Quote:
Originally Posted by mangamuscle
By which metric? The prior was the expulsion of an unwelcome invading force and the Kuwait government did paid the bill for military expenses. The latter was the invasion of a country which had plenty of experience after being at war with Iran for a decade. At first the casualties expected from the USA army were thought to be similar to those from the Vietnam war, but superior technology did paid out in the end.
|
There were some 3x the number of soldiers involved in the 1991 war.
While outmatched, the Iraqi army in 1991 was capable and actually able to fight back.
Veterans of the Iran-Iraq war were a greater factor in the 1991 war than in the 2003 war.
Kuwait paid for some of the coalitions expenses, but this is irrelevant to how big or small a conflict the 1991 war was.
The Iraqi army was broken in 1991, the primary reason Saddam was not deposed then was due to the UN coalition being explicitly formed to repel the invasion of Kuwait and not to overthrow the Iraqi government (similar to the purpose of UN forces in the Korean war).
Quote:
|
Which does not change it was a lengthily and costly occupation with its share of crippled for life war veterans.
|
The Iraqi insurgency and Iraqi civil war are separate events from the 2003 invasion.