« Saudi Arabia's Lebanese stooge condemns Hizbullah | Main | "Western Media Misunderstands Egypt" Abdullah Schleifer »

18 August 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


You are 100% correct. Jamal Abdul-Nasser had done the same to the MB. So, surprise surprise , history does repeat itself (specially if you do not behave; and they did not act as democrats - surprise- when they had the power).


"The government of Ehypt will outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood as a legal association". Sadat and Mubarak done it and could not eliminate the ideology of MB. Colonel, I am curious to know why do you think this time will be different.



you should add Nasser to the list of those who suppressed the MBs political activity for 63 years. Ideas are hard to kill. Men and their acts are easy to kill or stop if you are resolved. it is not a question of their ideology. maybe they will have better luck 60 years from now. pl


The fall of the MB's only makes it easier for AQE to appear out of thin air.



they will be suppressed as well. there is nothing inevitable or "written" about the supposed coming victory of political Islamism. pl


"In a tweet, the group said..."
I wonder just who all those folks following the MB on twitter might be. They sure aren't the fellahiin. Perhaps the D.C. crowd could figure out the implication of that fact.


There was an anarchist movie a few years ago that posited the same thing: "Ideas are bulletproof." Of course, if they weren't; how would one know? A dead idea, unremembered, gone to the choir eternal -- habeas corpus.

Babak Makkinejad

If they had wanted to "blink" then why did they do all of this?

Why confront the Army and cause all these deaths when they could have "blinked" earlier, wait for the new elections, and participate in them?

I mean, are Ikhwan stupid or what?

What gives?



The MB louts in the street and the leaders behind badly misjudged their strength in their enthusiasm for the cause. That is why I say that the supposedly inevitable victory of political Islamism is a joke.

As for Saddam's options I was then head of US military intelligence for the ME and had studied his options closely. there were four lane highways from Kuwait to Dhahran and thence to Riyadh. My estimate was and is that six divisions pushed hard forward would have overrun the Ghawar oilfield and the air ans sea ports and then reach Riyadh in two weeks. Saudi Arabia had nothing with which to stop them and the US could not have acted quickly enough to have stopped them. He ordered his forces to stop at the Saudi border for no valid military reason. much as Hitler made mistakes during Barbarossa. That would have been the end of SA. pl

Alba Etie

Col Lang
One plausible reason for stopping at the Kuwait border was because Saddam thought he might be able to keep Kuwait , without going to Riyadh . Is is true that Kuwait at one time was a province of Iraq ?



He seems to have thought that. It was a very bad miscalculation. the plan as written by the Iraqi general staff would have carried them all the way to Dhahran and Riyadh within a cople of weeks of crossing the Kuwait frontier. This would have profoundly altered the situation and presented us with the necessity of entering through UAE or Red Sea ports. The Saudi decision to let us in the country was a surprise to many including me. Nevertheless, the US had so few forces in SA for several weeks that the Iraqis could have run right over them. We had a battalion of paratroops from the 82nd, one squadron of fighters and only the ammunition and bombs that were flown in with them. this was a "speed bump" on the road to Dhahran. pl

The beaver

It looks like the Pharaoh will be set free today.
The military may not have the intention to seize power but let's see if the old guard does not make a comeback with the son of the Pharaoh running for the presidency.


As soon as he saw SA being reinforced, he didn't think that all of what he was promised (presumabely, if he stopped at the border) was a stalling tactic? Guess we will never know now, but surely it wasn't just a stupid miscalculation; instead it was also likely a resuot of the doubt in his mind that we would betray a "company" man.



He halted his forces at the border, in fact pulled one armored brigade back into Kuwait, before any announcement was made of Saudi willingness to be defended by us and certainly before the arrival of our little deterrence force. The Iraqi army halted on the Saudi border because of a phase line built into their plan, a phase line that had been established in deliberate planning with the agreement of the head of state. there were three more phase lines in the plan. There would have been a temporary halt on each of these. the military could not have advanced beyond any of these without Saddam's decision. I was the chief military intelligence person on this here in Washington and IMO Saddam could have seized all of the Eastern Province and Riyadh and we would have backed away from a fait accompli. pl



I am told that Amre Mousa is their preferred candidate. Gamal can be a pain. pl


If you think Saddam was a "company man" you really are a simple minded ass. pl


"That would have been the end of SA. pl"

We can dream, can't we?

The beaver

May be for the short term - to appease everyone around - the 25th January crowd and the anti-Mursi secular demonstrators.
Mousa is not a young pup ( he had been praising the qualities of Jamal for President back in 2011) and who knows what the tea leaves would tell us 2 yrs down the road.
The nepotism and corruption machines need to be kept oiled for the"elites".



This is Egypt we are talking about. what you call "corruption" is a way of life. pl


My point was that perhaps he felt he was and that was what dictated his actions.


Thanks. Its nice to get this insight after having read articles about what Glaspie did or did not say to Saddam at the time and what was being inferred.



Saddam never thought anything of the sort. He was very reluctant to accept US intelligence support in the war. He always believed that the Americans were false friends who would abandon Iraq as soon as the Saudis and Kuwaitis stopped fearing an Iranian victory. He was right. The realization on his part that this had occurred after the cease fire was accepted by the Iranians was instrumental in his decision to invade Kuwait. Kuwait had lent Iraq a lot of money during the war for the purpose of keeping the Iraqis in the fight against Iran. When the war ended Kuwait immediately started demanding paymentp. l



glaspie was frightened of Saddam and hid within her talking points from state. these were written by people who did not want to see US intervention in a Kuwait/Iraq War. That would have included just about everyone in the USG at that point. Nothing in her instructions said that she could threaten Saddam. ambassadors don't make foreign policy. New Subject - Iraq did not solicit US combat intelligence support in the war against Iran. that was offered at the urging of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait who were frightened of Iran. pl


So the Kuwaitis had the Iraqis do the bleeding and dieing for them - Wiki writes of 150,000–375,000 Iraqi soldiers and militia killed and an economic loss for Iraq of more than $500 billion - and the Kuwaitis had nothing better to do but to demand payback just as if Iraq had done nothing for them but taking a loan?


William R. Cumming

Hypothetical? If a post-American withdrawal Iraq invaded Kuwait now what would the US do? The Saudis? Iran?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

July 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Blog powered by Typepad