Arab Spring in the absence of the Iraq War?

The more the Arab Spring progresses and the more we see just how much a blunder the invasion of Iraq was, I wonder what would have happened if it never took place. I am pretty curious actually as to whether Saddam would have been overthrown internally instead of completely by intervention. I also wonder how differently current events would have turned out without the war ever happening.

I must say, I believe the Arab Spring could have happened years earlier if the Iraq War never took place. The complete mess the country became and the cycle of violence it is still consumed in has seemed to served as sort of an example as to what would happen to Arab nations if their respective dictators/strongmen were overthrown. It gave their people a reason (real or not) to rally around them, and even today, we have seen people like Syrian President Assad largely using this card to maintain his key support (as well as Gaddafi and his supporters for awhile).

Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and this is all hypothetical and after the fact, but you have to wonder and reassess history constantly.

I think Saddam would have reacted exactly like Ghadaffi. He wouldnt hesitate to use planes against his people. I cant really find a correlation between the Iraq War starting or not and the Arab Spring commencing. I cant say if it sped up the Spring or hurt it or had no effect at all. But: if the Iraq War never started, I'd say Saddam would have been overthrown by now.

I take the opposite view. I do not think that the Arab Spring would've been able to be as successful as it has been with Saddam still in power - especially if sanctions were lifted. -Sun_Tzu-

I take the opposite view. I do not think that the Arab Spring would've been able to be as successful as it has been with Saddam still in power - especially if sanctions were lifted. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

The more the Arab Spring progresses and the more we see just how much a blunder the invasion of Iraq was, I wonder what would have happened if it never took place. I am pretty curious actually as to whether Saddam would have been overthrown internally instead of completely by intervention. I also wonder how differently current events would have turned out without the war ever happening.

I must say, I believe the Arab Spring could have happened years earlier if the Iraq War never took place. The complete mess the country became and the cycle of violence it is still consumed in has seemed to served as sort of an example as to what would happen to Arab nations if their respective dictators/strongmen were overthrown. It gave their people a reason (real or not) to rally around them, and even today, we have seen people like Syrian President Assad largely using this card to maintain his key support (as well as Gaddafi and his supporters for awhile).

Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and this is all hypothetical and after the fact, but you have to wonder and reassess history constantly.

SEANMCAD

the oil markets would have moved to the euro and oil right now for us would be much higher and Iran, Russia, and I think France would be doing very well right now.

the war was 100% about oil

I'm sorry, but I can't buy Saddam's push for pricing oil in euros as a reason. He was under sanctions and had already lost so much of his credibility after years of a misguided war with Iran and Kuwait. Just because he wanted it doesn't mean he could have made it happen.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]I take the opposite view. I do not think that the Arab Spring would've been able to be as successful as it has been with Saddam still in power - especially if sanctions were lifted. BossPerson

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]I take the opposite view. I do not think that the Arab Spring would've been able to be as successful as it has been with Saddam still in power - especially if sanctions were lifted. -Sun_Tzu-

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]I take the opposite view. I do not think that the Arab Spring would've been able to be as successful as it has been with Saddam still in power - especially if sanctions were lifted. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Because lifting the sanctions would make the people less desperate?jetpower3

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Because lifting the sanctions would make the people less desperate?jetpower3

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

Gaddafi wouldn't have been overthrown without western intervention.

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] No because if the sanctions were lifted Saddam would've been able to reload militarily. BossPerson

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

As I recall, Iraq's military was also very weak by 2003. You still don't recover from 20+ years of military and economic decimation, internal uprising, and sanctions in 8 years.

What was the rationale for the Iraq war?Victorious_Fize

What was the rationale for the Iraq war?Victorious_Fize

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]What was the rationale for the Iraq war?SaudiFury

And he wasn't?

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] No because if the sanctions were lifted Saddam would've been able to reload militarily. Storm_Marine

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

Gaddafi wouldn't have been overthrown without western intervention.

Maybe not, but Saddam was under a no-fly-zone of his very own. Any new uprising would be very difficult to respond to in the same way as Gaddafi initally did.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]What was the rationale for the Iraq war?Storm_Marine

And he wasn't?

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]What was the rationale for the Iraq war?SaudiFury

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]What was the rationale for the Iraq war?Victorious_Fize

and do what there?

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] No because if the sanctions were lifted Saddam would've been able to reload militarily. BossPerson

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="jetpower3"]

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

themajormayor

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"] WMD's and terrorism, then when it turned out neither were really true. it ended up being 'he was an evil man". Storm_Marine

and do what there?

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"] They should invade Uganda.

Victorious_Fize

and do what there?

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

and do what there?

themajormayor

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Because lifting the sanctions would make the people less desperate?jetpower3

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] No because if the sanctions were lifted Saddam would've been able to reload militarily. -Sun_Tzu-

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

Well, intervention was already sort of happening in Iraq, right down to the days preceding March 20th, 2003 (no-fly-zone bombings). You could debate whether this would have kept up for ~8 more years, but if the U.S. seemed pretty determined to see him go in 2003, I'm sure they would have loved to do so with a lot less cost to them in 2011 or so.

Further, we still don't know what would have happened if the U.S. did not intervene. By this point, much of his Gaddafi's regime had already hemorrhaged. Just because he was toppled with intervention doesn't mean that the uprising would have been automatically defeated without it. There's no guarantee in the least he would have been able to hold on.

Also, it's not there hadn't been large-scale uprisings in Iraq before. There were large-scale uprisings immediately after the Gulf War (when Saddam was arguably at his weakest) and he crushed them with ease. -Sun_Tzu-

Pile on years more of sanctions, economic and military decay, and a re-galvanized/organized opposition movement. Syria too had an uprising in the decades before the Arab Spring. They crushed the first, yet the latter seems quite tenacious with minimal external support thus far.

