There was no Shock and Awe used anywhere; it was a bluff that was put in the media to fool Saddam.
http://www.dcmilitary.com/navy/tester/8_16/commentary/22780-1.html
. . . OTOH, and surprisingly, they ain’t necessarily so glad that the Taliban/Muhajedeen overthrew the Communists. Some Afghans seem to remember the Soviet occupation period as comparing favorably with anything before or since, including the current situation. Discussed in this thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=304345
Without disagreeing with the general thrust of your post, I’ll just add a little corrective to the effect that the ‘foreign Arabs’, while disliked, made up neither the leadership nor the bulk of the Taliban rank and file. The Taliban were/are very Pushtun in aspect, despite ( or in fact including ) their slightly hybrid theology.
The issue, insomuch as it was one, was more was that the Taliban sheltered and loosely aligned with foreigner-based militias like ObL’s.
- Tamerlane
Noted.
I thought I rembered that the Taliban was even a student led movement initially, but don’t really remember for sure.
How many here actually read milblogs? Precious few, I’d guess.
Bullshit!
The Shock and Awe was never discussed as “bombing Baghdad back to the stone-age”.
It was about precise-bombing.
And that happened.
Or do you mean that the European TV-stations set up some fire-works in Baghdad every night?
Henry
The word “Taliban” can be translated as “students” (as in students of the Koran). It’s a Pashto word, but ultimately derives from Arabic.
What’s your point?
The leadership of Afghanistan supported an sheltered the man responsible for the 9/11 attacks. They acted as a staging area for al Qaida and refused repeated requests by the US government to hand him over, thus earning an invasion and ouster.
Iraq did not harbor support or protect Al-Qaida. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and Iraq posed no threat to the United States or its allies (outside of the hypothetical threat that any country with access to a well-stocked University biology lab poses)
Basically, the only thing the two countries had in common was that they were run by assholes; Something they share with the Unites States, I’m afraid.
I agree with most of your points other than this one- Iraq was a threat to Isreal (an allie) and the Kurds (well, maybe not 'allies" per se).
The best thing I have ever seen on Iraq for facts and figures is the Brooking Institution‘s Iraq Index (pdf-pops). The last one came out Dec.5. In it (on page 36) you can see the British Ministry of Defense’ s last poll was in August found 45% (and 65% of Iraqi’s in Maysan Province) felt that attacks on the troops were justified.
The International Republican Institute’s polling showed Iraqi’s evenly divided on Right-Wrong direction.
But Overwhelmingly and constantly when asked to name the top 3 problems, as **furt ** and others said, in Iraq Iraqi’s name the lack of electricity, and lack of adequate housing more significant by twice the margin before the next problems: in order unemployment, followed closely by the presence of Foreign troops (circa 10% of the population naming this one of the top 3 problems).
Those are the issues, as far as any reasonable person can measure not being there, that matter the most to Iraqi’s and may be useful as to the whys and whatfors.
The only other point I would make is an echo of Tamerlane’s that Afghanistan regime switched from Pashtun to Pashtun. In Iraq it switched from Sadam’s Sunni’s to a Kurd-Shiite dominated government (pg. 42 on the linkshows the current make-up) and it really is a case 40% of the country going from running stuff and being the “eleites” to being (very) minor players