PanARMENIAN.Net - Now it is crystal clear that the invasion into Iraq was the U.S. response to the terrorist act of September 11, 2001, although still puzzling is the goal of invasion. The whole world knew that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. But for formal reasons and as an excuse for their own actions, bypassing the UN Security Council in the U.S., the coalition allies agreed to a conscious forgery, which was revealed very soon. Inadequate response of President George W. Bush to the destruction of WTC towers led to serious consequences not only for the U.S. Army, but also for the region. Logically, the U.S. should have “punished” terrorists in Afghanistan, not in Iraq. But, apparently, Saddam hampered the oil lobby. America itself benefited little from the adventure. The only one that brought home the bacon was former Vice President Dick Cheney with his oil interests and supplies to the U.S. Army. And, of course, the president himself, who “earned” the title of champion of democracy a la US. Saddam’s fall led to the “Arab spring” strange as it may seem. It was with the collapse of Iraq that instability made roots in the Middle East. However, it must be admitted that the first people undermining the region were the British, who left in 1947. After their leave, there started the Israeli-Arab war, which continues to this day. Events in the Middle East put the long-awaited end to the Versailles-Potsdam, if one may say so, arrangement of Eurasia. The world has entered a new era and no one can foresee what will happen as a result of the shake-up.
But let us revert to Iraq. On 9 April 2003 the coalition forces seized Baghdad. In two months of war London and Washington lost a little over 170 soldiers. However, the confrontation then grew into a guerrilla war and the losses of the U.S. Army increased. Moreover, the situation was not improved after the capture and execution of Saddam Hussein in 2006. The official number of U.S. soldiers killed during the war amounted to 4481, with another 30 thousand wounded. Different estimates counted from 500 thousand to 1.1 million killed Iraqis, but they say the real number of those killed was a lot more. In fact, Iraq has now divided into three zones: North Kurdistan, Sunnis and Shiites fighting in the central part and in the south. But U.S. president Barack Obama, true to himself, declared that the U.S. is leaving independent, stable and self-confident country to a government representative elected by people... However, nothing in Obama's statement was true, like all the others made in respect of Egypt, Libya and Tunisia.
Beyond doubt, Iraq will join the list of Muslim countries where Shariah law reigns and may even fall under the strong influence of Iran. Separation of government posts between Shiites and Sunnis can lead to another civil war, after which Iran could easily take revenge for the war that lasted from 1980 to 1988. Then Saddam Hussein invaded the Iranian province of Khuzestan. By the summer of 1982 Iran returned the territory occupied by Iraq, after which the parties entered into a war of attrition. An armistice was signed on 20 August 1988 and the prewar situation was restored.
By duration, resources used and number of victims the Iran-Iraq war was one of the major military conflicts since 1945. In the course of the war chemical weapons were actively used. Thus, the future of Iraq is seen not in a good light. If you also add to this the constant raids by the Turkish army into Northern Kurdistan under the pretext of fighting the Kurdish rebels, it turns out that Iraq is simply broken up. Maybe this is what the U.S. sought - is always easier to negotiate and set conditions with a weak rival. Currently there is the Lebanese model working in Iraq, i.e. the president is a Shiite, and the premier is a Sunni. According to BBC, Prime Minister Tariq al-Hashemi was arrested on charge of financing terrorist operations. There will be more resignations and may even be death penalties. For the Middle East history repeats itself, and, as always, it is heavily irrigated with blood.