First Iraq War

It would seem the United States is again contemplating launching a war on Iraq, it is having some difficult drumming up support. The leaders of Arab countries have voiced strong public objections on attack on fellow Arabs in Iraq. The Arabs after being forced into the first War are now openly expressing opposition to military actions. They do not want thousands of Western troops running amuck in their own countries. An attack Iraq by the West would stregthen extremist groups in these countries. In many Arab countries, a U>S> military strike could in fact. produce horrible repercussions in the Arab world giving ammunition to Islamic extremist. This would lead to a weakening of moderate support in these countries. The United States first began to destroy Iraq because Iraq supposedly began a war with Kuwait, however, the Iraq invasion of Kuwait was justified and supported by a majority of the Arab world.

Gulf War vs Iraq War: Media Coverge

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/business/media/24press.html

The link above brings you to an article from the New York Times called "The War Endures, but Where's the Media?". This article points out the fact that after several years of being at war in Iraq. American's have almost forgotten the war is still going on. The media coverage of the Iraq War has diminshed greatly in the past several years. The war is no longer on the front page of major newspapers or lead stories on the news. It's no wonder this war has been nicknamed "The Forgotten War".

The media coverage of the Iraq War differs so much from that of the Gulf War. This war was constantly covered by many media outlets until it ended. Not once did the American public forget about the war in the Gulf.

Environmental Aftermath in Afghanistan

"It is estimated that ten thousand villages, and their surrounding environments were destroyed. Safe drinking water declined, because of a destruction of water infrastructure and resulting leaks, bacterial contamination and water theft."

Not only have numerous amounts of people been killed during this on going war but, the environment has taken on a huge toll as well. Drinking water became destroyed and contamination ruined many other sources for people. All of this contamination comes from bombs, humans, and poor placement of things like landfills. Air pollution from things like bombs, planes and other machinery have take a large toll on Afghanistan as well. The air quality has become more poor and has been know to cause harm to people in the certain parts of the country.

The wildlife and their habitats have become scarce as well. The Taliban destroyed a lot of the forest during the peak of the war because they needed the timber to illegally trade. The US troops destroyed most of the rest of the forests during bombings and when they were in need of firewood. "Less than 2% of the country still contains a forest cover today." The number of migratory birds through Afghanistan has decreased along with mountain wildlife. Some of the mountain wildlife, such as leopards, have found refuge but others are captured and traded for crossing country boarders.

Think again, the thousands of deaths caused due to the war as well as the finances for the war are not the only problems that have escalated. Afghanistan is now struggling environmentally due to pollution and deforestation from this prolonged war.


Source & Quotes: http://www.lenntech.com/environmental-effects-war.htm#ixzz1gHi4ugVZ

A Look Back- First Memories

I really enjoyed reading this article. It talks about the beginning of the war and what has become of it in this modern day. It discusses the difficulty America had when they first arrived. Most Iraqi's were unsure if they should be grateful for our help or if they should fight us away. We were a foreign country forcing our way into theirs whether they wanted the help or not. At the time of first arrival it is understandable as to why Iraqis would be nervous and uncooperative with Americans. They withheld information about where dangerous people were located and further information on possible whereabouts of possible Al-Qaeda members.

This article has conversations soldiers had with some Iraqis when they first got into their country. Many did not want to talk to the Americans because they did not know if they could trust them. One man asks an American soldier if his son can touch him. Befuddled, the man asks why. The Iraqi man tells him he wants his son to be able to say he touched the man who had brought him freedom when the war comes to an end. It is interesting to see the different mindsets Iraqis had towards these American soldiers. It is also disheartening to know that after 20 years children like this mans are still living in a very harmful place that is far from free.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/12/03/143090345/a-look-back-the-beginning-of-the-war-in-iraq?ft=1&f=1010

The End of The Iraq War

After all the time that has passed America is finally throwing in the towel on this ongoing battle. This article discusses the goals that were first initiated at the beginning of this war. It then discusses how America has fallen short of those goals. America tried its hardest to lend a helping hand all these years but the effort just is not worth it at this point. After nearly 4,500 Americans losing their lives, many people can now live with a little more ease knowing it will be over soon.

