Could Saddam have fallen with the Arab Spring?

[Moonlight Graham]

Hypothetically, would it have been possible, or likely or unlikely, given the strength of the Iraqi military at the time of US invasion, and they fact that Iraq actually didn't have WMD's to use on dissidents, for the citizens of Iraq to topple the Hussein regime on their own (or possibly with some NATO support re: Libya) during this era of Arab Spring uprisings if the US & gang had never invaded Iraq?

Or would Saddam have been able to crush such an uprising, similar to Syria? Or would Iraqis have feared a possible WMD response re: the gassing of Kurds, and not dared to try a rebellion en masse? Or would the Arab Spring not have even happened in the first place with the spreading of "democracy" in Iraq via the US-led regime change there.

The point here is: could the US-led invasion of Iraq & regime change there have been a complete waste because such regime change may have happened anyways via popular uprising?

Edited October 21, 2011 by Moonlight Graham

[August1991]

The point here is: could the US-led invasion of Iraq & regime change there have been a complete waste because such regime change may have happened anyways via popular uprising?

MG sorry, you ask a really dumb question.

The better question is to ask whether the "Arab Spring" could have occurred if Bush Jnr had not removed Saddam Hussein from power.

I know that the Western Left hates Bush Jnr but the fact is, he started this "Arab Spring" - or at least made it possible.

----

MG, your question is akin to asking: "Why did we invade Normandy? Why did the Soviets defend Stalingrad? Hitler's regime was going to fall anyway."

Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991

[Moonlight Graham]

MG sorry, you ask a really dumb question.

The better question is to ask whether the "Arab Spring" could have occurred if Bush Jnr had not removed Saddam Hussein from power.

If you read my post I did ask this question in the sentence the before the one you quoted:

"Or would the Arab Spring not have even happened in the first place with the spreading of "democracy" in Iraq via the US-led regime change there."

I know that the Western Left hates Bush Jnr but the fact is, he started this "Arab Spring" - or at least made it possible.

So this would be your valid argument to my question. You think no, because the Arab Spring would not have happened without the democracy regime change in Iraq.

I'm torn on this, it's really hard to know. It is possible for sure, but I just don't know enough about the exact motivations of the first people who started the Spring, ie: that dude who set himself on fire in Tunisia, and the protesters in Egypt. Would be interesting to see some very in-depth interviews and surveys of those involved.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Moonlight Graham

[August1991]

If you read my post I did ask this question in the sentence the before the one you quoted:

"Or would the Arab Spring not have even happened in the first place with the spreading of "democracy" in Iraq via the US-led regime change there."

Again MG, you wonder whether the "Arab Spring" could have happened without the invasion of Iraq.

And I answer that your question is comparable to asking whether Hitler would have fallen without the bombing of Dresden, the Dieppe landing or the Battle of Kursk.

So this would be your valid argument to my question. You think no, because the Arab Spring would not have happened without the democracy regime change in Iraq.

I'm inclined to think that every step helps. In retrospect, Bush Jnr took the right step. But I think Obama was better footed in Libya.

----

We in the West are involved in a long term "dispute". Americans thankfully choose good leaders.

As one US president said, Americans will "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

I'm not American but in this dispute, I'm happy that they defend individual freedom.

Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

The answer is already well documented, and one principle reason for so called No-Fly Zones after the Gulf War. Saddam crushed the rebellions north and south, killing thousands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq

[eyeball]

If not for the usual suspect super-powers diddling in the ME, see Iran in 1953 for example, we likely never would have even heard of Saddam.

With such Shining Beacons and examples like America and Great Britain behaving the way they did however it's no wonder the Arab Spring took so long. That it did is a testament to the arrested development that geo-political diddling can cause.

My fear is that it's taken so long that the natural resources the ME region were stripped of in the process have left it bereft of the means to take any real advantage of the opportunities freedom and democracy are said to open up. I think the prospects for a fairly short spring are high. The waterhole is just too small so look out for the meanest to come out on top.

[Guest Derek L]

The answer is already well documented, and one principle reason for so called No-Fly Zones after the Gulf War. Saddam crushed the rebellions north and south, killing thousands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq

Exactly………..The invasion of Iraq most defiantly put Middle Eastern dictators on notice so to speak, and the recent action in Libya helped to reinforce the message.........As Al Capone once said: "You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone."

