What's new

Iraq's secret weapons: Iraqi-made unmanned aerial vehicles in the 90's

The SC

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
32,229
Reaction score
21
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
History Lesson: Iraq’s Foil-clad Drones

On February 5, 2003, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed the United Nations General Assembly in order to describe in detail the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein was supposedly developing in Iraq. This speech is now infamous, and the the inaccurate statements about Iraq’s nuclear and chemical weapons within it are a matter of public record. In that same speech, Secretary Powell made the remarkable assertion that Iraq was developing sophisticated drones to deliver these weapons of mass destruction.
“Iraq has been working on a variety of UAVs for more than a decade. This is just illustrative of what a UAV would look like,” Powell said, showing a photograph of a small unarmed drone. “This effort has included attempts to modify for unmanned flight the MiG-21 and with greater success an aircraft called the L-29. However, Iraq is now concentrating not on these airplanes, but on developing and testing smaller UAVs, such as this.” He went on, “Iraq could use these small UAVs which have a wingspan of only a few meters to deliver biological agents to its neighbours or if transported, to other countries, including the United States.”

Powell was not the only senior U.S. government figure to make claims about Iraq’s unmanned aerial vehicle program. In a speech the previous October, President George W. Bush said, “We’re concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States.” The president explained that Iraq’s “growing fleet” of unmanned aircraft “could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas.”


A slide from Colin Powell’s address to the U.N. General Assembly

These public claims were based, according to U.S. officials, on intelligence analysis conducted by various agencies. A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons arsenal was partly declassified in July 2003 in response to growing accusations that U.S. government claims about Iraq’s WMDs had been fabricated. The NIE notes that Baghdad had “exceeded U.N. range limits of 150 km with its ballistic missiles and is working with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which allow for a more lethal means to deliver biological and, less likely, chemical warfare agents.” The report was referring to intelligence collected in June, 2002, that appeared to show that Iraq had exceeded a self-imposed range limit for one of its prototype drones during testing. An October 2002 report by the Director of Central Intelligence reiterated these claims.

During inspections of Iraq’s military systems, the U.N.’s Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission did indeed scrutinize the Iraqi drone program, and concurred with the U.S. assessment that the unmanned aircraft might prove to be an effective delivery system for chemical weapons. A March 6, 2003 report by UNMOVIC, Unresolved Disarmament Issues: Iraq’s Proscribed Weapons Programmes, noted that drones “are of particular interest to UNMOVIC because of their potential to deliver a weapon to a remote target. Even though some UAVs are small and can only carry a few tens of kilogrammes as payload, this could be significant if that payload is a BW agent such as anthrax. Indeed, Iraq has declared that in 1988 it considered RPVs [remotely piloted vehicles] as a delivery vehicle to spray BW [biological warfare] agents, but said that it rejected the idea as the aircraft possessed at that time were too small.” The U.N. report focused on the L-29, a manned fighter jet that the Iraqi military had converted into an unmanned aircraft. Iraq had claimed that it had a range of only 30 km. and was designed for training purposes (not unlike the U.S. QF-16, which is also used for training), claims that UNMOVIC did not trust.

l-29uav.jpg

An L-29 photographed at Samara East Airbase Credit: Globalsecurity.org

The prospect of Iraqi unmanned aerial vehicles spraying chemical and biological agents over densely populated areas over the United States was widely reported in the media. But soon after the invasion of Iraq, as the tall stories of Iraq’s WMD arsenal began to fall apart, Powell’s and Bush’s claims about the scale and sophistication of Iraq’s drone program proved to be wildly exaggerated. In their speeches, Powell and Bush had neglected to mention that the capabilities of Iraqi drones had been a matter of debate in U.S. intelligence circles, according to the Associated Press. The Air Force, it was later revealed, had maintained that Iraqi drones were not capable of posing any real threat to the U.S., or even to the countries bordering Iraq. “We didn’t see there was a very large chance they [UAVs] would be used to attack the continental United States,” Bob Boyd, director of the Air Force Intelligence Analysis Agency, told the Associated Press, also noting that it was unlikely that Iraq was planning to use its drones to deliver chemical weapons, since there was little crossover between the two programs.

