What would the Middle East be like if the US didn't invade Iraq (either time)?

[Renew Deal]

I have to wonder what the middle east would be like today if the US didn't invade Kuwait/Iraq in 1990 and certainly if the 2003 invasion didn't happen.

Would Saddam have been able to control and integrate Kuwait? Would someone other than the US respond? Would he have attempted to continue his expansion into Saudi Arabia or elsewhere?

And then there is the 2003 invasion. What do you think the Middle East and Iraq would look like if that didn't happen (regardless of your feelings on 1990)? Many people write articles that assume Saddam would still be alive in 2014, but he would be 77 this year. Would his kids be in charge? Would the entire place fall apart?

My feeling on one aspect of this is that the 2003 Iraq invasion trained many of the people fighting today. I'm not sure that tactics and weapons would be so advanced without the 2003 invasion.

[MohRokTah]

1. You'd have a sniveling paper tiger barely holding control of Iraq.

You'd have a somewhat appeased Iran knowing their greatest rival was nothing but a paper tiger barely holding control.

You'd not have an Al Queda or any offshoots all pissed off because we were in Saudi Arabia since we wouldn't have gone in there in the first place.

9/11 would have never happened.

The first Iraq War really set the stage for everything nasty in that region since.

[Scootaloo]

2. He DID try to expand into Saudi Arabia

Which is the only reason the US got involved. We parked in Saudi Arabia, just watching saddam assfuck Kuwait, because, well.. .we told him he could. Problem was he rolled into a Saudi town just over the Kuwait border., the saudois flipped their shit, and since Uncle Sam shares a bed with king Abdullah, we mobilized.

A probably more relevant question is.. .What would hte Middle east look like if the United States hadn't used Iraq aas a proxy for a war against Iran?

Saddam wouldn't have been able to centralize his authority. he probably would have died in a coup at some point in the 80's - a common fate for dictators who have more brawn than brain. Iraq would still probably be a pretty awful place as far as civil liberties are concerned, but it wouldn't be wrecked by thirty years of war today.

And across that border, a somewhat similar story - Before Iraq's invasion of Khuzestan, Iran's revolution had a strong progressive / leftist component. it might sound weird that Theocrats and leftists would be breaking bread together, but Pahlavi was just that hated. However once the war broke out, the religious and the right were able to capitalize on it to seize power in Iran - the left and dissidents against the war were, of course, dubbed "counter-revolutionaries' and were either imprisoned as traitors, or - worse - sent to the front as new conscripts.

No US support for Saddam means no massacre of Kurds or Shia in Iraq. it means a more moderate Iran and certainly a more prosperous Iraq. it means there is no 2003 war that destabilizes the region and leads to the insanity we see now.

Twenty years from now, we'll be asking "Gosh, what if the US hadn't backed Fattah al-Sissi's coup?"

[Skittles]

3. I like Mr. Robinson's analysis

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-paying-for-bushs-2003-invasion-of-iraq/2014/08/11/2eee77ac-218a-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html?hpid=z3

[MADem]

4. We didn't invade Iraq in 1990. A lot of people were irritated because we didn't.

Most of them were to the right of Little Porgie's daddy. We did light up the sky over Baghdad, but that was an air effort.

And we didn't "invade" Kuwait, either. The powers that be, there, despots like many in the region, absolute rulers who got their jobs by inheritance and wealth, quite plainly invited us in.

That whole mess was precipitated by a dispute about oil fields, and a bit of "directional drilling" going on to steal some oil from Iraq at an angle. Iraq blew up those oil fields and dumped a ton of oil in the Gulf following that stunt. They also thought it was a good idea to lob some weaponry at Israel. In for a penny, in for a pound, I guess...? Saddam was hoping, I suppose, that his neighbors would leap to his aid, but he forgot how many of them were getting a stipend from, or via, USA.

While Iraq was trying to annex Kuwait, the UN passed a series of resolutions telling Iraq to cut the shit, which Iraq ignored.

It was an unfortunate event, that could have been avoided entirely with artful diplomacy. SECDEF Cheney no doubt wanted to get his paws on that oil, but he was foiled by Porgie's paw declaring victory and having a parade. Darn the bad luck!

The Porgie War, though, that was entirely a much grander load of horseshit--that was a failed attempt at regime change. They succeeded in changing the regime, but not to anything resembling what they wanted it to be.

Who remembers this? These idiots actually thought the Iraqis would be happy to incorporate Israeli blue into their brand new flag--it's like they were high, or something:





The second one really ended up with this as a result:



It's hard to know how the situation would have shaken out--Saddam might have died, and one of his crazy kids might have taken over--that wouldn't be a terribly good outcome. They were much more "murder-y" than Saddam, who was no piker, himself.

[Dems to Win]

5. What would the US be like if we had not invaded Iraq either time?

Just imagine the high speed trains we could have built with all that money.

Just imagine the alternative energy systems we could have developed.

Just imagine all the vets unwounded and their families enjoying life with their healthy loved ones.

Upon completion of the First Bush War on Iraq, with parades in the streets, Pres George H W Bush said, "We've kicked the Vietnam syndrome at last." Imagine if our country had not become comfortable making war again.

[mwrguy]

6. Peace