[bush_cheney2004]

Exactly………..The invasion of Iraq most defiantly put Middle Eastern dictators on notice so to speak, and the recent action in Libya helped to reinforce the message.........As Al Capone once said: "You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone."

Right...it's killing the Bush haters to think that maybe...just maybe...Bush was right.

[msj]

I think these are good questions, MG, leading to interesting speculations.

I suspect BC is right about Iraq - they would have been strong enough to prevent a Libya from happening in the first place. By this, I mean that they would have been able to crush any uprising swiftly enough so that a NATO like force would not have had the political will to emerge and assist.

But other parts of the Middle East/Arab world?

I think some could argue that with foreign troops on Arab soil this has provided existing regimes with nationalistic/ideological/racist/religionist reasons to maintain the status quo and as a means to vent anger towards those "evil" Americans rather than to the rightful cause of most of their problems - Israel no, just kidding, towards the tyrannical regimes themselves.

But, of course, I'm just a Canadian speculating about other countries and their affairs yadda yadda yadda so I better stop before BC whines about it.

[bush_cheney2004]

...But, of course, I'm just a Canadian speculating about other countries and their affairs yadda yadda yadda so I better stop before BC whines about it.

Well, at least you are trainable. And of course, I wouldn't be Bush_Cheney2004 if I didn't remind all of my neighbours in Canada that they were not part of the Iraq War. Canada preferred to leave Saddam in power if it meant...gulp...war.

[eyeball]

And of course, I wouldn't be Bush_Cheney2004 if I didn't remind all of my neighbours in Canada that they were not part of the Iraq War.

And of course, you'd still be just as full of crap as when you're reminding us about the Canadian troops that were part of the Iraq war.

[msj]

And of course, you'd still be just as full of crap as when you're reminding us about the Canadian troops that were part of the Iraq war.

Ha, that's exactly what I was thinking.

BC sure is slippery.

[bush_cheney2004]

And of course, you'd still be just as full of crap as when you're reminding us about the Canadian troops that were part of the Iraq war.

Several troops were, but not your ilk. No, your ilk crowed righteously that Iraq was not legal, better to go off and kill Afghans...until that went sour. Such a fickle bunch be these Canadians.

[bush_cheney2004]

Of course, soon after all the shooting was settling down, Canada wanted a piece of the action in Iraq, from Paul Martin begging Bush for oil service contracts to web sites like this:

http://www.idcc.ca/

Contact Us

Iraq Development Company of Canada (IDCC) is a professional, independent, private holding company with a strong intent to offer opportunity for Canadian companies and other companies around the globe to a partnership with Iraq's promising economy. Our qualified management has the international experience and knowledge that will aid in the success for companies that are willing to embark on a road to a promising future.

Now Canada loves Iraq. ROTFLMFAO!

[Bonam]

Had the US not invaded Iraq, the history of the world from 2003 onward would have been fundamentally different. The evolution of human civilization is a chaotic system, and small changes cause exponentially greater differences in outcome as they are propagated further forward in time. The Arab Spring may not have happened, or something like it may have happened years earlier, or Iran and Iraq might have engaged in another major war.

The point is, it is utterly impossible to know how history may have turned out had a major decision been made differently.

[eyeball]

Had the US not invaded Iraq, the history of the world from 2003 onward would have been fundamentally different. The evolution of human civilization is a chaotic system, and small changes cause exponentially greater differences in outcome as they are propagated further forward in time. The Arab Spring may not have happened, or something like it may have happened years earlier, or Iran and Iraq might have engaged in another major war.

The point is, it is utterly impossible to know how history may have turned out had a major decision been made differently.

I don't know, I think the architects of Operation Ajax had a pretty good idea that events would unfold in a general direction. But like any inter-generational thieves why should they have given a shit at the time?

[August1991]

Exactly………..The invasion of Iraq most defiantly put Middle Eastern dictators on notice so to speak, and the recent action in Libya helped to reinforce the message.........As Al Capone once said: "You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone."