However, despite America pulling out, the Iraqis are still in a struggle to turn their country into a fully functioning democracy. One person reported that America has brought them about half way to reach their goal of freedom. They must now use their resources and what they have learned from America to try and make their country what it has desired to be. "America will not be abandoning Iraq. The U.S. will leave behind thousands of diplomats and security contractors, whose presence will influence the direction of the country for years to come. Still, the disappearance of uniformed troops will have a profound effect on Iraqis in ways that will take years to define." America is not completely releasing all there duties in Iraq. They have spent a lot of time there trying to make things right and even though soldiers are finally going to come home, our country is still making sure it can help out with guiding Iraq the other half of the way to reach their goal.

article source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=143503849

Waste, Fraud, and Abuse-61 billion dollars of American Spending

http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=143532101&m=143532204

This is an interview with the special inspector for Iraq reconstruction. He has performed numerous amounts of audits looking in depth into the spending in Iraq. Even today, when he has recently been to Iraq, he speaks of other auditors still there conducting investigations. There are more cons than pros brought to the listeners attention of America's accomplishments after spending 21 years in this country. Now that the US is pulling out of the long Iraq War there is a discussion about how it will affect their reconstruction projects that still need more time and money to finish.

This is a very interesting interview. Recent news about Iraq is discussed as our country plans for the future. There is also interesting information about what has changed as these two decades have gone by. Something that caught my attention was when he states 6-8 million dollars was wasted just due to poor planning, management oversight, and the lack of clarity of who is in charge of the reconstruction project. What is our tax money funding? Is it being wasted or put to good use?

Potential Causes of Gulf War Illness: Environmental and Occupational Exposures

Many Gulf War veterans have experienced a variety of physical symptoms, collectively called Gulf War illnesses. In response to veterans’ concerns, the Department of Defense established a task force in June 1995 to investigate those incidents and circumstances related to possible causes of these unexplained illnesses. The Office of the Special Assistant assumed responsibility for these investigations on November 12, 1996, and continues to gather information on environmental and occupational exposures during the Gulf War and their possible effects on the health of the troops who served there. 

US military personnel who served in the Gulf War were not only exposed to chemicals in the environment; they were also exposed to chemicals associated with their occupational activities as described in this article. For example, pesticides were widely used to control insects, rodents, and other disease-carrying pests. These pesticides were applied where veterans worked, ate, and slept. Some members of the general military population, that is, applicators who were involved in the day-to-day handling and use of pesticides, and who did not wear personal protective equipment, may have been exposed to certain pesticides above levels considered safe for human health. This is a concern because if improperly used, pesticides have the potential to cause adverse health effects. In addition to pesticides, other occupationally related issues included chemical agent resistant coating (CARC) paint, retrograde contaminated equipment, and depleted uranium. Furthermore and along with the occupationally related issued were the environmentally related issues that included exposure to oil well fire smoke, particulate matter, and contaminated water. 

 

References: http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/story/envs.jsp

 

Gulf War vs Iraq War: Time Magazine Covers

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1991/1101910128_400.jpg

In the link above, an image of Time Magazine is shown with the words "War In The Gulf" on the cover. The word "War" is in huge block lettering making it impossible to miss. It also shows an image taken of Baghdad on January 17th which was when Desert Storm began. The image shows an accurate depiction of what exactly was going on that night.


http://www.people.com.cn/mediafile/pic/20100902/15/13188662280536908107.jpg

The link above brings you to an image of a Time Magazine cover that reads "Are We Stretched Too Thin?". This of course refers to the Iraq War and asks the question if the American government has bitten off more than they can chew with the Iraq War. The image shows a soldier with the world on his back whiling trying to reach his rifle. In my opinion, this sends a strong message about doing too much. I believe we are being "stretched too thin".

Why was the U.S. Interested in Saddam Hussein and his Invasion of Kuwait?

Strategist, statesmen and the general public quickly came to understand that the United States had significant interests in making certain that Saudi Arabia was not conquered by Saddam Hussein and his regime. Having rolled over Kuwait, Saddam already controlled over 20 percent of the world's oil reserves. Saudi Arabia contained an additional 20 percent. Since the world economy was primarily driven by fossil fuels, what Saddam could do with these resources could have been detrimental to both the American and world economies. 

Besides economic factors affecting the daily lives of every American, there were other considerations, even more important with respect to Saddam, such as his invasion of Kuwait that had perpetrated many atrocities on the Kuwaiti people, from summary executions, to confiscation of property, to the torture and degradation of individuals. Such crimes could not be ignored, and Americans had every reason to expect that this kind of behavior would continue and even accelerate should Iraqi forces move into Saudi Arabia. 

Further, Saddam and his regime had been vigorous in developing weapons of mass destruction. CIA and other intelligent experts estimated that Saddam was on the brink of developing nuclear capability and likely had a biological weapon's capability. There was no question that they had chemical weapons. Moreover, Saddam showed that he was ready, willing and able to use these weapons, as he had even done so using chemical weapons on villages within his own country in order to put down the Kurdish independence movement. 

Economic sanctions had failed to keep Saddam from committing atrocities, they had failed to keep him from developing weapons of mass destruction, they had failed to keep him from invading Kuwait. A majority of Americans understood that military force was not only justified, but it was absolutely necessary. 

References: http://www.indepthinfo.com/iraq/

Gulf War vs Iraq War: Costs

http://people.psych.cornell.edu/~fhoran/gulf/GW_cost/GW_payments.html

The link posted above shows how much money was spent to fund the Gulf War which was approximately $61 billion . The link also states that about $54 billion was paid by other countries in the coalition. When taken into account, the US really only paid about $7 billion of the total cost of the Gulf War.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/t/cost-iraq-war-could-surpass-trillion/#.TuUAEdWwVEM

The cost of the Iraq War, which is stilling going up everyday, is shown in the link above. Many experts believe the full cost of the Iraq War could go as high as $1 trillion or more! That is a ridiculous amount of money to be spent on a "forgotten war". Who will pay for this war? How will it be eventually paid? These are all questions Americans need to know.

Gulf War vs Iraq War: Timeline

http://www.warchronicle.com/iraq/news/timeline_two_wars.htm

In the link above, there is a timeline showing the progression of the Gulf War all the way into the Iraq War. The timeline begins with the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein in Iraq on August 2nd 1990. This timeline then goes on to show when the U.S. got involved and the beginning of Desert Storm. On March 3rd 1991, Iraq agrees to a ceasefire. It wasn't until March 19th that the Iraq War officially started.

The Aftermath of the Gulf War and the Eventual End of Saddam's Regime

On February 27, 1991, after 100 hours of ground war, US President Bush declared a ceasefire. At this point, the Iraqi military had been driven from Kuwait, and Allied forces were deep inside Iraq.

At the time of the ceasefire, Shiites and Kurds within Iraq, encouraged by American radio broadcasts, rose up against Saddam Hussein’s regime. With the Iraqi military greatly weakened, the regime's loyalist Republican heavily bombed, and with much of the population in open revolt, few outside observers expected Hussein to be able to stay in power for too much longer. In spite of these predictions, he was able to defeat the revolts and retain power. In retrospect, the fact that the international Coalition did not go on to capture Baghdad and overthrow the Ba'athist regime, has sometimes been heavily criticized - but the reality is that very few countries in the Coalition would have been willing to do so.

Because Hussein remained in power, Britain and the United States had no choice but to continue to maintain significant military forces in the region for the next few years. Allied forces attempted to enforce United Nations provisions, particularly those relating to no-fly-zones for Iraqi military aircraft, the continued economic embargo on Iraq, and disarmament. During this period, there were repeated confrontations between Allied and Iraqi forces.

Finally, in 2003, after a changed political situation following the September 11^th attacks on the United States, and yet another crisis over Iraqi disarmament, Allied forces, led by the United States and Britain, invaded Iraq and overthrew Hussein’s regime. He was then subsequently tried, convicted and then executed by his own people on December 30, 2006, and thus finally putting an end to his regime.

References:     http://www.historyguy.com/GulfWar.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/crisis_in_the_gulf/decision_makers_and_diplomacy/216328.stm

Could “Desert Storm Two” aka “Operation Iraqi Freedom” been avoided?