Indeed, in the final days before the invasion, Iraqi officials had displayed one of the military’s drones in an apparent effort to refute claims that these systems had any of the capabilities that U.S. officials claimed they had. According to the Christian Science Monitor, the drone had “‘God is Great’ written in Arabic along the fuselage and on each wing, with a red permanent marker.” The aircraft’s wings were apparently held together “with tin foil and duct tape, and two wooden propellers bolted to engines far smaller than those of a lawn mower.”
The L-29, meanwhile, was also found to be far less capable and reliable than originally thought. According to Globalsecurity.org, in a test at an advanced development stage in June 1997, the aircraft lost its communications link with ground crew and crashed. Engineers tried to solve the problem by bolting on to the drone a stabilization system from a Chinese cruise missile. This fix did not work. It also appears that the program could only have ever developed a handful of L-29 drones, since only a couple of dozen of the manned aircraft that it was based on were still in service in 2002. Furthermore, engineers had been unable to fly the aircraft more than 70 km. from the ground station (in the test in which the range limit of 150 km. was exceeded, the aircraft flew in circles over within a 70 km. range; the exceed “range” referred to by U.S. officials was therefore misleading).

aero-l29-delfin.jpg

A decommissioned L-29

Until recently, this anecdote from the leadup to the Iraq War was treated more as a curious sideshow to the more significant discussions around Iraq’s supposed nuclear program. But recently, it has taken on renewed relevance. After a U.S. spy drunkenly crashed his hobby drone into a White House lawn, many revisited the idea that even a rudimentary drone could be turned into an effective weapon. In theory, such a drone carrying a small amount of explosives could serve as an effective DIY precision-guided ordinance. The threat is being taken seriously. On March 18, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency will hold a hearing on this very issue. The Secret Service has announced that it will conduct a series of late night tests in order to figure out how to bring down small drones using signal jammers.
The cost of entry into drone warfare will someday drop to the point that a country with relatively few resources may indeed be able to develop drones that pose the kind of threat that Powell warned of in the General Assembly

But just as in 2003, when it comes to drones, there is still sometimes a gulf between fiction and reality, especially when it comes to indigenous military drone programs. The ongoing war in Syria has become a proving ground for various Iranian drones, the capabilities of which–just as with Iraq’s drones–are disputed. When Hamas announced that in July of last year that it had sent several drones into Israel for surveillance missions, the story grabbed headlines, but experts were quick to point out that, though they might sound impressive, Hamas drones were likely not much of a threat to the IDF. When countries like Nigeria and Ecuador claim to have developed capable military drones, it is worth pausing to consider whether or not such systems match both our expectations, as well as the claims that are being made about them.

While some commentators have warned that the proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles could pose a serious threat to international security, others have pointed out that the technical challenges are such that drones with anything approaching the capability of an armed U.S. Reaper drone, for example, are beyond the reach of all but a few of the wealthiest and most advanced militaries (satellites and other complex communications infrastructures are required to enable larger drone operations). The cost of entry into drone warfare will someday drop to the point that a country with relatively few resources may indeed be able to develop drones that pose the kind of threat that Powell warned of in the General Assembly, but in the meantime, we might look back at Iraq’s foil-clad drones and the excitement and anxiety they provoked as a cautionary tale: just because a country has drones, it doesn’t mean those drones are worth starting a war over.

http://dronecenter.bard.edu/history-lesson-iraqs-foil-clad-drones/


al-musayara20.jpg


al-musayara20_components.jpg


al-quds30a_isg2004.jpg


166738064.jpg


978291256.jpg


Ibn Firnas Company, headed by General Isma'il Ibrahim Ismail, has worked on at least three projects of the UAV. The first, the small reconnaissance plane known as the Sarab-1, was used only as an air target for the training of air defense and anti-aircraft artillery units, with a range of one to two and a half kilometers, of which 60 to 70 were built. The second aircraft is a Al-Mossayara-20 and was larger in size than the Sarab-1 aircraft, and uses commercial GPS navigation for aircraft to fly in pre-programmed tracks.