The Right-Wing Steyn view is that the example of Saddam (and Gaddafi) simply shows that psychopath-dictators need nuclear weapons.

Dictators around the world look at the examples of Saddam and Gaddafi (and Mubarak and Tunisia's El Abidine Ben Ali) and conclude that they need nuclear weapons.

Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il are still presidents. True, Hugo Chavez is still in power too.

I dunno.

-----

To me, the arrest of Ceaușescu and his wife are pertinent in the life of a nation. The pictures of Gaddafi matter.

[msj]

The point is, it is utterly impossible to know how history may have turned out had a major decision been made differently.

Well, you're no fun.

[bush_cheney2004]

...The point is, it is utterly impossible to know how history may have turned out had a major decision been made differently.

Yes, in general, we can say that enropy will increase in the absence of limiting forces. But Saddam and Iraq were already on a collision course and finite limit because of Gulf War I. It's not like the US/UK decided to invade Iraq out of the blue. Iraq was already being purposely strangled to death long before 2003.

[Moonlight Graham]

Americans thankfully choose good leaders.

As one US president said, Americans will "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

I'm not American but in this dispute, I'm happy that they defend individual freedom.

Rubbish. The US only acts in its own self-interest. Libya operations had little to do with freedom, and all about oil. If the US valued individual liberty so much then explain US inaction recently towards Yemen, the monarchy of Bahrain, the Maliki government, Syria etc. Not to mention the US kissing ass with the Saudi monarchy and doing massive business with China.

[dre]

If you read my post I did ask this question in the sentence the before the one you quoted:

"Or would the Arab Spring not have even happened in the first place with the spreading of "democracy" in Iraq via the US-led regime change there."

So this would be your valid argument to my question. You think no, because the Arab Spring would not have happened without the democracy regime change in Iraq.

I'm torn on this, it's really hard to know. It is possible for sure, but I just don't know enough about the exact motivations of the first people who started the Spring, ie: that dude who set himself on fire in Tunisia, and the protesters in Egypt. Would be interesting to see some very in-depth interviews and surveys of those involved.

I dont see any linkage at all between GWB the US, or Iraq and Arab Spring. Most of the riots that lead to the "arab spring" were over food and jobs and poverty, and living conditions. Its not fair to blame George Bush for all these people having shitty lives.

If you look at Tunisia where this all started. to Credit the US for Ben Alis eventual departure is really pretty silly, because without support from the US and France his regime would have fallen apart in the 90s or even late 80's.

The US didnt cause the Arab Spring, they delayed it by about 20 years. The US and western countries have been propping up and funding all these dictators, autocrats and despots and keeping them in power. And the regimes with good oil revenue from the west will be the ones that are able to squash their little democratic revolutions.

Edited October 22, 2011 by dre

[Guest Derek L]

I dont see any linkage at all between GWB the US, or Iraq and Arab Spring. Most of the riots that lead to the "arab spring" were over food and jobs and poverty, and living conditions. Its not fair to blame George Bush for all these people having shitty lives.

If you look at Tunisia where this all started. to Credit the US for Ben Alis eventual departure is really pretty silly, because without support from the US and France his regime would have fallen apart in the 90s or even late 80's.

The US didnt cause the Arab Spring, they delayed it by about 20 years. The US and western countries have been propping up and funding all these dictators, autocrats and despots and keeping them in power. And the regimes with good oil revenue from the west will be the ones that are able to squash their little democratic revolutions.

You’ve obviously never heard about the Bush doctrine…….or read his book.

[eyeball]

You’ve obviously never heard about the Bush doctrine…….or read his book.

You obviously can't tell shit from Shinola.

[bush_cheney2004]

Rubbish. The US only acts in its own self-interest. Libya operations had little to do with freedom, and all about oil.

Almost true....oil is about "freedom" too.

If the US valued individual liberty so much then explain US inaction recently towards Yemen, the monarchy of Bahrain, the Maliki government, Syria etc. Not to mention the US kissing ass with the Saudi monarchy and doing massive business with China.

The US does the same with Canada...so what?

[Guest Derek L]

You obviously can't tell shit from Shinola.

Hey thanks for the informative response.