when his regime was in power? Were there actually Christians living in Iraq back then or was he having them killed back then also?
Also, my next question is, I was thinking about the Tomb of Jonah being blown up by ISIS in Mosul. Isn't ISIS mostly Sunni like Hussein was? Why didn't he blow it up when his regime was in power? Were there actually Christians living in Iraq back then or was he having them killed back then also?
This post was edited on 7/27/14 at 2:22 pm
5
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:21 pm to windshieldman
quote:without question it would be more peaceful.
Lets say we did invade Afghanistan but never touched Iraq and Saddam Hussein was still dictator there would the middle east be more peaceful today than what it is right now, would there still be a big mess in Syria?
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:29 pm to TT9
Most definitely things would be more peaceful. The people there would still be living under tyrannical leaders but they kept the Islamists at bay and also "allowed" Christians to exist. Bush the elder was smart enough to leave Saddam in power. Khaddafi (spelling) would most likely still be in power too and Benghazi would never have happened...after all we were there, I'm certain, to funnel weapons to the "freedom fighters" in Syria, which in all of these places have been nothing but Muslim Brotherhood rebranded as Al Qaeda, ISIS, etc.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:31 pm to TT9
quote:
without question it would be more peaceful.
explain.
also the turmoil in Iraq really started back after WWI when the allied powers broke up the ottoman empire into small countries they didn't pay attention to ethical borders or religious borders and so on and so forth.
In Iraq you have pretty much one radical leader trying to lead three completely different cultures and groups of people who are not very friendly to each other.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:37 pm to catholictigerfan
But we have provided training and funding and weaponry to these Islamist terrorist groups that they never had access to before. Yes, there was violence but it was in smaller bursts and they were not as emboldened as they are now.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 2:40 pm to skeeter531
From the late 1950's through the 90's, we operated under the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" theory, and our number 1 enemy was communism. We fed the Islamists money, weapons and training to fight off the Soviet Union so that our military didn't have to be involved (except for Viet Nam) and didn't seem to realize that they would someday turn on us.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 4:20 pm to windshieldman
What if we actually went after Saudi Arabia and held their oil for the next 50 years? I would have planted US flags in the sand blown their arse back to the Stone Age.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 4:35 pm to windshieldman
quote:Saddam was Ba'ath, ISIS is Salafist. Two different things. Ba'athists are Arab nationalists first and Muslims second. They will make use of religion but more as an "opiate of the masses" type thing. They don't like sectarian conflicts within their borders. Salafists are true believers, and will fight anyone who believes differently from them without regard for national borders or realpolitik.
Also, my next question is, I was thinking about the Tomb of Jonah being blown up by ISIS in Mosul. Isn't ISIS mostly Sunni like Hussein was?
This post was edited on 7/27/14 at 4:37 pm
Posted on 7/27/14 at 4:43 pm to windshieldman
We would still be flying thousands of sorties enforcing Northern and Southern Watch from bases in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and others is my guess.
Posted on 7/27/14 at 4:44 pm to TOKEN
yes that is what we should have done...but our politicians are making far too much money by being in bed with the Saudis. Democrats AND Republicans have gotten us completely enmeshed with the Saudis, and with 'friends' like Saudi Arabia, who needs enemies?
Posted on 7/27/14 at 4:50 pm to windshieldman
Saddam would have to nuke up, and he would have. Predicting the ME is like predicting 'climate change'. 
Posted on 7/27/14 at 5:20 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
also the turmoil in Iraq really started back after WWI when the allied powers broke up the ottoman empire into small countries they didn't pay attention to ethical borders or religious borders and so on and so forth.
In Iraq you have pretty much one radical leader trying to lead three completely different cultures and groups of people who are not very friendly to each other.
This. It's a violent cultural clusterfrick.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News