RE: Operation Desert Storm?

RE: Operation Desert Storm? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Politesub53 -> RE: Operation Desert Storm? (9/5/2008 5:53:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Since we are talking of legal niceities, under international law Iraq had a legitimate claim to Kuwait and wanted to test its claim in the international arenas but was denied. Kuwait, historically the 19th province of the Ottoman region that formed Iraq was illegitimately given independence by Britian because it was oil rich and so allowed Britain to control a weak oil rich state. Oil played no part. The Anglo Ottoman agreement was signed in 1913. Oil wasnt discovered in Kuwait until the 30s. You could also argue that since Kuwait was made a province of Basra, by the occupying Ottomans, then that itself is also invalid.

meatcleaver -> RE: Operation Desert Storm? (9/5/2008 6:01:08 AM)
Britain didn't give Kuwai independence until 1961and Kuwait only actively tried to get its international borders recognized after the discovery of oil (backed by Britain) knowing Iraq had an historical objection to their independence. Of course, Britain made the decision with military force.

Politesub53 -> RE: Operation Desert Storm? (9/5/2008 6:06:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou I also consider 10+ years of firing at U.S. aircraft legally enforcing a treaty to also be an attack. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein and his psychopathic sons in it. While i agree with the second sentence, the first one is incorrect. The no fly zones had no legal authority from the UN, the then secretery general said as much himself. My opinion of them is that they were needed, but didnt go far enough, as Saddam could still use helicopters, but none the less, they were illegal.

Politesub53 -> RE: Operation Desert Storm? (9/5/2008 6:16:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Britain didn't give Kuwai independence until 1961and Kuwait only actively tried to get its international borders recognized after the discovery of oil (backed by Britain) knowing Iraq had an historical objection to their independence. Of course, Britain made the decision with military force. Kuwait had terminated its oil contract with Britain in 1961. Britain granted independence in 1963, when the new Iraqi government threatened to invade Kuwait. Although Britain had sent troops to Kuwait, along with the Arab league, protection, or a show of force, isnt the same as use of force.

meatcleaver -> RE: Operation Desert Storm? (9/5/2008 6:19:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Britain didn't give Kuwai independence until 1961and Kuwait only actively tried to get its international borders recognized after the discovery of oil (backed by Britain) knowing Iraq had an historical objection to their independence. Of course, Britain made the decision with military force. Kuwait had terminated its oil contract with Britain in 1961. Britain granted independence in 1963, when the new Iraqi government threatened to invade Kuwait. Although Britain had sent troops to Kuwait, along with the Arab league, protection, or a show of force, isnt the same as use of force. Britain had lost its power by 1961 (Suez proved British power to be toothless) and was on the way out of all its colonies and couldn't enforce anything without a nod from the US. I was talking about earlier enforcement. By the way, we talk about Saddam being a psychopath but who were the first to use poison gas to subdue the Iraqis? You got it, Britain.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125