The third aircraft is a Al-Mossayara-30, designed fo a maximum load of 30 kg. Several models were built and tested, but there were problems in the control of their flight and with the start of the War of Iraq liberation, as the Americans call it, the company was not able to continue to work on it, and it was acknowledged that if Iraq had given more time it could be able to produce UAVs Unusually in large volumes.

In 1998, Al-Razi General Company was awarded a contract to develop a laser-based surveillance and control system for these aircrafts. The experimental work was initiated on a surveillance and control system for use with the Al-Mossayara-20 UAVs. It was tested in a pilot flight using a laser surveillance and control system in early 2000 in the Tikrit area of the Iraqi Aviation Academy. Where it flew an unmanned aircraft of the type Al-Mossayara- 30 made by the company Ibn Firnas for a distance of 6-10 km at a height of 700 meters. It was noted in this experiment that the dimensions of the aircraft used in the surveillance and control laser system experiment was smaller than the plane Al-Mossayara- 20. Although the research was conducted in two directions namely control of the laser-based surveillance and control system and the transmission and reception of laser information. In March 2000, Al-Razi published a report on his experience of a laser voyage inspection, as the company's president was disappointed by the results of the experiment. He believed that the system could not be used to control a drone because of the short range of the system, and later cancelled the program.

In the fall of 2002, the MIC chose Al-Mossayara-20 aircraft to be introduced into the Iraqi Air Force, and named it SAQR after the Iraqi Falcon because of its superior air performance. In June 2002, the Al-Mossayara-20 aircraft flew an experimental flight. The flight took three flying hours and reached a distance of 500 km. At first the aircraft was under the control of the center of the ground command and control, and then moved to fly under the command of the automatic pilot shortly after take off and flew under the command of the automatic pilot of the aircraft and landed under the command of the same automatic pilot at the end of the flight. In November 2002, Ibn Firnas Company signed a contract to supply 36 unmanned Al-Mossayara-20 aircraft to the Iraqi army capable of carrying out aerial reconnaissance in battlefields, followed by another contract with the Republican Guard, requesting the same number of aircraft ordered by the Iraqi army, 36 aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Iraq used to be ahead in many fields of technologies before the manic CIA stooge became president through a coup and waged war on both his own nation and Iranians.

Iraq was the first country in the middle east to develop own mini super computers which are used in ballistic missile technology. Adding these drones, i am sure USA was planning to steal Iraqi scientists and if not possible to buy them, kill them all. Hundreds of Iraqi scientists were terrorized during US occupation of Iraq.

It's wondering to see how USA ruined a country that could be a threat to Israelis. Good article from the sc, wannabe Saudi :lol::tup:
 
The only reason why Iraq was targetted was becasue they had a stable Military force who wanted to expand into Middle east i.e Kuwait other regions
 
Iraq used to be ahead in many fields of technologies before the manic CIA stooge became president through a coup and waged war on both his own nation and Iranians.

Iraq was the first country in the middle east to develop own mini super computers which are used in ballistic missile technology. Adding these drones, i am sure USA was planning to steal Iraqi scientists and if not possible to buy them, kill them all. Hundreds of Iraqi scientists were terrorized during US occupation of Iraq.

It's wondering to see how USA ruined a country that could be a threat to Israelis. Good article from the sc, wannabe Saudi :lol::tup:

The progress that was accomplished was accomplished when Iraq was lead by Iraqi and Arab nationalists and when Iraq was aligned/non-hostile with the West while still maintaining ties to USSR. When Iraq had great ties with most Arab countries.

In fact Iraq (policy wise) was similar to current day KSA and UAE on many fronts. Clever foreign policy while seeking to have cordial ties with the neighborhood and world powers (West, China, Russia etc). Similar the economic progress and thus scientific/educational was boosted/inaugurated due to high oil and gas prices and opening up to the world (economically) and not being a sanctioned pariah state.

If that had continued Iraq would have been a GCC member today with similar living standards.

A world opposite of what you wish for Iraq (a Shia-dominated (Wilyat al-Faqih) theocracy with Iran as a patron).

