In the first gulf war what was the probability of success of America compared to Iraq? Can you explain?
369362
A higher probabilty.\n\nBecause in the 91 war, the war plans were drawn up properly with a complete set of goals in mind. IE- Push Iraq out of Kuwait. \n\nWith the war in Iraq now, the US government really messed up but won't admit it of course.
248249
The military for the most part are indoctrinated and trained to respond that way, however a sample of 150 is not adequate . You need closer to 1000 samples for any kind of confidence in the data and by that I mean a 95% level of accuracy.\n\nI knew guys that were happy to be in Nam, ( at first ).\nAlot of Americans already believe civil war has already started.\n\nAs for all the good things happening in Iraq, they seemed to be better off before our invasion and occupation.  We did a lot of good things in South Vietnam too.  It would be too demoralizing for the US forces to even entertain the idea that we are there to secure access to Middle Eastern oil, \nbut this is what this operation is really about.\n\nFreedom, democracy, the war on terra, or...WMDs, are all handy buzzwords that can provide justification to help someone get with the program.  When I was in the military I did not\nsee a lot of critical or analytical thinking any more than I do now.\nWe had the domino theory, back then.
344006
You are example of American. Yeah, be a pimp and nuke Iraq because 9/11 which happened AFTER first Gulf War.
918289
I think that the war in Iraq is a war that cannot be won just like the war on terror, sure we can do things to help the cause but the actual war/wars are not going to be won. I just cant believe how many people still think that we can win this war. I don't know if it is worse than Vietnam, we lost over 50,000 people there but the long term ramifications of this war cannot be measured.
235647
The goal of gulf war 1 was to get Saddam out of Kuwait. That was accomplished. The goal of gulf war 2 was to enforce over a decade of United Nations resolutions that were not being met. also, the terms of surrender that Saddam agreed to in gulf war 1 were not met. whether or not WMD were found is irrelevant, Saddam was not meeting his obligations that he agreed to. Saddam would not allow confirmation of the status of his WMD capability, and given his prior record, i am certainly glad we didn't take his word for it. One thing i will agree with you on, without question, is i wish the best for your son and all the other brave men and women deployed around the world. No matter what you believe about how we got into this situation, everyone needs to get behind that!
206868
NO DOUBT .. America is doomed.. b/c Wise men have told us that when God makes a man or a nation mad, it is a sign of His will to destroy them NO TEARS for that. But the tragedy is that when it falls, it won't be alone, it will take others >> Iraq is the first nation & Iran will follow pronto.
54857
It's Iraq, and the oil is important, but only to control militaries and sustain ours to enforce the economy. This is one of the "benefits" and or motives of invading Iraq however, we invaded Iraq because Hussein sported the idea of Arab nationalism which would have created a middle eastern european union and challenge our economy and therefore our idea of security. Is this right no, but I can see how some politicians could see this as noble. Also our economy is one of scales. Meaning that the more that is produced the cheaper it is too make a product. In the era of soft money it is feasible and happening that contrators need perpetual war to sustain themselves and hence our economy.
444655
Active Army Enlisted, OIF II Veteran.  Despite what is commonly seen in the press and the news networks, the country is steadily improving.  To date, there have been multiple, successful elections, constant improved infrastructure (schools, hospitals, roadways, pipelines, etc.) and a better trained, better supplied military (to include APCs and transport aircraft).\n\nOf course, starting from nothing after the invasion, to it's expected goal, will obviously take a long time.  However, the US must accept the direction Iraq wishes to take with its newfound democracy.  This is a double edge sword that can result in not only a free and successful Iraq, but also a fundamentalist nation, not to far from similar states such as Iran or Palestine.\n\nOne thing that must be remembered that in order to prevent further instability, the US and UK must not force a stable democracy to fast in Iraq.  As it has been seen is many other nations such as Rwanda in the 1990s, when foreign governments intervene with the good intention to produce a stable nation before sed nation is ready to embrace a "mature democracy", the result is further instability and therefore, in the case of Iraq, the increased continued presence of US troops in Iraq.\n\nCase in point, the US was not considered a mature democracy, recognizable to the rest of the world as a first world, influential nation till about 1940 to 1960, around to 180 years after the nation was founded.  As stated before, Iraq needs time and the freedom to set its own government at its own pace.
412719
The War was not "Legal", if any war could be justified in Law. Saddam was an Evil Dictator, but there are plenty of those in the World, some of the Allied to the USA (Hello Saudi Arabia!) There were no WMD's, but Loads of Oil, and no one seemed to have a clue what to do After we got rid of old Saddam. I think the Western powers did all they could to keep civilian casualties to a minimum, but I also believe that the USA and Britain went to war to secure a strategic resource, and for no other reason. 9/1 had nothing to do with Iraq, and that is a given. I think depending on the outcome History will judge the war as a naked show of aggression against a foreign power, with good or bad results. We will see.
