Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bet gone awry...Please Help

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
stilladeaniac Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:40 PM
Original message
Bet gone awry...Please Help
I am looking for information to refute a bet a coworker and I had about the size of the Iraqi Army during the Persian Gulf War.

My PNAC coworker contended that Iraq was the 4th largest army in the world at that time leading up to the gulf war and got me to bet $10. (I thought it was an easy bet.)

He has provided many sources that say the generic statement "4th largest army in the world" with the data always originating from the Bush Sr. administration. So here I am, coming to ask the experts. Is this statement true? Or did Bush Sr. exaggerate Iraq troop size? Links would help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GOPisEvil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. In 1991? I believe it was the 4th largest army in the world.
However, the drop-off from 3 to 4 was IMMENSE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Welcome to DU
I'm still a Deaniac, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SonofMass Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. Tell him you were betting that the average size per soldier
(height/weight) was lower than 4th.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. I have a hard time believing that.
US
Russia
China
India
Iran
Pakistan

All of these would logically seem to me to have larger armies than Iraq even at its peak.

What kind of "data" is he presenting? Just quotes from Poppy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stilladeaniac Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. He googled "largest iraq army" and showed me a few links n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. Hate to tell you this, but you lost your bet
Back in 1991, Iraq did field the fourth largest army in the world. It wasn't the most technilogically sophisticated army, but it was pretty big.

However by the time Bushco invaded last year, the Iraqi army was a shadow of it's former self.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shoelace414 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. I remember hearing that statistic back in 1991
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
7. Dude, you owe me ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Great job, Meegbear
I found some information, but this cite lays it out in black and white.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichV Donating Member (858 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. Wow, interesting
Rank Country Active Duty
1 China 2,470,000
2 India 1,303,000
3 N. Korea 1,082,000
4 S. Korea 683,000
5 Iran 520,000
6 Turkey 495,000
7 U.S. 471,700
8 Iraq 429,000

From the link above.

Was the bet just on the Army, or military as a whole?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stilladeaniac Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. The word used was "Army" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stilladeaniac Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. HELL YEAH! Thanks!!!
I owe you big time!!! What will suffice? my first born?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
21. Very good find...
thanks for the link - I know some that believe the 4th largest is gospel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. It was......(nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troublemaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
9. You're not going to be happy...
Edited on Mon Jul-12-04 03:49 PM by troublemaker
the usual measurement is number of men under arms full time. If your army is a jobs program you can have a pretty big army! Nobody uses army size as a sensible marker for military power, but in narrow statistical terms your coworker may be correct. (I don't remember anyone in '91 challanging the statistic. Maybe it's right, maybe not.)

Figures are often given to say that Israel in 1949 was vastly outnumbered by the Arabs armies but Israeli actually had numerical superiority on the ground within 24 hours because almost the entire fit population was in an efficient reserve corps. Their army was small, but not small... it's really a book-keeping thing.

Iraq may well have had the 4th greatest number of men under arms full time in 1991, but the did not have the world's fourth most powerful military, which was the implication intended at the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wurzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
10. May be largest in numbers of soldiers. But badly equipped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. Your co-worker won your $10-in 1991 Iraq was the 4th largest army
Try Jane's Defence for links.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsFlorida Donating Member (370 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
12. 8th does seem more reasonable
What are you going to do with the $10 you won? I would buy lottery tickets figure I have more of a chance winning the lottery than having my vote count in florida.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. WAR CRIMES - Highway of Death

(Photo Credit: © 1991 Kenneth Jarecke / Contact Press Images)


WAR CRIMES
A Report on United States War Crimes Against Iraq to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal

by Ramsey Clark and Others



Incinerated body of an Iraqi soldier on the "Highway of Death," a name the press has given to the road from Mutlaa, Kuwait, to Basra, Iraq. U.S. planes immobilized the convoy by disabling vehicles at its front and rear, then bombing and straffing the resulting traffic jam for hours. More than 2,000 vehicles and tens of thousands of charred and dismembered bodies littered the sixty miles of highway. The clear rapid incineration of the human being suggests the use of napalm, phosphorus, or other incindiary bombs. These are anti-personnel weapons outlawed under the 1977 Geneva Protocols. This massive attack occurred after Saddam Hussein announced a complete troop withdrawl from Kuwait in compliance with UN Resolution 660. Such a massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Convention of 1949, common article 3, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who "are out of combat." There are, in addition, strong indications that many of those killed were Palestinian and Kuwaiti civilians trying to escape the impending seige of Kuwait City and the return of Kuwaiti armed forces. No attempt was made by U.S. military command to distinguish between military personnel and civilians on the "highway of death." The whole intent of international law with regard to war is to prevent just this sort of indescriminate and excessive use of force.

"It has never happened in history that a nation that has won a war has been held accountable for atrocities committed in preparing for and waging that war. We intend to make this one different. What took place was the use of technological material to destroy a defenseless country. From 125,000 to 300,000 people were killed... We recognize our role in history is to bring the transgressors to justice." Ramsey Clark

Next » Preface

SOURCE:

http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. I had never seen this before. . . .
What an eye opener! So dimson learned from poppy that its okay to kill indiscriminately.

This family will burn in hell for their crimes against mankind.

:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gothmog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
16. I remember this stat also but thought it referred to # of tanks
I remember this stat back in 1991 and thought that it referred to the number of tanks in the force. Iraq used to have a large number of tanks but they were all out of date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-12-04 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
19. I think it's a wash
That link above with the number of people on active duty can get you out. On the other hand, I think they also measure armies by spending and maybe that's where Iraq comes in 4th. Maybe fas.org would have that figure for 1991. We spend way way way more than any other country which means we are the largest military power, regardless of the fact that N Korea has more men "enlisted" in the military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC