If the Iraq invasion had been a success ...

[wibble]

Just been thinking (dangerous I know) ....

 

 

Where would we be if the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan had gone as swimmingly well as Dode W Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had hoped?

 

America and the coalition of the willing have complete control of Iraq, the people are being obedient and the oil is flowing.

 

The Republicans win the election (not with McCain because McCain was the anti-war Republican) and the neo-con masterplan proceeds.

 

Just guessing, but I think that there would have been a wholesale demolition of Iran, bringing together Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan under US control.

 

This would have created a huge territory from which the US could exert pressure on the rest of the region.

 

Tension with Pakistan would be immense. India on one side, America on the other. The Russians would be getting worked up and ammassing in and around all their former provinces who would either be wanting back with Russia or jumping on the American bandwagon. I'd imagine that all of the 'Stan's would be in civil war (caused mostly through CIA and Rusky involvement).

 

China would be going bonkers and North Korea would be having a field day.

 

Perhaps the world banking crisis would have been nothing more than a blip.

 

The world would certainly be a very different place than it is today.

 

 

 

Maybe we should be thankful that the Iraqi's and the Afghan's are tougher than George thought.

[Guest Roop]

I'd say the North Koreans are having a field day as it is. They put so much effort into winding up the septic tanks and they get the exact reaction they're looking for.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just been thinking (dangerous I know) ....

 

 

Where would we be if the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan had gone as swimmingly well as Dode W Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had hoped?

 

America and the coalition of the willing have complete control of Iraq, the people are being obedient and the oil is flowing.

 

The Republicans win the election (not with McCain because McCain was the anti-war Republican) and the neo-con masterplan proceeds.

 

Just guessing, but I think that there would have been a wholesale demolition of Iran, bringing together Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan under US control.

 

This would have created a huge territory from which the US could exert pressure on the rest of the region.

 

Tension with Pakistan would be immense. India on one side, America on the other. The Russians would be getting worked up and ammassing in and around all their former provinces who would either be wanting back with Russia or jumping on the American bandwagon. I'd imagine that all of the 'Stan's would be in civil war (caused mostly through CIA and Rusky involvement).

 

China would be going bonkers and North Korea would be having a field day.

 

Perhaps the world banking crisis would have been nothing more than a blip.

 

The world would certainly be a very different place than it is today.

 

 

 

Maybe we should be thankful that the Iraqi's and the Afghan's are tougher than George thought.

 

Hmmm, interesting.

 

I don't think Iran would have 'collapsed'. Surrounded on all sides though, I'm a Dinner Jacket (I know it originated from Littlec*ck in the mail but I like it!) would have outwardly stated that Iran would have been more 'democratic' but would be aiding the Shiahs in Iraq as much as possible, rather like what happens now.

 

Syria would have been the next target in my view had they not capitulated to 'democracy' (despite Saudi, of course, not changing at all). Who knows? They might have lifted the real Lockerbie bomber!

[shaun.lawson]

Just been thinking (dangerous I know) ....

 

 

Where would we be if the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan had gone as swimmingly well as Dode W Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had hoped?

 

America and the coalition of the willing have complete control of Iraq, the people are being obedient and the oil is flowing.

 

The Republicans win the election (not with McCain because McCain was the anti-war Republican) and the neo-con masterplan proceeds.

 

Just guessing, but I think that there would have been a wholesale demolition of Iran, bringing together Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan under US control.

 

This would have created a huge territory from which the US could exert pressure on the rest of the region.

 

Tension with Pakistan would be immense. India on one side, America on the other. The Russians would be getting worked up and ammassing in and around all their former provinces who would either be wanting back with Russia or jumping on the American bandwagon. I'd imagine that all of the 'Stan's would be in civil war (caused mostly through CIA and Rusky involvement).

 

China would be going bonkers and North Korea would be having a field day.

 

Perhaps the world banking crisis would have been nothing more than a blip.

 

The world would certainly be a very different place than it is today.

 

 

 

Maybe we should be thankful that the Iraqi's and the Afghan's are tougher than George thought.

 

I don't think Iran would've been attacked. Nor do I think the Republicans would've won the election - because the key issue at the election wasn't Iraq at all. It was the economy. I think Geoff's right that Syria would be very much under threat though.

 

The US invaded Iraq because, put simply, they needed a bitch: to have and to hold, for strategic and economic reasons in one of the world's most unstable, unpredictable regions. I've never been down with the idea that they were pursuing some pan-imperial agenda at all; it merely involved Iraq, which the neo-cons hoped, would act as a beacon for the rest of the region: causing regimes to topple, democracy to be seized by the people, and - crucially - capitalism to flourish.

