Post by James G on Jul 21, 2019 15:15:48 GMT
Back to the idea of the OP, an idea struck me today to increase the likelihood of Iraq doing better in 1991.
The US and the Coalition bought Iraqi propaganda - willingly aided among them too by public commentators - that this huge, undefeated and powerful Iraqi Army needed to be matched, overwhelmed even by a superior force.
Quite a significant Coalition military deployment was made.
Instead, that could all be seen as a bluff and a smaller contribution made to throw Iraq out of Kuwait. With less overwhelming force, while they would still win, the Coalition would take larger losses should Iraq be able to hit back more than that could in OTL.
Reasonable idea? Or madness?
The US and the Coalition bought Iraqi propaganda - willingly aided among them too by public commentators - that this huge, undefeated and powerful Iraqi Army needed to be matched, overwhelmed even by a superior force.
Quite a significant Coalition military deployment was made.
Instead, that could all be seen as a bluff and a smaller contribution made to throw Iraq out of Kuwait. With less overwhelming force, while they would still win, the Coalition would take larger losses should Iraq be able to hit back more than that could in OTL.
Reasonable idea? Or madness?
