Gulf War I?
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
- von Neufeld
- Padawan Learner
- Posts: 188
- Joined: 2003-02-27 03:23pm
Gulf War I?
I have seen people refer to this war as Gulf War III and the liberation of Kuwait as Gulf War II, so what was Gulf War I then?
- Enlightenment
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 2404
- Joined: 2002-07-04 07:38pm
- Location: Annoying nationalist twits since 1990
Re: Gulf War I?
Gulf War I: (US-backed) Iraq verses Iranvon Neufeld wrote:I have seen people refer to this war as Gulf War III and the liberation of Kuwait as Gulf War II, so what was Gulf War I then?
Gulf War II: Iraq verses US & everyone else fighting to restore Kuwait to its rightful dictatorship.
Gulf War III: Iraq verses US fighting to build an empire.
It's not my place in life to make people happy. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to watch me slaughter cows you hold sacred. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to have your basic assumptions challenged. If you want bunnies in light, talk to someone else.
Huh, never heard of the Iran-Iraq War (80-88) refered to as a "Gulf War" per se, bit I suppose it works.
Yes , the Kuwaitis are bastards, but like Saddam before he fucked up, they are OUR bastards. And indeed we supported his war witrh Iran, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, even if hes a psychopath
Welcome to Realpolitik 101
Love your summations of each conflict.Gulf War II: Iraq verses US & everyone else fighting to restore Kuwait to its rightful dictatorship.
Gulf War III: Iraq verses US fighting to build an empire.
Yes , the Kuwaitis are bastards, but like Saddam before he fucked up, they are OUR bastards. And indeed we supported his war witrh Iran, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, even if hes a psychopath
Welcome to Realpolitik 101
BotM
- The Duchess of Zeon
- Gözde
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
- Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.
We actually supported both sides in the First Persian Gulf War.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.
In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
- Darksider
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 5271
- Joined: 2002-12-13 02:56pm
- Location: America's decaying industrial armpit.
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:We actually supported both sides in the First Persian Gulf War.
Didn't we just sell the iranians weapons to get out hostages back???
And this is why you don't watch anything produced by Ronald D. Moore after he had his brain surgically removed and replaced with a bag of elephant semen.-Gramzamber, on why Caprica sucks
-
- SMAKIBBFB
- Posts: 19195
- Joined: 2002-07-28 12:30pm
- Contact:
- Dark Hellion
- Permanent n00b
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: 2002-08-25 07:56pm
WE ARE NOT BUILDING A FUCKING EMPIRE. IF I HEAR THIS ONE MORE TIME I AM GOING TO KILL SOMEONE. If we are building an empire like so many claim, why not conquer Mexico. Its a neighboring country that expands our nation and gives an immense supply of cheap labor for further empire building. Its not like anyone in the world can stop us. The U.N. couldn't do jackshit if the U.S. really wanted to build an empire. We are top dogs and our access to WMD gives us a type of godhead. Bow before us or suffer pestilence, famine, war, and death. We will flood your streets with plague and rain fire on your city.
Guess what. WE don't.
Sure we are fighting this war for oil. But the guise of peaceful Iraq is a good one and actually noble one as well. If we go through on our word, we will do a great service to the Arab world dispite our less than perfect intentions.
Guess what. WE don't.
Sure we are fighting this war for oil. But the guise of peaceful Iraq is a good one and actually noble one as well. If we go through on our word, we will do a great service to the Arab world dispite our less than perfect intentions.
A teenage girl is just a teenage boy who can get laid.
-GTO
We're not just doing this for money; we're doing this for a shitload of money!
-GTO
We're not just doing this for money; we're doing this for a shitload of money!
- Darth Yoshi
- Metroid
- Posts: 7342
- Joined: 2002-07-04 10:00pm
- Location: Seattle
- Contact:
We're building an Empire! :p And we did sell the Iranians weapons. There was the public deal for the hostages, and some thorugh an Israeli intermediary some time after that.
Fragment of the Lord of Nightmares, release thy heavenly retribution. Blade of cold, black nothingness: become my power, become my body. Together, let us walk the path of destruction and smash even the souls of the Gods! RAGNA BLADE!
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
It's more accurate to say the Iraq was sponsored by France and Russia before and during it's war with Iran. All their weapons came from those two countries, and France even supplied a nuclear reactor to Saddam, with the express purpose of allowing him to develop nuclear weapons. You can't have a more loving international relationship than when you're willing to support their nuke program. The US was a pretty minor suger-daddy to Saddam in comparison.
"Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, "Yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down, down, down. Amen!" If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it."
- Dan Barker
- Dan Barker
- Enlightenment
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 2404
- Joined: 2002-07-04 07:38pm
- Location: Annoying nationalist twits since 1990
Rumpsfelt disagrees with you.Dark Hellion wrote:WE ARE NOT BUILDING A FUCKING EMPIRE.
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.
Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.
Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:
• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
It's not my place in life to make people happy. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to watch me slaughter cows you hold sacred. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to have your basic assumptions challenged. If you want bunnies in light, talk to someone else.
- Stormbringer
- King of Democracy
- Posts: 22678
- Joined: 2002-07-15 11:22pm
- Enlightenment
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 2404
- Joined: 2002-07-04 07:38pm
- Location: Annoying nationalist twits since 1990
Stormbringer wrote:And that equates to Empire Building outside of your own delusions how?
Translation: we have a white mans' burden to bring our brand civilization to the savages regardless of if they happen to want it or not.we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
It's not my place in life to make people happy. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to watch me slaughter cows you hold sacred. Don't talk to me unless you're prepared to have your basic assumptions challenged. If you want bunnies in light, talk to someone else.
- Stormbringer
- King of Democracy
- Posts: 22678
- Joined: 2002-07-15 11:22pm
Sounds to me like it's more a case where we want to build a world where people don't fly planes into are buildings. It sounds to me like they are simply trying to build good will and a world friendly to the US.Enlightenment wrote:Translation: we have a white mans' burden to bring our brand civilization to the savages regardless of if they happen to want it or not.we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
That's a highly ambiguos quote to accuse them of trying to build an American Empire.
Translation: leap in logic.Translation: we have a white mans' burden to bring our brand civilization to the savages regardless of if they happen to want it or not.
BoTM / JL / MM / HAB / VRWC / Horseman
I'm studying for the CPA exam. Have a nice summer, and if you're down just sit back and realize that Joe is off somewhere, doing much worse than you are.