WI: HW Bush Disposes Hussein?

OK; understood.

Also, for the record, I had the impression that the Iraqi Shiites rebelled in 1991 because the U.S. was much more powerful than Iran; thus, the U.S. was much more likely to save them from Saddam than Iran was (had the political will for this actually existed in the U.S., as the Iraqi Shiites falsely thought in 1991)!

I am sure many Shia were also hedging that Saddam might win the war anyway and they would be killed, but there wasn't a great deal of enthusiasm for being conquered by Iran under the Ayatollah and they knew from how the US handled post war Germany and Japan its not like we would subject them.

In addition, a bit off-topic, but out of curiosity--why exactly do you think that Bush Jr. removed Saddam Hussein in 2003? The WMDs as he claimed? Something else?

Because the nation was tried of putting up the kind of violations of the Gulf War cease fire I showed you from 1998 with him and the media and most Americans wanted it to happen and after 911 Saddam was stupid enough to link himself to the attacks in the public consciousness. The Iraq of 2003 was not the Iraq of 1991 though. It was a state with the middle class wiped out by sanctions and a religious radicalization movement taking root and jihadists setting up shop.

And, yes Gore would have, the pressure on Bush to act against Saddam was great, but it would be bigger on Gore. The difference is Gore would have likely gotten more political and military support from Western Europe as Bush was hated in Western Europe, but relatively liked in Eastern Europe.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I am sure many Shia were also hedging that Saddam might win the war anyway and they would be killed, but there wasn't a great deal of enthusiasm for being conquered by Iran under the Ayatollah and they knew from how the US handled post war Germany and Japan its not like we would subject them.

Did Iran actually want to conquer Iraq or merely create a pro-Iranian puppet state in Iraq, though?

Because the nation was tried of putting up the kind of violations of the Gulf War cease fire I showed you from 1998 with him and the media and most Americans wanted it to happen

Even before 9/11 or only after 9/11?

and after 911 Saddam was stupid enough to link himself to the attacks in the public consciousness.

Yes; correct!

The Iraq of 2003 was not the Iraq of 1991 though. It was a state with the middle class wiped out by sanctions and a religious radicalization movement taking root and jihadists setting up shop.

Didn't you previously say that Saddam initially used radical Islam in the 1980s to solidify Sunni Arabs' support towards him?

And, yes Gore would have, the pressure on Bush to act against Saddam was great, but it would be bigger on Gore. The difference is Gore would have likely gotten more political and military support from Western Europe as Bush was hated in Western Europe, but relatively liked in Eastern Europe.

If so, why didn't Clinton invade Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein?
 
Didn't you previously say that Saddam initially used radical Islam in the 1980s to solidify Sunni Arabs' support towards him?

If so, why didn't Clinton invade Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein?

His back to Faith movement started in 1986 towards the end of the Iran/Iraq War as revolution insurance, but didn't get into high gear until after the loss in the Gulf War. Then the idea of a revolution was much more real so you had the Fayedden Saddam going around in black clothes cutting off hands and heads and generally a program to religiously radicalized Iraqi Sunnis against the West, but also against the Shia in Iraq as a way to keep Iraqis from uniting against him.

esquadrc3a3o-da-morte.jpg


Saddam-special-forces-parade-ap.jpg


As for Clinton he did a number of bombing campaigns and seriously considered making his last one ODF into a much larger operation which he hoped might collapse the regime. But, he didn't want to go to Congress after they impeached him so he decided against ODF on steroids.

The 1990s high for a second invasion to topple Saddam was in 1993 after the Bush plot came out and that stood at about 71%. After 911 I am talking November 2001 support was at 80% for another invasion and for the most part it stayed in the 70% range in 2002.
 
Last edited:

CaliGuy

Banned
His back to Faith movement started in 1986 towards the end of the Iran/Iraq War as revolution insurance, but didn't get into high gear until after the loss in the Gulf War. Then the idea of a revolution was much more real so you had the Fayedden Saddam going around in black clothes cutting off hands and hands and generally a program to religiously radicalized Iraqi Sunnis against the West, but also against the Shia in Iraq as a way to keep Iraqis from uniting against him.

By "revolution insurance," you mean to ensure that Iraqi Sunnis will not accept any Shiite-led state in Iraq in the event of a revolution, correct?

As for Clinton he did a number of bombing campaigns and seriously considered making his last one ODF into a much larger operation which he hoped might collapse the regime. But, he didn't want to go to Congress after they impeached him so he decided against ODF on steroids.

What exactly does ODF stand for? Indeed, please pardon my ignorance here.

The 1990s high for a second invasion to topple Saddam was in 1993 after the Bush plot came out and that stood at about 71%. After 911 I am talking November 2001 support was at 80% for another invasion and for the most part it stayed in the 70% range in 2002.

Was the 71% data in 1993 for a full-on U.S. invasion with hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops?

Also, what were these figures in the 1994-2000 years?
 