As for @The SC he is an Arab with ancestral ties to KSA (from what I know) who lives in Canada and he is a great user who has contributed a lot to this forum. Don't pollute this peaceful Arab section of the forum with trolling and nonsense. Also try to make a post without mentioning KSA and Arab monarchs. That obsession is reaching unhealthy levels.
 
The progress that was accomplished was accomplished when Iraq was lead by Iraqi and Arab nationalists and when Iraq was aligned/non-hostile with the West while still maintaining ties to USSR. When Iraq had great ties with most Arab countries.

In fact Iraq (policy wise) was similar to current day KSA and UAE on many fronts. Clever foreign policy while seeking to have cordial ties with the neighborhood and world powers (West, China, Russia etc). Similar the economic progress and thus scientific/educational was boosted/inaugurated due to high oil and gas prices and opening up to the world (economically) and not being a sanctioned pariah state.

If that had continued Iraq would have been a GCC member today with similar living standards.

A world opposite of what you wish for Iraq (a Shia-dominated (Wilyat al-Faqih) theocracy with Iran as a patron).

As for @The SC he is an Arab with ancestral ties to KSA (from what I know) who lives in Canada and he is a great user who has contributed a lot to this forum. Don't pollute this peaceful Arab section of the forum with trolling and nonsense. Also try to make a post without mentioning KSA and Arab monarchs. That obsession is reaching unhealthy levels.
When was that? During Saddams regime?

He waged war on iran with western backing.

He massacred kurds n shias.

He occupied tiny kuwait and threatened KSA.

He was a certified idiot. Who did their bidding and when he misbehaved, they killed him and destroyed iraq.

And today you have a pretty much divided iraq.
 
When was that? During Saddams regime?

He waged war on iran with western backing.

He massacred kurds n shias.

He occupied tiny kuwait and threatened KSA.

He was a certified idiot. Who did their bidding and when he misbehaved, they killed him and destroyed iraq.

And today you have a pretty much divided iraq.

I am talking about the 1960's and 1970's. Before Saddam's time.

Iran was supported by the West as well and tons of other countries (Contra Affair). Not to say that it was the most heavily armed regional country by the US (1 year before that war began).

As for massacres, Kurdish rebels were no saints. Let Iraqi users explain this to you in detail here. @TheCamelGuy The Kurds have been waging a war against the Iraqi state since the monarchy was around. They still conspire against the Iraqi state to this very day. The Iranian Mullah's massacred their own Kurds too who sided with Iraq.

As for Iraqi Shia Arabs, there were no massacres other than against the Marsh Arabs and those who rebelled in the South during the early (1990's) when the Gulf War was ongoing. KSA hosted a large portion of those refugees in the early 1990's when they sought refugee across the border. They were not targeted because they were Shia but because they were against his rule. There were several Shias in Saddam's government. Most of the soldiers during the Iraq-Iran war were Shias. As well as other minorities (Christians). Saddam Hussein cared little about sect and Iraqi Sunni Arabs who opposed him were ruthlessly killed/exiled as well. Be it nationalists, secularist or Islamists. Even family members were targeted.

Anyway that is outside of the topic of this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"A Land of Opportunity with Braindead Opportunist..."
 
I am talking about the 1960's and 1970's. Before Saddam's time.

Iran was supported by the West as well and tons of other countries (Contra Affair). Not to say that it was the most heavily armed regional country by the US (1 year before that war began).

As for massacres, Kurdish rebels were no saints. Let Iraqi users explain this to you in detail here. @TheCamelGuy The Kurds have been waging a war against the Iraqi state since the monarchy was around. They still conspire against the Iraqi state to this very day. The Iranian Mullah's massacred their own Kurds too who sided with Iraq.

As for Iraqi Shia Arabs, there were no massacres other than against the Marsh Arabs and those who rebelled in the South during the early (1990's) when the Gulf War was ongoing. They were not targeted because they were Shia but because they were against his rule. There were several Shias in Saddam's government. Most of the soldiers during the Iraq-Iran war were Shias. As well as other minorities (Christians). Saddam Hussein cared little about sect and Iraqi Sunni Arabs who opposed him were ruthlessly killed/exiled as well. Be it nationalists, secularist or Islamists.

Anyway that is outside of the topic of this thread.
You mean the soviet supported Ba’athists? Which produced Saddam as well?

I am talking about the 1960's and 1970's. Before Saddam's time.

Iran was supported by the West as well and tons of other countries (Contra Affair). Not to say that it was the most heavily armed regional country by the US (1 year before that war began).

As for massacres, Kurdish rebels were no saints. Let Iraqi users explain this to you in detail here. @TheCamelGuy The Kurds have been waging a war against the Iraqi state since the monarchy was around. They still conspire against the Iraqi state to this very day. The Iranian Mullah's massacred their own Kurds too who sided with Iraq.

As for Iraqi Shia Arabs, there were no massacres other than against the Marsh Arabs and those who rebelled in the South during the early (1990's) when the Gulf War was ongoing. They were not targeted because they were Shia but because they were against his rule. There were several Shias in Saddam's government. Most of the soldiers during the Iraq-Iran war were Shias. As well as other minorities (Christians). Saddam Hussein cared little about sect and Iraqi Sunni Arabs who opposed him were ruthlessly killed/exiled as well. Be it nationalists, secularist or Islamists.

Anyway that is outside of the topic of this thread.
You mean the soviet supported Ba’athists? Which produced Saddam as well?
 
You mean the soviet supported Ba’athists? Which produced Saddam as well?

Among others, yes. Their rule of Iraq initially was a great success story and Iraq progressed on all fronts and at one point in time became a leading regional country on a few fronts. That progress ended with the Iraq-Iran war (same case with Iran - even worse) and subsequent conflicts and political isolation (sanctions that make the current Iranian sanctions a joke in comparison).

Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr for instance was probably the best president in Iraq's modern history.

During his rule, Iraq was blossoming; high economic growth due to high international oil prices strengthened Iraq's role in the Arab world and increased the people's standard of living. Land reforms were introduced, and wealth was distributed more equally.
A sort of socialist economy was established in the late-1970s, under the direction of Saddam. Al-Bakr gradually lost power to Saddam in the 1970s, when the latter strengthened his position within the party and the state through security services. In 1979, al-Bakr resigned from all public offices for "health reasons" and died in 1982.​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Hassan_al-Bakr

Fact of the matter is that Iraq was doing well in the 1960's and 1970's.

Depending on your political views in Iraq there are 3 "good periods" in Iraq's modern-day history that people remember fondly (most) depending on age group and political views.

The monarchy (various time periods in that era), Abd al-Karim Qasim and Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr.

Al-Abadi might be the fourth one, although there are also numerous Saddam Hussein supporters as not everything he did was bad.
 
The only reason why Iraq was targetted was becasue they had a stable Military force who wanted to expand into Middle east i.e Kuwait other regions
Iraq had no intention of expanding its territories.. The attack on Kuwait was after the latter insisted on Iraq to pay its war time debts of around $20 billion, and Saddam was very angered by this (probably Kuwait was under the influence of the US), because Iraq was already under sanctions and its economy was struggling.. it is not that Iraq did not want to pay, but the timing of Kuwaiti demands was not right..
 
Iraq had no intention of expanding its territories.. The attack on Kuwait was after the latter insisted on Iraq to pay its war time debts of around $20 billion, and Saddam was very angered by this (probably Kuwait was under the influence of the US), because Iraq was already under sanctions and its economy was struggling.. it is not that Iraq did not want to pay, but the timing of Kuwaiti demands was not right..

It would have been better if Kuwait was divided by KSA and Iraq and KSA took command of all the small GCC states. Basically a single federal Arabian state. We should be one country/entity as throughout most of recorded history. Will probably happen one day in one form or another with or without the monarchies (most likely without). Closer economic and political cooperation (something along the GCC) will speed this inevitable process up.

Unification should be the goal not fragmentation. That will be the way forward in the Arab world. 100% sure of this.

Those dreaming of a separate Basra province so it can turn into another Dubai or some of the Iraqi Sunni Arabs thinking that they can create a country with Eastern Syria, it is useless and only will lead to further division.

Jordan (Northern Hijaz) should join its fatherland too. If people can love and show loyalty to modern-day states (the same ancient lands anyway) they will do so once unifications take place once again as throughout most of history.

Look at UAE and their unification. Today nobody talks about altering this decision and turning UAE into 7 separate countries (as de facto under the British colony and before the Brits arrived).
 
The progress that was accomplished was accomplished when Iraq was lead by Iraqi and Arab nationalists and when Iraq was aligned/non-hostile with the West while still maintaining ties to USSR. When Iraq had great ties with most Arab countries.

In fact Iraq (policy wise) was similar to current day KSA and UAE on many fronts. Clever foreign policy while seeking to have cordial ties with the neighborhood and world powers (West, China, Russia etc). Similar the economic progress and thus scientific/educational was boosted/inaugurated due to high oil and gas prices and opening up to the world (economically) and not being a sanctioned pariah state.

If that had continued Iraq would have been a GCC member today with similar living standards.

A world opposite of what you wish for Iraq (a Shia-dominated (Wilyat al-Faqih) theocracy with Iran as a patron).

As for @The SC he is an Arab with ancestral ties to KSA (from what I know) who lives in Canada and he is a great user who has contributed a lot to this forum. Don't pollute this peaceful Arab section of the forum with trolling and nonsense. Also try to make a post without mentioning KSA and Arab monarchs. That obsession is reaching unhealthy levels.
I can't see what this guy said about me.. most likely because he is on my ignore list.. nevertheless, thanks for clarifying things to him.. you were right in your assessment, actually with direct ties to our prophet (SAWS)..Thus to ancient and modern KSA..

It would have been better if Kuwait was divided by KSA and Iraq and KSA took command of all the small GCC states. We should be one country as throughout most of recorded history. Will probably happen one day in one form or another with or without the monarchies (most likely without). Closer economic and political cooperation (something along the GCC) will speed this inevitable process up.

Unification should be the goal not fragmentation. That will be the way forward in the Arab world. 100% sure of this.

Those dreaming of a separate Basra province so it can turn into another Dubai or some of the Iraqi Sunni Arabs thinking that they can create a country with Eastern Syria, it is useless and only will lead to further division.

Jordan (Northern Hijaz) should join its fatherland too. If people can love and show loyalty to modern-day states (the same land anyways) they will do so once unifications take place once again as throughout most of history.

Look at UAE and their unification. Today nobody talks about altering this decision and turning UAE into 7 separate countries (as de facto under the British colony and before the Brits arrived).
I agree, since those tiny states are more of a liability to the GCC powers than an advantage.. they represent also a vulnerability and weakness in the overall scheme of the GCC
 
I can't see what this guy said about me.. most likely because he is on my ignore list.. nevertheless, thanks for clarifying things to him.. you were right in your assessment, actually with direct ties to our prophet (SAWS)..Thus to ancient and modern KSA..


I agree, since those tiny states are more of a liability to the GCC powers than an advantage.. they represent also a vulnerability and weakness in the overall scheme of the GCC

:lol:

I should seriously follow your example, bro.

Not sure if I agree that they are a "liability" but a country like Qatar for instance is basically a fiefdom of Al-Thani (a family originally from Najd 250-300 years ago like 90% of all native Qataris) which without their control of the Qatari Peninsula and blessing of outsiders, it would have been a part of modern-day KSA and the historical Eastern Arabia region that it is a part of. 85% of which is made up by Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province. That historical region stretches from Southern Iraq to Northern Oman.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Arabia

A federal state would deal with almost all challenges. I am sure that most people would support this. All polls show this.

For instance Iraq should have been a GCC member state but due to political events of the past and current day circumstances that is not realistic although Iraq voiced interest to join a few years ago (before the Daesh cancer emerged to new heights). Today that is at least 5-10 years away due to lack of economic reforms and current economic situation not to say Iraq being partially hijacked by individuals (thankfully the majority are somewhat old so they will die off not far from now) who are not aligned to their own country first and foremost but other entities and ideologies.

