The analogy only works if they're taking it over from a different (more wicked and corrupt) group of Americans.
Preventing the Vietnam war would do a lot to prevent it though it would likely not stop it entirely because much of it was due to a reaction to the post war conservative culture that had developed which I’m not sure how to prevent.
What is exactly the resemblance here? Without context seems like a random choice.
My guess is the Persian Empire, just for keeping the theme of the Emperor using a lion flag and the Padhishah title.
Colonizer taking over sand colony from a more brutal colonizer!
I think it's the economy. Terrible in 1980, so Carter lost reelection, which doesn't happen often. By 1984 times were booming hard, and nobody wanted to change that. Plus in the 80s and 90s there wasn't much of a difference between the parties.
Maybe he made a deal with the United States in which he offers himself as the "non-Taliban and nom-American puppet" alternative in exchange for economic and diplomatic support.
He was also a fairly poor campaigner compared to Reagan. "I will raise your taxes, but so will other guy and at least I'm telling you" doesn't seem like a very good campaign message.
Didn't know this was his campaign message (not American, so neither I care that much), but I for my part, appreciate the honesty lol
I would think the rationale would it would be better to come in second place than to have never tried at all.
You mean more seriously than actually invading the country? It wouldn't have changed anything because the point was that the US government was eager to "show their strength" by massacring someone, as well as having a war to distract the population, so they would have invaded even if Saddam was 200% collaborative. Any attempt to "show we're serious" would in any case have been the first shots of the actual invasion, not something separate.