While doing some continued research and reading about the First Gulf War, I came across this very interesting this article that really makes the reader think. The author asks an interesting question: Did Desert Storm end too quickly, enabling much of Saddam Hussein's army to escape from Kuwait and ensuring the Iraqi dictator would remain a threat for years to come? In the article, retired Marine Lt. Gen. Walter Boomer was interviewed, asked this question and answered yes to it. Boomer commanded all of the U.S. Marines in the first Persian Gulf War that began almost 21 years ago this upcoming January.

To this day Boomer remains convinced that had Operation Desert Storm last only 72 more hours that “we could have killed or captured most of the remaining Iraqi soldiers as they fled Kuwait and were between the MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force] and Basra.” Even though the ground war combat had not been as fierce as expected, Boomer said he knew the Iraqis were fleeing with most of their forces intact. “We had taken 22,000 Iraqi prisoners,” he said. Left unsaid was that Iraq had an army of some half a million in theater. The vast majority were still alive, although much of their armor, artillery and other equipment had been destroyed. Given the order to pursue, the allies “would have left Hussein without an effective army,” Boomer said, “and the future of his regime would have been very bleak – in my opinion.”

I thought this was such an interesting thing to think about. Imaging if the fighting lasted for just a few more days, could that have brought down Sadam Hussein once and for all and thus, Operation Iraqi Freedom would never have been? I suppose we will never know the answer to this question, but it is certainly one I have never pondered and is certainly something for those in command, to think about in conflicts to come. We need to learn to finish what we start and not leave a battle or war early, but leave when the job has been complete. If we do this hopefully it will help to avoid future conflict.

References: http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/8946142/

Gulf War vs Iraq War: Protests?

War and Terrorism Collection - Document

During the Iraq War, which started in 2003, there were many people who greatly disagreed with the decision to invade Afghanistan. Media coverage constantly showed the American disapproval of the Iraq War. Many believed it was completely unnecessary. However, during the Gulf War, there were very few anti-war protests. Why is that? I believe that was because the Gulf War went well. In my opinion, people will be more likely to approve of a war if it is going well and is thought of as a "just war".

The Finance Aftermath- Finances Past Due

"By 2009, funds for Iraq and Afghanistan fighting had totaled $1 trillion. Over the same time period, another $1 trillion had been added to core budget spending."

It seems as though many different house representatives have given proposals on how to tax the people to help begin paying for the war but, none of the plans have taken action. "In 2009, Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.), Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and others in the House called for one. It would have established a 1 percent surtax on what each taxpayer owed, plus an additional percentage on returns where the higher-income payer owed $22,600 or more." At this point, any plan would help to being paying for the war. As a country, if we keep putting off these billions of dollars for future generations to pay back, our economy will most likely fail. Every small dollar counts when the total amount owed is sky high.“If we don’t address the cost of this war, we will continue shoving billions of dollars in taxes off on future generations and will devour money that could be used to rebuild our economy.” (Obey). Our economy is already in a tough spot, although it is trying to come back, but all of this money spent on the war could help piece together our economy bit by bit.

Another proposal made by Senator Al Franken "took another approach, introducing a resolution that would have required Obama or a future president to find funding at the same time he or she planned to send U.S. troops into combat situations." This plan makes plenty of sense. If the president is unable to find sufficient funding, then the country would have to face budget cuts or added revenue. By not choosing a plan and putting all of these finances for the war off, the government is making the billions of dollars spent on the war a problem for future generations. “Who will bear the financial sacrifice, the generation that has decided to go to war or its children and grandchildren?” (Franken). Later generations are going to be responsible for the finances of a war that they did not cause nor have any recollection of. If the Senate budget committee could decide on a resolution on how to pay back this massive amount of money, our country may be able to make a turn

around.

Source & Quotes:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/were-past-due-on-handling-the-finances-of-war/2011/12/02/gIQAL0epXO_story.html

Veterans Transition from "Combat to College"

As young veterans return from their tours in Iraq, many of them plan to pursue an education. Brian Hawthorne, who served twice as a medic in Iraq, found himself lost in a sea of students at George Washington University "who didn't know anyone in the military." As he began studying he became concerned because he wasn't understanding much. He looked for help on campus and was directed to Veterans Affair Medical Center. Doctors diagnosed Hawthore with a mild brain traumatic injury, which they said was probably caused from being close to bomb blasts overseas. This is just one of the many stories about veterans trying to transition back to a normal life after combat.

"Some student veterans say they have little in common with their younger, more sheltered classmates whose concerns typically revolve around their social lives and separating from their parents." Many typical college students would not be able to point out veterans unless they were told. The only difference about them is how they are dealing with their day to day lives. For example, Brian Hawthorne (mentioned earlier) was concerned with his grades and sought help. Other students are worried about their social lives at college and where tonights party is. Some veteran students also feel that they are "put on the spot when they are singled out in class by well-meaning faculty members who solicit their views on foreign policy." Although professors do not try to make those students feel uncomfortable, they do it without knowing. Veterans are afraid to admit that they are having difficulty and feel uncomfortable when put on the spot. Along with veterans dealing with their injuries and post-war stress, suicide has also become a factor in their lives after war.

"A study of 525 student veterans published last month and conducted with the help of the Student Veterans Association (SVA), a national advocacy group with chapters on 400 campuses, found that 46 percent had contemplated suicide." 46 percent is a high number, but it all makes sense. It seems as though many veterans keep their feelings and experiences in and they build up. A mind of a veteran is something that an everyday person can't understand. People, especially veterans college classmates, don't know how to cope with someone who has experienced such gruesome events at such a young age. Colleges are taking action in different ways. The University of Texas at Austin opened a veterans center on campus. At the center, a psychologist from the Department of Veterans Affairs will be available for student veterans. Other campuses have held sessions to train college counselors to deal with student veterans. Even though student veterans just want to be like any other student on a college campus, they should be payed attention to because they are at risk whether it be academically or personally.

Source & Quotes: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/veterans-find-that-their-transition-from-combat-to-college-can-be-difficult/2011/10/20/gIQAugW54N_story.html

Events of War

The war began January 16, 1991, with the coalition launching an air assault on Iraq and its

troops and military installations in Kuwait. The assault, which lasted 38 days, destroyed much of

Iraq's war-making capabilities; when the ground attack began February 24, coalition forces were

virtually unopposed and they defeated Iraqi ground troops within 100 hours. Hostilities ended

with a temporary cease-fire on February 27. Iraq agreed to terms of a United Nations

permanent cease-fire on April 6, 1991. The Persian Gulf War marks the first time in history that

air power played the most important role in deciding the outcome of a war>S launched

“Operation Desert Storm and Iraq and its people. It’s crazy to see how we just went to War with

them over oil and unleashed on the poor country. Even though Kuwait was oil rich country but it

had some laws. Women had no right and men were in charge. It’s just a country were men were

only in control and will always be right no matter what happens to them. Although, America had

send 88,000.00 tons of bombs into Iraqi people and many places were not even targets and they

just were hit on homes and it didn’t matter who lived in the homes. I just feel it’s wrong that

many people say that it was a lie that they had a locations were the bombs were going but many

says it’s a lie. But what about the soldiers that were also injured and many of them died or were

hurt. Did U>S> think about bombing that country that many people will get hurt for no reason

but because they wanted to start a war. But there is no really proof of Saddam Hussein used

weapons of his invasion in Kuwait. But I guess its up to who had the details and went along with

it.

Summary

                                                “Summary“

     The few public statements issued after July 24, 1994 stressed time and time again that the U.S.A. have no defense treaties or security commitments with Kuwait.1.  Events leading up to the use of United States forces before the actual fighting began to cause me to wonder how truthful the above statement is.  The United States ends up spending $61 - $71 billion dollars, and 550,000 troops to the effort.2.  The United States Congress in addition votes to authorize the use of American forces to push Iraqi forces out of Kuwait.