Al-Abadi might be the leader who can overcome all this if he gets more time but his coalition nowadays is doubtful and we will see what will happen. As long as incompetent sellouts and traitors like Nouri al-Maliki are still around (despite his popularity having skyrocketed down) anything bad can sadly happen.

Iraq nowadays is caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. KSA/Arab countries should also have interacted with Iraq differently since 2003 but luckily this fault has been corrected and nowadays the ties are close and growing quickly. Better late than never, I say. Still much to do.

With wise leadership Iraq can use all its major neighbors in their favor and not pick sides openly. However we know where Iraq's natural place is and that is among its Arab neighbors and brethren. Not foreigners. History also shows this.

Anyway back to topic.

http://iraqimilitary.org/forums/ , http://www.arabic-military.com and http://defense-arab.com/vb/ have a lot of interesting information and articles from that time period of Iraq.
 
:lol:

I should seriously follow your example, bro.

Not sure if I agree that they are a "liability" but a country like Qatar for instance is basically a fiefdom of Al-Thani (a family originally from Najd 250-300 years ago like 90% of all native Qataris) which without their control of the Qatari Peninsula and blessing of outsiders, it would have been a part of modern-day KSA and the historical Eastern Arabia region that it is a part of. 90% of which is made up by Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Arabia

A federal state would deal with almost all challenges. I am sure that most people would support this. All polls show this.

For instance Iraq should have been a GCC member state but due to political events of the past and current day circumstances that is not realistic although Iraq voiced interest to join a few years ago (before the Daesh cancer emerged to new heights). Today that is at least 5-10 years away due to lack of economic reforms and current economic situation not to say Iraq being partially hijacked by individuals (thankfully the majority are somewhat old so they will die off not far from now) who are not aligned to their own country first and foremost but other entities and ideologies.

Al-Abadi might be the leader who can overcome all this if he gets more time but his coalition nowadays is doubtful and we will see what will happen. As long as incompetent sellouts and traitors like Nouri al-Maliki are still around (despite his popularity having skyrocketed down) anything bad can sadly happen.

Iraq nowadays is caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. KSA/Arab countries should also have interacted with Iraq differently since 2003 but luckily this fault has been corrected and nowadays the ties are close and growing quickly. Better late than never, I say. Still much to do.

With wise leadership Iraq can use all its major neighbors in their favor and not pick sides openly. However we know where Iraq's natural place is and that is among its Arab neighbors and brethren. Not foreigners. History also shows this.
To put it better and clearer.. in case of war they will be a liability, more than anything else.. Since there is only KSA and the UAE who will have the responsibility and capabilities to defend them..and thus dispersing their forces.. I think that is why all the tiny GCC members have been urged and encouraged to build some kind of strong militaries for deterrence sake .. the latest weapons' purchases and military service introductions stem from this new policy.. I am glad the GCC as a whole saw this vulnerability and addressed it in the proper way..
 
Last edited:
I am talking about the 1960's and 1970's. Before Saddam's time.

Iran was supported by the West as well and tons of other countries (Contra Affair). Not to say that it was the most heavily armed regional country by the US (1 year before that war began).



Anyway that is outside of the topic of this thread.

One arms deal several years into the 8 year war and you call that support? Because the U.S was desperate for money? You understand Iran took dozens of U.S hostages during that time right? Iran was barely armed, and one deal is not = to "supported".

Support is the 10's of billions of GCC funding, and 10's billions of arms deals by the Soviet union, and europe to Iraq in addition to satellite intelligence give from the U.S. These are known facts. A midget deal is not U.S support for a country that they've been threatening for 40 years now. Do you even remember beruit barracks bombing? U.S don't support Iran, but when it comes to needing money, they will sell anything to anyone desperate like Iran was at the time. Iran was broke as shit, no military after the army crumbled after the revolution, hated by literally every country in the western & eastern world, and completely alone without even a capability to produce a bullet.

While Donald Rumsfeld was shaking hands with Saddam Hussien to help him with the GCC to destroy the IR as everyone viewed IR as a threat. Lets be realistic here buddy.
 
Back
Top Bottom