Also, it's not there hadn't been large-scale uprisings in Iraq before. There were large-scale uprisings immediately after the Gulf War (when Saddam was arguably at his weakest) and he crushed them with ease. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

Eight years or less of reloading militarily isn't going to cut it. Gaddafi had about the same amount of time, and that wasn't enough to save himself.

jetpower3

Well, intervention was already sort of happening in Iraq, right down to the days preceding March 20th, 2003 (no-fly-zone bombings). You could debate whether this would have kept up for ~8 years, but if the U.S. seemed pretty determined to see him go in 2003, I'm sure they would have loved to do so with a lot less cost to them in 2011 or so.

Further, we still don't know what would have happened if the U.S. did not intervene. By this point, much of his Gaddafi's regime had already hemorrhaged. Just because he was toppled with intervention doesn't mean that the uprising would have been automatically defeated without it. There's no guarantee in the least he would have been able to hold on.

And on a related note - Saddam was someone who not only had a history of brutally crushing internal uprisings, but also was no stranger to invading politically unstable countries. I would find it very hard to believe that if Saddam were in power today that he wouldn't entertain the idea of invading Syria.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Also, it's not there hadn't been large-scale uprisings in Iraq before. There were large-scale uprisings immediately after the Gulf War (when Saddam was arguably at his weakest) and he crushed them with ease. Victorious_Fize

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

The more the Arab Spring progresses and the more we see just how much a blunder the invasion of Iraq was, I wonder what would have happened if it never took place. I am pretty curious actually as to whether Saddam would have been overthrown internally instead of completely by intervention. I also wonder how differently current events would have turned out without the war ever happening.

I must say, I believe the Arab Spring could have happened years earlier if the Iraq War never took place. The complete mess the country became and the cycle of violence it is still consumed in has seemed to served as sort of an example as to what would happen to Arab nations if their respective dictators/strongmen were overthrown. It gave their people a reason (real or not) to rally around them, and even today, we have seen people like Syrian President Assad largely using this card to maintain his key support (as well as Gaddafi and his supporters for awhile).

Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and this is all hypothetical and after the fact, but you have to wonder and reassess history constantly.

SEANMCAD

the oil markets would have moved to the euro and oil right now for us would be much higher and Iran, Russia, and I think France would be doing very well right now.

the war was 100% about oil

[QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

[QUOTE="jetpower3"]

The more the Arab Spring progresses and the more we see just how much a blunder the invasion of Iraq was, I wonder what would have happened if it never took place. I am pretty curious actually as to whether Saddam would have been overthrown internally instead of completely by intervention. I also wonder how differently current events would have turned out without the war ever happening.

I must say, I believe the Arab Spring could have happened years earlier if the Iraq War never took place. The complete mess the country became and the cycle of violence it is still consumed in has seemed to served as sort of an example as to what would happen to Arab nations if their respective dictators/strongmen were overthrown. It gave their people a reason (real or not) to rally around them, and even today, we have seen people like Syrian President Assad largely using this card to maintain his key support (as well as Gaddafi and his supporters for awhile).

Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and this is all hypothetical and after the fact, but you have to wonder and reassess history constantly.

kuraimen

the oil markets would have moved to the euro and oil right now for us would be much higher and Iran, Russia, and I think France would be doing very well right now.

the war was 100% about oil

Which "wars" do you refer to? Iraq?

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Also, it's not there hadn't been large-scale uprisings in Iraq before. There were large-scale uprisings immediately after the Gulf War (when Saddam was arguably at his weakest) and he crushed them with ease. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"] As it has been in many countries back in the day, just look at Hama. Using chemicals against a civilian population causes for serious reproaches in this new millennium, the new Assad doesn't even dare to think about it. Given Iraq's resources, I can very much see why the West would gamble on the democratic revolutionaries, much like how they did in Libya.

Victorious_Fize

And even if the sanctions were quickly removed after 2003, I'm sure the west would just as happily reimplement them when the time was right (again, Libya's case).

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Also, it's not there hadn't been large-scale uprisings in Iraq before. There were large-scale uprisings immediately after the Gulf War (when Saddam was arguably at his weakest) and he crushed them with ease. jetpower3

Pile on years more of sanctions, economic and military decay, and a re-galvanized/organized opposition movement. Syria too had an uprising in the decades before the Arab Spring. They crushed the first, yet the latter seems quite tenacious with minimal external support thus far.

By the way, I think the Arab spring is mostly hogwash. Tyrants are changing but people aren't.GazaAli

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"] As it has been in many countries back in the day, just look at Hama. Using chemicals against a civilian population causes for serious reproaches in this new millennium, the new Assad doesn't even dare to think about it. Given Iraq's resources, I can very much see why the West would gamble on the democratic revolutionaries, much like how they did in Libya.Victorious_Fize

What has the Arab Spring done for us? Well, it has given us an exiting new flag for Libya! It has also given us.. erm... very cheap flights to Egypt and Tunisia!

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]By the way, I think the Arab spring is mostly hogwash. Tyrants are changing but people aren't.Victorious_Fize

What has the Arab Spring done for us? Well, it has given us an exiting new flag for Libya! It has also given us.. erm... very cheap flights to Egypt and Tunisia!

TehFuneral

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] And what are those serious repercussions? -Sun_Tzu-

Do you think the west would have agreed to lift the sanctions without major concessions on Saddam's part that could have weakened him long-term?

[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] And what are those serious repercussions? -Sun_Tzu-