1110700
No-one will win or lose, just like no-one is winning or losing in Afghanistan or Iraq. Some americans will believe that they would have won because they killed another hundred thousand people. They will convince themselves of that and blame the liberals and the liberal media when the world turns against them. Just like some of them still think that they actually won in Vietnam, really they did, but the hippies made them lose it all.  Just see the comment above and you'll know the mindset.
166073
Gulf War (1990-91)\n\n    * Shortly after the war, the US Defense Intelligence Agency made a very rough estimate of 100,000 Iraqi deaths, and this order of magnitude is widely accepted -- even improved upon:\n          o B&J: 50,000 to 100,000\n          o Compton's: 150,000 Iraqi soldiers killed\n          o World Political Almanac 3rd: 150,000 incl. civilians.\n          o Our Times: 200,000.\n    * Other authoritative sources working with more detailed data have come up with lower numbers:\n          o The British govt. put the death toll at 30,000 (War Annual 6, 1994)\n          o A May 1992 report by the US House Armed Services Committee estimated that 9,000 Iraqi soldiers were killed by the air campaign. [http://es.rice.edu/projects/Poli378/Gulf/aspin_rpt.html]\n          o The PBS news show Frontline estimates 2300 civilians, 10-20,000 military in air war and, 10,000 military in the ground war; for a total of 27,300 ±5000. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/appendix/death.html)
219666
bagdad was always a hub of commerce & society. americans were safe up until the invasion. it was one of the last places in the middle east that i could get a drink, a woman could dress in modern clothes & have a job, gays were tollerated, trade was unrestricted & all people were welcome to enjoy all there was to offer. the only standing concern was to pisoff saddam.
944711
No, it has never been proven that Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attack.  On the other hand we know that  Saudi Arabians made up the majority of those actually involved in the attacks that awlful day.  Our invasion of Iraq has cost the USA many of our sons and daugthers lives and wounded thousands, changing their lives forever, on top of that thousands of Iraq's citizens have been killed and thousands have fled their homeland since we went in to make their lives BETTER....  Now we have created a terrorist haven and brought Iraq to the point of civil war and the present administration does not have a clue as to how this all can be resolved.  They had done so little research about Iraq that they thought we would be welcomed as liberating heroes and the battle would be over when we stopped bombing.  Now three years later the situation in Iraq is worse not better.  What a mess!!
610433
You are right it is Mission failed, because it was all about power rather than humanity. \n\nBecause the mission did not plan for contingency. All they planned was an unloading of hardware. \n\nNo real study of the culture in Iraq was made prior to the assault, to ensure of developing a democratic country suitable for the people and cultures of Iraq. Perhaps the US will finally get, that not all of the world’s citizens want to be American Clones. \nIt was a sham what happened after invasion and its not just Americans who need to carry the shame. \n\nTo many egos where at the front of the decision making hierarchy. It was all about power rather than humanity\n\nI would be interested to hear what Americans believe would have been a "good purpose" getting control of the oil fields? Or helping the people?
574053
The original premise for invading Iraq was the alleged presence of WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and possible ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda.  Both allegations have been proven false since the invasion.  Whether Saddam's overthrow has made the region more stable will not be answered for years, possibly decades.\n\nThere are parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.  In both conflicts, our troops were not fighting an enemy which clearly identifies itself.  Another similarity shared by Iraq and Vietnam is the lack of well-defined goals for victory.\n\nWhile it has been speculated oil was the primary reason for invading Iraq, that remains largely unproven.  Statistically speaking, Canada and Mexico provide the largest chunk of imported crude oil to the United States, followed by Saudi Arabia.  It appears the decision to invade Iraq was based more on socio-political reasons (i.e. establishing a Western-friendly regime) than it was for acquiring natural resources.
217824
Sorry, no newspapers or statistics.\n\nThe US destroyed Iraq, made the situation so bad that a civil war is gonna happen, in which some neighbour countries will certainly interfere.\n\nSo -even if I was against the war- YES, I think the US or even better a bigger coalition (UN, including Germany, France and Russia- by the way they're already doing it) should stay for a long time, and reconstruct the country. Anything else would be "we came, we bombed, we staid long enough to make a mess, an then left because we didn't plan anything and the situation was too complicated for us".
921992
'Republican Plan' 'Success in Iraq' are an oxymoron. They had, never had, or will have a plan for success. What they did have was a plan to steal oil.