If Bush decides not toinvade Iraq, for whatever reason (the reason isn't really important) would Saddam be overthrown in the Arab Spring. If so how is he overthrown, is there a full blown civil war, would there be political settlement or would he step down semi-peacefully way ( I really doubt that last one). Or would Iraq be unaffected like Iran.
No Iraq War does the Arab Spring Come to Iraq
- Thread starter Patton
- Start date
Nope, Saddam was very very good at putting down revolts. Even after his army was defeated in the Gulf War he was able to slaughter hundreds of thousands of Shia we asked to rise up in very short order. Of course Bush 41 said America would help the Iraqi people if they rose up and didn't.
Saddam used the kind of extreme violence to any precieved threat to his rule whatsoever that makes baby Assad look like a peaceable reformer in comparison.
Last edited:
If Obama ends up President no. If Hillary or John McCain ends up President then I would say yes.
Obama made as part of his campaign him being a citizen of the world in a way say Bill Clinton (or Hillary) never did. Bill showed he was willing to bipass the UNSC for air strikes to end a civil war and I honestly think Hillary would be no different. Obama hasn't shown himself willing to bipass the UN yet and honestly Russia wouldn't support intervention at the UN as Saddam right now would have sanctions gone and would be buying tons and tons of weapons from Russia. Oil prices would have risen as they did OTL as the main reason for their rise was China and to a lesser extent India's economy going gangbusters and using much more oil each year.
Saddam would be rearming mainly on Russian weapons like crazy over the past half decade. I suspect some other countries in Europe would sell weapons to them again as well, but not all of them. Say what you will about Saddam he knew how to put together an extremely tightly controlled Totalitarian State where all aspects of society were under his thumb... pre-war Iraq had a more effective terror apparatus then any other in the Middle East in the 20th century or what we have seen so far in the 21st century.
Last edited:
If there's no Iraq war, Obama might be butterflied away. His rise to power was based off his opposition to the war.
Very possible, but if no Iraq War the financial house of cards could start falling earlier then OTL as well or perhaps even later in which case John McCain could win the Presidency.
I doubt that Obama regardless of his positives could have beaten the Clinton machine in 2008 without hard core anti-war elements putting him over the top.
But, he was Russia's friend. So, support for any rebellion won't happen unless its under a Hillary or McCain that isn't willing to avide by the will of the UNSC. In fact one can argue Gaddafi's biggest mistake was letting his once close relationship with Russia lapse otherwise no UN support for a No Fly Zone and no intervention.
Please, not even the GOP tries to really spread that myth.
If there's no Iraq War then Bush isn't President. Without him fucking up the economy as much the Spring could be delayed a bit. Or it could come earlier, without Bush pissing off the entire Arab world and keeping the focus off domestic problems there.
I think there would still be uprisings as populations in the Islamic world were unhappy with the current set of aging dictatorships, but watching democracy in action in Iraq gave the Arab Spring a direction that they otherwise I suspect wouldn't have had. It would be more about changing one dictator for another instead of the idea of replacing the dictator with a democratic process which they got to watch in action in Iraq. Sure, Arabs saw the flaws in a democratic process, but they also saw the positives.
Saddam's Iraq is different because after the First Gulf War there was bipartisan interest in eventually settling the score.
Putting out the names of potental Democratic Presidents I would say how willing I think they would be to bipass the UN on it...
Gore, Hillary, Kerry, a whole bunch of others? Yes.
Obama, Feingold and a few others? Maybe yes, maybe no, to be honest I think it would be decided on the U.S. public mood at the moment on getting involved. If we were in the middle of a bad Recession or even Depression after the housing market crashes then that will factor into it.
Snake Featherston
Banned
No, Saddam Hussein just bombs, gasses, and shells his opposition and buries the corpses in more mass graves. Just because Bush horribly bungled the Iraq War does not invalidate that Mr. Al-Majid was a very, very nasty man leading a scummy regime.
I was about to ask that same question. I think the Arab Spring, or something like it was bound to happen eventually, but I think it would delayed without the Iraq War.
Saddam Hussein was a very horrible man equal to Stalin and Hitler
He used nerve gas on his own people during the Iran-Iraq war I think that will answer your question
If the second Gulf War had not happened the Saudis would be supporting him as a counterweight to Iran one of the major reasons why the first Gulf War happened was Kuwait refusing to forgive a loan to Saddam against Iran in the Iraq Iran war
We may have had a second Iran-Iraq war in the Middle East or an even bigger war
Saddam would not twiddle his thumbs while Iran was building a nuclear weapon
If Saddam doesn't leave there are a lot of factors Libya would still be pursuing a nuclear weapon Which comes to mind first
Here's my two cents on the subject
He used nerve gas on his own people during the Iran-Iraq war I think that will answer your question
If the second Gulf War had not happened the Saudis would be supporting him as a counterweight to Iran one of the major reasons why the first Gulf War happened was Kuwait refusing to forgive a loan to Saddam against Iran in the Iraq Iran war
We may have had a second Iran-Iraq war in the Middle East or an even bigger war
Saddam would not twiddle his thumbs while Iran was building a nuclear weapon
If Saddam doesn't leave there are a lot of factors Libya would still be pursuing a nuclear weapon Which comes to mind first
Here's my two cents on the subject
whitecrow
Banned
Is that an actual figure or a hyperbole? I know Saddam bloodily put down revolts but killing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS after 1991? Do you have any citation for that?
We could argue the Iraq war *delayed* the Arab Spring. With the US invasion and the bungled post-war reconstruction and widespread violence, this was in the eyes of many people, proof that democracy equals chaos. Without it, no such proof existed and the Mohamed Bouazizi event could well have occurred earlier.
Of course we all agree that Saddam would make Gaddafi and Assad look compassionate.
Of course we all agree that Saddam would make Gaddafi and Assad look compassionate.