     Kuwait’s, head of security, Brigadier Fahd Ahmed Al-Fahd states subsequent to the Iraqi invasion, ‘We agreed with the American side that it was important to take advantage of the deteriorating economic situation in Iraq in order to put pressure on that country”.2.  U.S. Secretary of State, James Baker, in a meeting with Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz, tries to hand a letter to Mr. Aziz from President Bush.  Mr. Aziz states he could not accept the letter, saying, “The language in the letter was not compatible with language between heads of state”.3.  Mr. Baker also goes in front of NATO and warns them that Iraq may attempt a partial pullout from Kuwait as a way to weaken the coalition.  Mr. Baker states strongly that, “ NATO endorses the American pullout by January 15, 1991, and is acceptable to the coalition”.3.

     United States actions prior to the Iraqi invasion and prior to the coalition attack to push Iraq out of Kuwait is consistent with a policy of how deep United States involvement contrary to U.S. statements  and U.S. actions show a deep commitment and/or involvement in Middle East affairs.  It is possible to conclude that the United States managed this crisis, and in the end benefited most by all that happened.

     Kuwait is encouraged to pressure Iraq by keeping oil prices low.  They do this by producing more oil than the OPEC quota calls for.  Kuwait starting in 1987 finds itself on the receiving end of American military technology and advisors.  Saudi Arabia feels vulnerable as a result of Iraqi actions.  Iraq threatens other Arab states who are perceived to be American allies.  United States Ambassador to Iraq is perceived by Iraq as giving a green light to Iraqi moves against Kuwait.  Iraq invades and occupies Kuwait and the United States then forms an international coalition to punish Iraq.

     United States Forces as a result of the above, is now in the Middle East in a big way.  Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Arab Emirates are forced to accept the fact that without a U.S. guarantee, their long term existence could be in question.  Iraq, Syria and/or Iran could be in a position to affect United States and its allies energy supplies, thus able to make a serious threat against the economies of the West.  This interference with world oil supplies has now been made more difficult with the active involvement of the United States.

     Prior to the Iraq aggression, it was almost impossible for the United States to put military forces in the Middle East.  This fact was mostly due to the United States support for Israel.  Most Arabs were strongly anti-American because of this Israeli support.  Arab governments had to be careful in how they were involved with the United States or they would find themselves being protested against.  Now, with Iraq’s aggression and Arab concern over Iran (Persia), it is almost impossible for the Middle East to see when U. S. forces will leave the area.

  

                                                            Works Cited:

1. http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article -213.shtml. Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait.
2.  
3. http://www.experts.about.com/e/g/gu/gulf-war.htm. Gulf War Experts.

4. http://www.nytimes.com/1990/12/18/world/standoff-in-the-gulf-a-partial-pullout-by-Iraq-is-feared-as-deadline-ploy.html. Confrontation in the Gulf as U.S. officials see it.

"U.S. Reasons for Seeing Iraq Brought Down" - Part II:

                        “U.S. Reasons For Seeing Iraq Brought Down “

                                                Part II:

     Questions that must be asked based on information available from different sources.

1. Did the United States want to see Iraqi’s power reduced?
2. Did the U.S. put in place policies that caused Iraq to miscalculate the United States reaction to their forceful take over of Kuwait?  If the answer to the above two questions is yes, then why did the United States pursue the above courses of action?

     This paper opens emphasizing an event that occurs shortly after Iraq captures Kuwait.  Iraq produces a captured Kuwaiti memo of a November 1989 meeting between Central Intelligence Agency, (C.I.A.), director William Casey and a Kuwaiti General Al-Fahd.  This memo purporsely shows the United States and Kuwait conspiring to destabilize Iraq by keeping oil prices artificially low. The Washington Post reports the Kuwaiti Foreign Minister faints when confronted with the memo.  Both the United States and Kuwait declare it a forgery.  “Critics of the C.I.A. and Kuwait point to the memo’s vagueness as proof it was real”.1.