 

They were wrong, ludicrously so really. And what's more, they could never, ever have defeated Iraq and won the peace with so few troops, and no real plan to rebuild the nation at all.

[wibble]

It's all incredibly hypothetical - as it was just a passing thought, not based on anything I read.

 

I think if the invasion had been a walk in the park and the benefits could be seen early in the piece, that the economic problems could have been talked down and the invasion seen as the way out of economic trouble.

 

I also think that the neo-cons - especially Rumsfeld and Cheney - did indeed have world domination type tendencies. These guys stopped at nothing to get their way. Outing spies, tourture etc. are the acts of maniacs.

 

An easy path through Iraq may well have fed their egos like Hitlers 14 day jaunt through France did to him.

 

I really believe that an easy run would have changed their levels of ambition to a ridiculous level.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

One other question though - if this had occurred in this fashion, do you think that Israel and Palestine would have both 'sued for peace', given (a) the large American presence on Israel's doorstep and ( the perceived 'power' of democracy in Iraq?

 

Anyway, as Shaun said, the Americans won the war but lost the peace.

[shaun.lawson]

It's all incredibly hypothetical - as it was just a passing thought, not based on anything I read.

 

I think if the invasion had been a walk in the park and the benefits could be seen early in the piece, that the economic problems could have been talked down and the invasion seen as the way out of economic trouble.

I also think that the neo-cons - especially Rumsfeld and Cheney - did indeed have world domination type tendencies. These guys stopped at nothing to get their way. Outing spies, tourture etc. are the acts of maniacs.

 

An easy path through Iraq may well have fed their egos like Hitlers 14 day jaunt through France did to him.

 

I really believe that an easy run would have changed their levels of ambition to a ridiculous level.

 

I simply don't see how this could've been the case though. What happened post the 'liberation' of Baghdad was essentially inevitable: guerilla warfare was always going to be the response of the insurgents, and the US just wasn't prepared for it. For the invasion, war and peace to have been a walk in the park would've required massively more manpower and very shrewd planning.

 

Meanwhile, for all Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz etc may well have had madcap ambitions, the American people don't at all. They were willing to support the Iraq war because it was presented as essential to national security, and 9/11 still resonated with so many. But the more soldiers are brought back in body bags, and the further away 9/11 recedes into memory, the more cautious they are always likely to become.

 

You can't go to war without a will behind you. Iraq was iffy for both the US and UK for this reason: and subsequent campaigns would have been massively more so, not least because attacking a country which already has WMD is self-evidently a complete no-no. Then there's the question of manpower; and of money. The more overstretched any nation is militarily, the more vulnerable it becomes: so much so that further wars would've themselves represented (or in a sense, created) a threat to American national security.

 

Then factor in the constitutional checks and balances in the US, and how little power the President generally has, and it all becomes vastly more complicated than you seem to suppose, even in a hypothetical, counter-factual thread such as this. The US was founded on being anti-imperialist; and for all it has behaved with thundering hypocrisy very often throughout the modern era, no American administration could continually display brazenly imperial ambitions and expect the people to accept it.

[wibble]

I totally agree Shaun, but my interest was more in where the neo-cons would have headed if their actions had resulted in a successful invasion.

 

I reckon the whole new world order agenda would have been pushed a level further and we'd be so much closer to a polarised world.

[The Mighty Thor]

What? You mean it hasn't been a success?

 

I agree with the school of thought that the outcome of the Iraq invasion would have had no bearing on the accession to the US throne of the Messiah.

 

I think the world is a rapidly changing place and the growing impotence of the USA internationally will have more of an effect on them domestically than it will have on the 'new world order'.

 

To take MJ's point regarding the polarised world i suspect that this will be driven more by the scarcity of natural resources rather than the political machinations of the so called 'superpowers'

[SpikeDudley]

The ironic thing is that there's nothing conservative at all about invading other countries.

[maroonlegions]

Considering that the invasion of Iraq was based on WOMD and that was based on lies and add to that the cluster bombing of Iraq civilians, then is it any wonder that there is a growing feeling that the NWO instigators would go to any lengths to further their agendas.The only ones considering this a success is the NWO organisations, Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld"s company's made massive profits in the contracts awarded to them to rebuild the infrastrucher of Iraq.War based on lies that led to massive civilian deaths and casualties.