True.
Although Iraqi war-machine was battle-hardened and well-equipped for an Asian country at that time, U.S. had advanced much further in military capabilities than the rest of the world. Lessons from earlier war in Vietnam and digital revolution were taken at heart.
No country, other than U.S., was capable of tackling Iraq like that in 1991. In-fact, Russian and Chinese analysts had predicted 30,000 American casualties in this war (in advance) but they had no idea what U.S. was bringing to the table this time.
Iraq had committed 50 divisions to the war. It would have thrashed a lesser coalition like GCC left and right. It is often said that Cold War ended with defeat of Saddam Hussein.
My friend,
I see your point. However, I had to point out the overreaching aspect in your argument.
Think about it. Iraq had committed 50 divisions (about a million men in total) to the war in 1991 in order to prevent a breakthrough in Kuwait. And that force wasn't amateurish either.
Pakistan didn't had cruise missiles, stealth aircraft, long-range bombers, aircraft carriers, aircraft with BVR and precision strike capabilities, JSTARS ground activity monitoring system, a huge network of satellites, powerful conventional bombs like Daisy Cutters, Apache gunship helicopters and M1A1 Abrams MBT at its disposal back then. On top of all this, Pakistani military was not in the position to conduct large-scale military operations during night-time or periods of darkness.
How many divisions do you think Pakistan could commit to that war and how would it shift all that stuff to that region in the first place? Could Pakistan even afford to leave its borders with India and Afghanistan largely unguarded in 1991? Can it even today?
Pakistani military capability is no where close to that of U.S. and geopolitical situations of both are also different. We are not a superpower and neither we are in the position to commit a huge force to a war in some other part of the world without compromising our own defensive posture. Not even close.
Overreaching in arguments do not make them credible. Saudi Arabia had thought through the scenario back then and we cannot fault it for seeking American intervention at the time.
Yes, GCC should have discouraged efforts of Bush administration to invade Iraq in 2003. But they all thought that downfall of Saddam Hussein is good for the entire region. They all miscalculated the magnitude and reach of jihadi mindset in the region.