     Why would the United States want to destabilize Iraq?  It could be because Iraq had just concluded an exhausting war with Iran and was now looking to flex its military muscle on the oil producing states in OPEC.  The New York Times reported that according Mehdi Varzi, a London based oil analyst, an historic meeting of OPEC in July 1990, a “Historic Turning Point may have been reached”.2.  Iraq at this meeting flexed its military muscle and forced Kuwait and the Arab Emirates to back down from their overproduction of oil above OPEC quotas.  Iraqi President Saddam Hussein threatened military action if they refused.  Mr. Varzi is quoted as saying, “because Iraq has used military might to show that it is now the OPEC policeman, this did not happen overnight”.2.  Iraq had rattled its military saber at an earlier OPEC meeting in May of 1990.  President Hussein at this meeting called for the:

1. Liberation of Jerusalem.
2. Attacks on the United States and Israel.
3. Demanded $27 billion dollars from Kuwait.
4. Blamed Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and greed for low oil prices and equated

their behavior as acts of war against Iraq.3.

     Iraq around the time of the May OPEC meeting in Baghdad also threatens to use chemical weapons against Israel if that country should make any move against Iraq.

     July, 1990 is the crucial month in leading to the First Iraq War.  It seems to win a political victory at the July OPEC meeting described above.  Additionally, United States Ambassador in Iraq, Glaspie told President Hussein that the United States had “no opinion” on disputes between Arab countries.  Glaspie later in London says, “We didn’t expect him to take the whole country”.4.  Also, during July, Iraq moved 100,000 men and tanks to the Kuwaiti border.5. Saudi Arabia had said nothing of the Iraqi moves, but there is little doubt, many Arab officials said, that the Saudis feel “very uncomfortable as one official put it, with the rising star of Iraq in OPEC”.2.

     Two more points for the purpose of this paper need to be raised.  Iraq viewed itself as the hero of the Arab world.  Saddam Hussein felt Iraq had provided collective service for all Arabs by being a buffer against Iran (Persia).  This position of President Hussein and Iraq in the minds of many Arabs would also have been enhanced by President Hussein’s threats against Israel and its protector, the United States.  Palestinians actually supported Iraqi moves against Kuwait.  Lastly, the Kuwait Royal Family was extremely unpopular as they were hated by Arabs and Muslims.  The Royal Family inside and outside the Arab world were described as degenerates, parasites and rapists, owners of a harem and slaves and that they ran Kuwait as if it was a private enterprise.5.

     The United States Government may have looked at the trends taking place in the Arab word and felt they had to take drastic action or the Middle East may have fallen under the control of Iraq and or radical Islamic elements.  A decision may have been made to keep the Arab world divided, sew discord between Arab nations, but under no circumstances allow any one nation or ideology to gain control.  The United States thus pushed a policy to keep Iraq in debt and to keep the Kuwait’s, Saudi’s and other Oil Emirates dependant on United States military protection.  United States policy may have miscalculated how far Iraq’s Hussein would go, thinking, he could never believe that the United States would allow him to control such a huge supply of vital western energy supplies.  Hussein and Tariq Aziz, Iran’s foreign minister, should have known despite what they thought Ambassador Glaspie had said. It was in our vital national interest to keep the Middle East oil reserves out of Saddam Hussein’s hands.  It was also in our national interest to preserve the sovereignty of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.  The Kuwaiti Royal Family was despised by many threats but Iraq gave it support from other Arab nations as it would not otherwise have received.  American forces also would never have been allowed into the Middle East Countries without a clear threat from another country.  Middle East oil is vital to the West and the United States by virtue of the First Iraq War and is now in a better position to protect it.

     This paper was not written from the usual perspective of America going to war for human rights, to stop aggression, to stop tyranny of the new Hitler ,Saddam Hussein, or even because Saddam might develop or use weapons of mass destruction.  My belief is that a great country has to act in their own self-interests.  If we are smart and can arrange events properly, often times we can act in ways that support both our goals and ideals.

                                                            Works Cited:

1. www.http://experts.about.com/e/g/gu/gulf_war.htm. 

2. www.http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/26/world/iraq_said-to-prevail-in-oil-dispute-with-kuwait-and-arab-emirates.html. Page wanted = 1.

      “Iraq said to prevail in oil dispute with Kuwait and Arab Emirates”.

3. www.http:/www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraqsoileventskuwait.html.

4. www.http://www.unnyc.org/shows/lopate/2010/nov/11/why-americans-choose-war. “Why Americans Choose War”.

5. www.http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_213.shtml.  “Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait 1990”.