Should Iraq resort to using chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, be found supporting terrorist acts against the US or coalition partners anywhere in the world, or destroy Kuwait’s oil fields, it shall become an explicit objective of the United States to replace the current leadership of Iraq….National Security Directive 54, 15 January 1991
Smoke from the burning oil wells was first visible from satellite images as early as February 8, 1991. Satellite images showed the number of oil fires peaked between February 22-24, 1991. In total, Iraq ignited or damaged more than 750 of Kuwaits’s 943 oil wells….A Chronology of Events
GORBACHEV: I know you were worried that, if Saddam simply withdraws, he would still have significant potential and therefore play a destabilizing role. This is no longer relevant. Besides, then we would be able to continue our cooperation in the UN Security Council framework to implement the idea we discussed: to create new security structures in the Middle East, to solve the numerous problems of that region
G.H.W. BUSH: Let me give you a detailed answer. First, we have no reasons to believe he [Saddam] will agree to your proposal. Second, it is not correct that the military potential which has enabled him to behave so insolently in the region no longer exists. A substantial part of his military potential is still there, and this would enable him to go on threatening his neighbors. The question of the right time to stop the military action should be considered carefully. Wouldn’t that make him look like a hero in the Middle East? Is it the right time now, when he has just attacked Israel, when he continues using Scud missiles, and his Republican Guard is still at his disposal? It seems to me that a cease-fire in the present situation would let him emerge victorious from under the ruins of defeat.Gorbachev-Bush Telephone call, 18 January 1991
In Pavel Stroilov’s book, Behind the Desert Storm, we see why the first Gulf War led to the Second Gulf War, which led to further troubles and today’s eruption against Israel. Always, Moscow has played an important role. About the chicanery involved in the First Gulf War, Pavel Stroilov wrote, “Again and again, as if all these decades never happened, they give us all this nonsense about the legacy of colonialism, about the centrality of the Palestinian problem….” The real Middle East problem today, said Stroilov, is the work of Red Arabs and their Islamist partners. The Middle East has been Moscow’s nasty stew pot. The Kremlin’s surrogates in the region have always kept the pot simmering so that things can be brought to a boil when necessary.
Now we see that Hamas has gone into action. What this signifies is pressure: (1) anti-American, anti-Israeli pressure on the oil-rich Gulf States and Saudi Arabia; (1) pressure on the price of oil, which helps Russia; (2) pressure on the economies of Europe, Japan and South Korea; (3) pressure on America’s stretched military resources; (4) pressure to reduce support for Ukraine.
If China continues its buildup in the Far East, and wars can be touched off in three regions at once, what will America do?
A Conversation with Jimmy from Brooklin on Hamas and communism