Captain Seafort wrote:It wasn't a matter of Maggie asking for help - it was a matter of her pointing out to Bush where US interests lay.
If it wasn't a matter of needing help then England wouldn't have come asking for it.
Captain Seafort wrote:Yes they were - if Saddam's occupation of Kuwait had been ignored, Saudi Arabia would have been next. Then Bahrain, Qatar, and so on. Saddam would have controlled the majority of the world's oil, and as such would have been able to blackmail the western powers by threatening to either cut off their supply. Military action to seize control back from him would have been countered by burning the wells just as he did in Kuwait, only on a far larger scale. Without the massive forces attacking on a broad front from a prepared start-line we wouldn't have been able to stop him doing the job properly.
He would have controlled the majority of Arab oil, if he didn't run out of troops first to move forward. Allowing only if Iran or Israel or Egypt didn't lash out at him first. As to blackmail, maybe with Europe but again that's not US interest since a lot of those companies that drill the oil are US or US co-op'd companies. Another issue being that if he cut off the oil from there, the US would have to then find a why to replace the 8% of our oil we get from the Middle East. This is unlikely since one, the Arabs love our money and two even if they didn't the South Americans do. In the end, there was no national interest for the US to get involved.
What it boils down to is simple. Its not a matter of US interest, but a matter of the UN including England getting caught with their pride pulled down in front of everyone. You guys talked tough and it got laughed at and you needed help from the US. This however isn't the problem, we're allies and we are here to help each other. We don't always agree or even like each other but we know we have a common goal in the world. The problem is trying to ignore history or change it because you've been embarrassed and not giving credit where credit is due to those who work to fix the errors. France and Italy and Holland were part of the screw up, but they didn't come to the US to ask for help. The Arab nations were dead locked as to ask for help or not after the UN motion failed to change Iraq's plans. What it took was England leading the way of saying "we messed up, get over it and fix it." By England that means Thatcher because she was the one to push for it. She was the one who flew to DC and asked Bush to come back in. She didn't force anything, she didn't re-spine anyone. To say otherwise simply insults her work as what she did took no less skill and intelligence then it did humility. She accepted the error of judgement and before things fell out of hand (and also before the US released the million personnel it had called up for duty from the first Bush plan) she jumped forward to be the voice necessity. It was Thatcher that came to Bush Sr to ask for help knowing how poorly things were handed down. It was also her motion that the US take the lead in the operation for the war that helped stabilize the command concerns. Up until then everyone wanted a joint and equal command. Something else that wouldn't have worked unless someone had been willing to step aside and England doing so again led the way for it.
I get you're all about Pro-England, but every stupid comment you throw out there or every time you dismiss history to try and treat England as though it still rules the world. All you do is piss on your own country for it. Everyone who's ever done anything in England becomes meaningless when you don't remember what they honestly did and start replacing it with ego. England's fall from grace isn't from its national view, but from the lack view from people like yourself. You should remember that the next time. What hurts the US most is that our civilians have forgotten what makes us great, history. The same is true for England, but you guys are a lot further down that road then we are.