By "revolution insurance," you mean to ensure that Iraqi Sunnis will not accept any Shiite-led state in Iraq in the event of a revolution, correct?

Yes.

What exactly does ODF stand for? Indeed, please pardon my ignorance here.

fox_logo1.gif


Top of the line 1990s graphics for you.

Was the 71% data in 1993 for a full-on U.S. invasion with hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops?

Yes.

Also, what were these figures in the 1994-2000 years?

50% range for much of it with it getting into the 60% range from time to time when Saddam would boot the inspectors and then give speeches about his right to have unconventional weapons.
 
Last edited:
In addition, a bit off-topic, but out of curiosity--why exactly do you think that Bush Jr. removed Saddam Hussein in 2003? The WMDs as he claimed? Something else?

Ultimately, it comes down to money - the Petrodollar. Saddam was threatening to start charging for oil in Euros. The US stood to lose billions.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Yes.



fox_logo1.gif


Top of the line 1990s graphics for you.



Yes.



50% range for much of it with it getting into the 60% range from time to time when Saddam would boot the inspectors and then give speeches about his right to have unconventional weapons.
Thank you very much for sharing all of this information! :)

Also, though, were Americans aware of what exactly a full-scale war with Iraq would look like in the event that the U.S. will actually try using military force to overthrow Saddam Hussein?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It was possibly the WMDs, but I think post 9/11 hysteria and Bush wanting to both one up daddy and get revenge for daddy (Saddam did try to assassinate him in '93) might've also had a small part in it. I do think however that the Neo Cons (some of which, IRC, seem to be making a comeback in the current administration) in Bush's cabinet were the ones that made the biggest push for it and made it happen .

OK.

Also, by current administration, you mean the Trump administration, correct?

With 9/11 still happening? No, al Qaeda and Bin Laden would be Gore's top priority, we still probably would've bombed the hell out of them though. Without it? All bets are off, Gore was pretty hawkish as a Senator and as VP and Saddam was a headache during the Clinton years.

What about if/after Osama Bin Laden is killed by U.S. forces, though?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Also, out of curiosity--on average, how radicalized do you think that Iraqi Sunni Arabs became by 2003?

Any thoughts on this?
 
Thank you very much for sharing all of this information! :)

Also, though, were Americans aware of what exactly a full-scale war with Iraq would look like in the event that the U.S. will actually try using military force to overthrow Saddam Hussein?

The answer is no, the Gulf War set up elite expectations for a quick short war with a few hundred dead and the US taking Baghdad, but in the years before the war Zarqawi and various actors in the regime set up plans for a shadow war after the war.

When expectations don't meet reality people are angry.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The answer is no, the Gulf War set up elite expectations for a quick short war with a few hundred dead and the US taking Baghdad, but in the years before the war Zarqawi and various actors in the regime set up plans for a shadow war after the war.

When expectations don't meet reality people are angry.
OK. Also, though, exactly what links to Saddam Hussein's government did Zarqawi and people like him have before 2003?
 
Also, out of curiosity--on average, how radicalized do you think that Iraqi Sunni Arabs became by 2003?

Any thoughts on this?

Minimally tens of thousands of young men with military experience where radicalized in the 90s. Enough for many Iraqi military officers and paramilitaries to join Zarqawi and his original group Tawhid wa'l-Jihad (Monotheism and Jihad) some even before Saddam fell.

IS top command dominated by ex-officers in Saddam's army

BAGHDAD — While attending the Iraqi army's artillery school nearly 20 years ago, Ali Omran remembers one major well. An Islamic hard-liner, he once chided Omran for wearing an Iraqi flag pin into the bathroom because it included the words "God is great."

"It is forbidden by religion to bring the name of the Almighty into a defiled place like this," Omran recalled being told by Maj. Taha Taher al-Ani.

Omran didn't see al-Ani again until years later, in 2003. The Americans had invaded Iraq and were storming toward Baghdad. Saddam Hussein's fall was imminent. At a sprawling military base north of the capital, al-Ani was directing the loading of weapons, ammunition and ordnance into trucks to spirit away. He took those weapons with him when he joined Tawhid wa'l-Jihad, a forerunner of al-Qaida's branch in Iraq.

Now al-Ani is a commander in the Islamic State group, said Omran, who rose to become a major general in the Iraqi army and now commands its 5th Division fighting IS. He kept track of his former comrade through Iraq's tribal networks and intelligence gathered by the government's main counterterrorism service, of which he is a member. It's a common trajectory.

The group's second-in-command, al-Baghdadi's deputy, is a former Saddam-era army major, Saud Mohsen Hassan, known by the pseudonyms Abu Mutazz and Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, according to the intelligence chief. Hassan also goes by Fadel al-Hayali, a fake name he used before the fall of Saddam, the intelligence chief told The Associated Press. Like others, he spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the intelligence.

A former brigadier general from Saddam-era special forces, Assem Mohammed Nasser, also known as Nagahy Barakat, led a bold assault in 2014 on Haditha in Anbar province, killing around 25 policemen and briefly taking over the local government building.

Saddam-era veterans also serve as "governors" for seven of the 12 "provinces" set up by the Islamic State group in the territory it holds in Iraq, the intelligence chief said.

One initiative that eventually fed Saddam veterans into IS came in the mid-1990s when Saddam departed from the stringent secular principles of his ruling Baath party and launched the "Faith Campaign," a state-sponsored drive to Islamize Iraqi society. Saddam's feared security agencies began to tolerate religious piety or even radical views among military personnel, although they kept a close watch on them and saw to it they did not assume command positions.

At the time, the move was seen as a cynical bid to shore up political support among the religious establishment after Iraq's humiliating rout from Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War and the Kurdish and Shiite uprisings that followed.

"Most of the army and intelligence officers serving with IS are those who showed clear signs of religious militancy during Saddam days," the intelligence chief said. "The Faith Campaign ... encouraged them."

In the run-up to the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, Saddam publicly invited foreign mujahedeen to come to Iraq to resist the invaders. Thousands came and Iraqi officials showed them off to the media as they were trained by Iraqi instructors. Many stayed, eventually joining the insurgency against American troops and their Iraqi allies.

Al-Qaida in Iraq was initially led by a Jordanian militant, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and had a strong foreign presence in its leadership. But after al-Zarqawi's death in a 2006 U.S. airstrike, his Iraqi successor, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, began to bring in more Iraqis, particularly former Saddam officers. That process was accelerated when Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi took over after his predecessor was killed in a 2010 airstrike.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...-dominated-ex-officers-saddams-army/31332975/

Zarqawi's people could go where they wanted in Iraq because Saddam had a official invitation out to foreign jihadists to come to Iraq train with our troops and prepare for war with America in 2002.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Minimally tens of thousands of young men with military experience where radicalized in the 90s. Enough for many Iraqi military officers and paramilitaries to join Zarqawi and his original group Tawhid wa'l-Jihad (Monotheism and Jihad) some even before Saddam fell.
Thanks for all of this information! :)

Also, two questions:

1. Does this mean that the U.S. did Iraqi Sunni Arabs a huge favor by overthrowing Saddam Hussein and thus halting the Faith Campaign?
2. Do you think that the rise of ISIS was more-or-less inevitable? In other words, do you think that ISIS would have still captured a lot of Iraqi Sunni Arab territory even if Allawi rather than Maliki was Iraqi Prime Minister after 2010?
 
Isn't he relatively isolationist, though?

He campaigned on it, and while I believed it initially, I remember a lot of Neo Cons getting nominated or being put out there as potential nominees, so I no longer believe he is. That is all I will say on the matter as I don't want this thread to tread into "Chat" territory.



Why would Gore lose if he's a war President after 9/11, though?

Bush damn near lost in 2004 OTL (a swing of 100K votes in Ohio would've put Kerry in the White House) due to a weak recovery from the "Dot Com" bust/recession and his handling of the Iraq War. While we may not see an Iraq war under Bush, you'd still have the weak recovery and, on top of that, voter fatigue after 12 years of Democrats in the White House.
 
Thanks for all of this information! :)

Also, two questions:

1. Does this mean that the U.S. did Iraqi Sunni Arabs a huge favor by overthrowing Saddam Hussein and thus halting the Faith Campaign?
2. Do you think that the rise of ISIS was more-or-less inevitable? In other words, do you think that ISIS would have still captured a lot of Iraqi Sunni Arab territory even if Allawi rather than Maliki was Iraqi Prime Minister after 2010?

No war and in my view Iraqi Sunni society continues its trek off the deep end leading to eventual civil war. It continued it anyway in the form of AQI/ISIS, but hopefully its the last gasp of that era in Iraq, but much is up to what people do the next several years.

As for Allawi I won't get into it other then backing Maliki and then leaving Maliki to his own fears and paranoia along with an under developed Iraqi Army wasn't the best of idea, but its water under the bridge.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
No war and in my view Iraqi Sunni society continues its trek off the deep end leading to eventual civil war. It continued it anyway in the form of AQI/ISIS, but hopefully its the last gasp of that era in Iraq, but much is up to what people do the next several years.

OK; understood.

Also, do you think that a post-ISIS reconciliation process in Iraq is likely to be successful?

As for Allawi I won't get into it other then backing Maliki and then leaving Maliki to his own fears and paranoia along with an under developed Iraqi Army wasn't the best of idea, but its water under the bridge.

OK.

Also, do you think that we should have tried putting more pressure on Maliki in 2011 to get a status of forces agreement in Iraq on our own terms?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Also, out of curiosity--do you think that Iraq would have experienced a Sunni Arab rebellion had the U.S. helped the Shiites and Kurds overthrow Saddam Hussein back in 1991? Or were sectarian tensions in Iraq back then not yet that deep--thus preventing a Sunni Arab rebellion from breaking out in Iraq afterwards?
 
Top