Originally posted by Toad
"like Saddam's"; Not necessarily quantitatively.
More conjecture? Where's the beef? Give me some qualitative comparisons between the two military forces.
From your undoubtedly accurate to the last vowel depiction, the Securitate being stripped of their weapons doesn't seem to compare with the reports of how the Republican Guard fared against the Kurds and the Shiites. After initial reverses, the state forces came back extremely successfully and harshly. [/B]
The Securitate who were guarding a group of forced "pro-Ceausescu" demonstrators were stripped of their weapons. We are talking probably less than 100 guards for over 1000 demonstrators.
The rest of the Securitate, Security Troops and Worker's Guards kept their weapons and used them against the Romainian people. They did fight back.
The difference is that in Iraq the revolt never spread through out the country. The people of Baghdad did not revolt with the people of Basra.
In Romania, the protest rippled through the entire country. The people of Bucharest revolted with the people of Timisoara. The majority of people in Romania violently called for a change because they had had enough.
The majority of Iraqis evidently never reached that level of hate for Saddam that the Romanians did for Ceausescu.
We both agree that xxxxxxxxxx nation's boys should be dying for xxxxxxxxx nation's independence. [/B]
Glad we agree on something. I don't see that happening even now with US military aid on the ground. I don't see the people of Baghdad carrying out acts of sabotage while the Republican Guard is busy with the US forces. I don't see Iraqi expatriates here in the US getting on planes to go back to Iraq to organize a resistance front. I do see Iraqi expatriates going home to fight against the US though.
However, we disagree on whether or not a populace without heavy weapons can successfully revolt against a government that accepts slaughter and genocide as an acceptable means of control, equipped with heavy weapons and soldiers more than willing to use them against their countrymen. Such a populace would have to have external military aid. IMO. [/B]
Well, I've given you one example where your opinion did not play out as you would have expected. I could go into the Iranian Revolution of 1979, but I doubt you are willing to consider that your opinion has been contradicted by historical events regardless of how many examples I am able to give.
How'd the Kurds succeed in the North with a no-fly zone? They failed miserably without one in '91 but have held an Indpendent Kurdistan with the addition of "just" a no-fly zone... external military aid. [/B]
The Kurds are a tiny minority...that is why they fail without external assistance.
