home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!yorkohm!minster!aaron
- From: aaron@minster.york.ac.uk
- Newsgroups: alt.desert-storm
- Subject: Re: Iraqi Aircraft Violations
- Message-ID: <728043712.29377@minster.york.ac.uk>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 10:21:52 GMT
- References: <93024.154536TWZ101@psuvm.psu.edu>
- Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England
- Lines: 28
-
- TWZ101@psuvm.psu.edu wrote:
- :
- : Some people in this group seem to be saying that the U.S. is being too
- : rigid in its enforcment of the U.N. resolutions against Iraq, especially the
- : flight bans in the north and south, and the actions taken against the SAM
- : batteries and air defense assets in both zones. In fact, the U.S. has been
- : far too lenient.
-
- I think the phrase is 'too selective'
-
- : In April, 1992, after Iraq began flying combat air patrols in response to
- : an Iranian air raid on a rebel base camp inside Iraq, the U.S. and its
- : Coalition partners did ABSOLUTELY nothing to stop the blatant violation of
- : accord.
-
- Perhaps this is because the allies do not want a Greater Iran as much as
- they don't want a Greater Iraq. It actually serves their purposes to play
- them off against each other, neother becoming more powerful than can be
- controlled provided that any conflict does not unduly threaten oil supplies
- or to drag in other nations (notably Israel). Hence the Western powers were
- not that distressed from a foreign policy perspective by the Iran/Iraq war
- and there is evidence to suggest that both sides were supplied with weapons
- by Western powers (and others)
-
- The allies (essentially now a US led coalition of Western powers with
- Kuwait and Saudi) are looking after their own regional interests.
-
- Aaron Turner
-