Name one thing he did wrong

Name one thing he did wrong

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He could have checked what Iran's territory looks like and how many people live there before attacking it

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Buying aluminum tubes.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He gassed the Kurds and LARPed as Nebuchadnezzar.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Started 3 wars and lost all of them.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i wonder whose post is going to be

    [...]

    it will be legendary

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not really

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    That is wrong.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      K*rd detected

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Even worse, a Kurd lover

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Trusted Americans

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/23/world/confrontation-in-the-gulf-us-gave-iraq-little-reason-not-to-mount-kuwait-assault.html?unlocked_article_code=1.uk0.WUou.X7V1YxJ71s2j&smid=url-share
      >The American strategy, carried out primarily by the State Department but approved by the White House, was based on the assumption that Iraq would not invade and occupy Kuwait. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, who assured the Bush Administration that Mr. Hussein would not invade, argued that the best way to resolve an inter-Arab squabble was for the United States to avoid inflammatory words and actions.

      >Some senior Administration officials said the strategy was also rooted in the view that Washington - and most of the Arab world - probably could live with a limited invasion of Kuwait, in which Iraqi forces seized bits of Kuwaiti territory to gain concessions.

      >''We were reluctant to draw a line in the sand,'' a senior Administration official said. ''I can't see the American public supporting the deployment of troops over a dispute over 20 miles of desert territory and it is not clear that the local countries would have supported that kind of commitment. The basic principle is not to make threats you can't deliver on. That was one reason there was a certain degree of hedging on what was said.''

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/23/world/confrontation-in-the-gulf-us-gave-iraq-little-reason-not-to-mount-kuwait-assault.html?unlocked_article_code=1.uk0.WUou.X7V1YxJ71s2j&smid=url-share
      >The American strategy, carried out primarily by the State Department but approved by the White House, was based on the assumption that Iraq would not invade and occupy Kuwait. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, who assured the Bush Administration that Mr. Hussein would not invade, argued that the best way to resolve an inter-Arab squabble was for the United States to avoid inflammatory words and actions.

      >Some senior Administration officials said the strategy was also rooted in the view that Washington - and most of the Arab world - probably could live with a limited invasion of Kuwait, in which Iraqi forces seized bits of Kuwaiti territory to gain concessions.

      >''We were reluctant to draw a line in the sand,'' a senior Administration official said. ''I can't see the American public supporting the deployment of troops over a dispute over 20 miles of desert territory and it is not clear that the local countries would have supported that kind of commitment. The basic principle is not to make threats you can't deliver on. That was one reason there was a certain degree of hedging on what was said.''

      He was given an ultimatum with option of peaceful withdrawal from Kuwait.
      But Sadam was blinded by his experience of Iran-Iraq war that was WWI tier trenches meat-grinder with no front movement. He thought war for Kuwait would be teh same and after losing several tens of thousands of troops pussy Americans who have no taste for millions size casualties would've leave him alone. Total strategical planning failure. Juts like with Iran 12 years prior. And then same failure in 2003

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Disenfranchised the Shia majority

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Lost, and lost again. Iraq could have been the leading Arab state and a bulwark against jihadism, but he just had to frick up

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Simply put, he invaded Kuwait. Idgaf about Kuwaitis but that moronic decision was the last excuse the US needed to come and rape the once beautiful country into a husk.

      It makes me sad thinking about it. It would have been a bulwark against a loooot more than just something like ISIS, which was birthed as a result of the crumbled nation anyways.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Simply put, he invaded Kuwait. Idgaf about Kuwaitis but that moronic decision was the last excuse the US needed to come and rape the once beautiful country into a husk.

      It makes me sad thinking about it. It would have been a bulwark against a loooot more than just something like ISIS, which was birthed as a result of the crumbled nation anyways.

      Don't forget, without him Iran is the only country in the region actively hostile to Israel. All the rest are aligned with the US

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Syria?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's an Iran proxy anyway

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Compies with orders to destroy stockpiles of chemical weapons
    >Refuses to let UN observers check he had destroyed said stockpiles and makes ambigious statements pretending he still has them
    what the hell was he thinking

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what the hell was he thinking

      >not a real peer war blah blah blah
      >Americans only know who to drop bombs into desert blah blah blah
      >Iraqi cities would be become Grozny for Americans blah blah blah
      You know usual vatnick's blabbering.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        what?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You surely didn't read Russian newspapers of that time, where multitude of Russian general explaiend how Iraqi invasion would become graveyard for American army. No doubt same sort of advice they were whispering into Saddam's ear.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It goes beyond standard blabbering, it's perhaps the most moronic politcal decision anyone has yet made in the 21th century. He had already destroyed his chemical weapons, what did he have to lose from just letting the UN see a few warhouses and landfills to prove it to them?
        Even if he had kept his chemical weapons he would have at least been able to damage the coalition forces a bit more, Saddam chose to follow the most stupid, moronic and self-destructive route he could have.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's just how strongmen act, it's an impulse. Think about how Khrushchev made sure to amplify the "missile gap" myth despite the fact America's nuclear capacity was far superior to the Soviets, a myth which eventually led to Khrushchev's humiliation in the Cuban missile crisis. That's just how strongmen act, there isn't any thinking behind it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're right of course, I don't know why I'm repeated surprised by it. And Khrushchev was an actual politican while Saddam was just hired muscle rewarded with political office, I shouldn't expect much from him

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          He didn't think Bush would actually do it. He was also incredibly paranoid about israelites and the CIA, so he believed they knew he was bluffing because they have spies everywhere.

          That's just how strongmen act, it's an impulse. Think about how Khrushchev made sure to amplify the "missile gap" myth despite the fact America's nuclear capacity was far superior to the Soviets, a myth which eventually led to Khrushchev's humiliation in the Cuban missile crisis. That's just how strongmen act, there isn't any thinking behind it.

          You're right of course, I don't know why I'm repeated surprised by it. And Khrushchev was an actual politican while Saddam was just hired muscle rewarded with political office, I shouldn't expect much from him

          He didn't want to appear weak yeah. Thing is, part of his Arab nationalism came with an understanding that the Arabs were weak, so he did the strongman thing while also playing a lot of hedging games between the West and the USSR (in the 70s, 80s). Via the West he built relations primarily with France. During the first Gulf War he also played up the strongman thing which failed, but some Baath Party officials who worked with propaganda and influence ops pivoted in the 90s when they were under sanctions to present themselves as the underdog, which had some influence in Europe. Then in 2003 the French balked at the invasion.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    didn't fire enough scuds at israelites

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Larpgayging and invading Kuwait

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Funny how /misc/trannies never shut up about the USS Liberty, yet they NEVER talk about, or even know of, the USS Stark.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Terrorised his own people and started one of the most moronic war in 20th century against Iran.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *