Thirty-five years ago, the world woke up to find the United States at war with Iraq. It was a war that set in motion changes that still reverberate globally to this day.
This is brilliantly argued, Scott. The idea that Desert Storm was actualy the starting point for America's decades-long decline hits different when you trace the direct line from 1991 to today's chaos. I remember watching the war on CNN as a kid, thinking it was this clean victory - but you're right, it was really the moment we chose hegemony over cooperation. That hubris has cost us dearly.
and likely the deployment of DEWS , frying thousands of retreating Iraqi troops, like in Venuzuela using high tech like that. I was neutral about Gulf War I. I read newspapers and watched the news . As Twain said, people who do not read them are uninformed, people who do read them are misinformed.
Do I recall correctly that Iraq had justifiable concerns about Kuwait exploiting Iraqi oil fields along its border? And didn’t Saddam get an implied “green light” from the US ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie? And could not that dispute have been taken to the UNSC and potentially have been resolved peacefully?
I also recall talk, later, of the 'implied green light' of which you speak. And vaguely of underground pipelines from Kuwait, taping into Iraqi oil fields. But it was a long time ago & I stand to be corrected.
War is never black & white, more increasingly dirty shades of grey.
Hey, Scott, can you clarify something for me? At the beginning of this article, you stated Iraq. In August of 1990, Iraq had invaded and occupied the sovereign state of Kuwait, an act of aggression that operated in flagrant violation of the law. It was my understanding back then, since Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq, which is a war crime, Iraq had every right to invade Kuwait. Is that correct, or was I misinformed?
Saddam was our guy - then he was’nt. He was our guy vs Iran ( oh um ) - Bush senior was in on this . Look it up - he knew what was coming before - in fact Saddam told him he would . There was a set up. Think Robert Fisk wrote in this.
I bet those family members of the 400+ coalition soldiers who perished during that militarized rendition of dick-wagging and chest-thumping didn't -- and still don't -- consider those losses "much ado about nothing."
I also suspect that the 175,000 to 250,000 U.S combatants who continue to suffer from multi-symptomatic Gulf War Illness don't consider their affliction "much ado about nothing" either.
2,300 is a gross misrepresentation of the number of civilian deaths attributable to the USA-led intervention. The actual number was at least 100 times that. Here's Google Gemini's summary:
1. Direct Civilian Deaths (Combat Phase)
These are deaths caused by the actual bombing campaign (Operation Desert Storm).
The Estimate: Most independent human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and the Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA), estimate between 2,500 and 3,500 civilian deaths.
Key Event: The single largest loss of life occurred at the Amiriyah shelter on February 13, 1991, where two U.S. laser-guided bombs killed 408 civilians.
The "Clean War" Debate: While the Coalition emphasized "precision" munitions, the sheer volume of strikes (88,500 tons of bombs) inevitably led to significant collateral damage in urban centers like Baghdad and Basra.
2. Death via Infrastructure Collapse (1991–1992)
This is the "Indirect" death toll often cited by public health researchers. The Coalition’s strategic bombing targeted Iraq’s electric grid, water treatment plants, and sewage systems.
The Estimate: A landmark 1992 study by the Harvard Study Team estimated that an additional 100,000 to 110,000 Iraqis died in the year following the war due to the "public health catastrophe" caused by the destruction of power and water infrastructure.
The Cause: Without electricity, water pumps failed and sewage flowed into the streets. This led to massive outbreaks of cholera, typhoid, and gastroenteritis, primarily killing the very young and the elderly.
3. Deaths Due to Sanctions (1991–2003)
The UN sanctions imposed on Iraq are among the most controversial in history. Because the sanctions lasted 12 years, the numbers are massive and highly disputed.
The "500,000 Children" Figure: In 1996, a UNICEF report famously suggested that 500,000 children had died due to the sanctions. This number was cited by Madeleine Albright in a famous 60 Minutes interview.
The 2017 Revision: Modern retrospective analyses (notably by the British Medical Journal) have suggested that the "500,000" figure was likely a result of the Iraqi government manipulating survey data to influence international opinion.
The Revised Estimate: Current scholarly consensus (as of 2026) suggests a more "tentative" figure of 150,000 to 200,000 excess deaths attributable to the sanctions. While lower than the initial reports, it still represents a staggering humanitarian crisis where malnutrition and lack of medicine were the primary killers.
The Lancet recently published a study going back more than 50 years showing more than 500,000 deaths a year from "sanctions". We're truly monsters. Kuwait was a province of Iraq carved off by the British as usual.
Mr. Ritter, we here in an Oregon small south coast town support your efforts and you. Thank you for your reflections, history and insights. The Frost poem inserts were well received. You exhibit great courage, you are truly a Marine through. Our higher power and Guardian angels see you.
Gary Holland on the Jeff Rense program yesterday saying that in the Vietnam War 1970's they (USA) ordered heaps and heaps of military gear, camouflage, for "Desert Storm" conditions not the tropics. Though perhaps they expected Agent Orange to turn the rainforests into deserts quickly (not likely). I wonder if Colon(sic) Powell, who in part covered up for the Mai Lai massacre, had something to do with those desert gear purchases too. Nothing would surprise me (and what rense said Sadam Hussein said when he had read Jeff Rense's own book on where AIDS was created (usual suspects ) "nothing would surprise me with the Americans". Nothing can surprise me with the youknowwhos, up to and including the Samson Option.
This is a excellent piece, you describe well Desert Storm, not as a standalone event, but as the operational birth of the unipolar moment, an “unfinished war” that set a direct course for the conflicts that followed.
But was it not just an other event in a long series of tragic events which most of us will never fully grasp. I’m struck by what one might call a historian’s dilemma. Where does the story truly begin? You rightly note its operational roots in repurposed Cold War plans. But its strategic cause was the calcified aftermath of the Iran-Iraq War, which left Saddam bankrupt, bitter, and primed to miscalculate in Kuwait.
And that forces us to look deeper still, to the 1947-48 Partition of Palestine. That rupture didn’t just create a refugee crisis; it shattered the regional order and ushered in the era of American superpower intervention, secular nationalism, and religious revival that defined the modern Middle East. It was the true start of the “American Era” , it began in 47 not 91
One need not look too far back to find Britain`s fingerprints on most every conflict since the crusades . For the last century we can call it the American empire era, but historically I think it will be known as the Anglo-American era, and I doubt America will get a full century given its trajectory
The ideology of Europe that keeps trying to weaken Russia shows that science, technology and data are not all powerful. Russia has superior weapons and the largest battle hardened army in the world.
Or even the history of the West's over 100 years of attacks on Russia recently laid out by Prof Jeffery Sachs is ignored or probably just ignored.
And the transcendent power of capitalism, the new religion, expects some day to plunder Russia.
Or, maybe it is the old guard and newly rich holding onto their power.
Ukraine will be settled on the battlefield.
I just joined for $70 for a year's membership. Good luck in your fight against debanking.
Hi Scott, you do amazing work! I am proud of you and admire your strength and perseverance! Thanks a lot for sharing your book chapter by chapter. And I recommend to still sell the book once finished and I am happy to connect you to a good publisher in Germany.
This is brilliantly argued, Scott. The idea that Desert Storm was actualy the starting point for America's decades-long decline hits different when you trace the direct line from 1991 to today's chaos. I remember watching the war on CNN as a kid, thinking it was this clean victory - but you're right, it was really the moment we chose hegemony over cooperation. That hubris has cost us dearly.
and likely the deployment of DEWS , frying thousands of retreating Iraqi troops, like in Venuzuela using high tech like that. I was neutral about Gulf War I. I read newspapers and watched the news . As Twain said, people who do not read them are uninformed, people who do read them are misinformed.
Do I recall correctly that Iraq had justifiable concerns about Kuwait exploiting Iraqi oil fields along its border? And didn’t Saddam get an implied “green light” from the US ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie? And could not that dispute have been taken to the UNSC and potentially have been resolved peacefully?
I also recall talk, later, of the 'implied green light' of which you speak. And vaguely of underground pipelines from Kuwait, taping into Iraqi oil fields. But it was a long time ago & I stand to be corrected.
War is never black & white, more increasingly dirty shades of grey.
Yes, and we all know too well the fate of any who happen to be any shade other than white,
You have great sense of humor, The UNSC, resolve peacefully , in which dimension has this every happend
Hey, Scott, can you clarify something for me? At the beginning of this article, you stated Iraq. In August of 1990, Iraq had invaded and occupied the sovereign state of Kuwait, an act of aggression that operated in flagrant violation of the law. It was my understanding back then, since Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq, which is a war crime, Iraq had every right to invade Kuwait. Is that correct, or was I misinformed?
You are correct about the slant drilling. But that didn’t give Iraq the authority under international law to invade and occupy.
Saddam was our guy - then he was’nt. He was our guy vs Iran ( oh um ) - Bush senior was in on this . Look it up - he knew what was coming before - in fact Saddam told him he would . There was a set up. Think Robert Fisk wrote in this.
I bet those family members of the 400+ coalition soldiers who perished during that militarized rendition of dick-wagging and chest-thumping didn't -- and still don't -- consider those losses "much ado about nothing."
I also suspect that the 175,000 to 250,000 U.S combatants who continue to suffer from multi-symptomatic Gulf War Illness don't consider their affliction "much ado about nothing" either.
2,300 is a gross misrepresentation of the number of civilian deaths attributable to the USA-led intervention. The actual number was at least 100 times that. Here's Google Gemini's summary:
1. Direct Civilian Deaths (Combat Phase)
These are deaths caused by the actual bombing campaign (Operation Desert Storm).
The Estimate: Most independent human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and the Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA), estimate between 2,500 and 3,500 civilian deaths.
Key Event: The single largest loss of life occurred at the Amiriyah shelter on February 13, 1991, where two U.S. laser-guided bombs killed 408 civilians.
The "Clean War" Debate: While the Coalition emphasized "precision" munitions, the sheer volume of strikes (88,500 tons of bombs) inevitably led to significant collateral damage in urban centers like Baghdad and Basra.
2. Death via Infrastructure Collapse (1991–1992)
This is the "Indirect" death toll often cited by public health researchers. The Coalition’s strategic bombing targeted Iraq’s electric grid, water treatment plants, and sewage systems.
The Estimate: A landmark 1992 study by the Harvard Study Team estimated that an additional 100,000 to 110,000 Iraqis died in the year following the war due to the "public health catastrophe" caused by the destruction of power and water infrastructure.
The Cause: Without electricity, water pumps failed and sewage flowed into the streets. This led to massive outbreaks of cholera, typhoid, and gastroenteritis, primarily killing the very young and the elderly.
3. Deaths Due to Sanctions (1991–2003)
The UN sanctions imposed on Iraq are among the most controversial in history. Because the sanctions lasted 12 years, the numbers are massive and highly disputed.
The "500,000 Children" Figure: In 1996, a UNICEF report famously suggested that 500,000 children had died due to the sanctions. This number was cited by Madeleine Albright in a famous 60 Minutes interview.
The 2017 Revision: Modern retrospective analyses (notably by the British Medical Journal) have suggested that the "500,000" figure was likely a result of the Iraqi government manipulating survey data to influence international opinion.
The Revised Estimate: Current scholarly consensus (as of 2026) suggests a more "tentative" figure of 150,000 to 200,000 excess deaths attributable to the sanctions. While lower than the initial reports, it still represents a staggering humanitarian crisis where malnutrition and lack of medicine were the primary killers.
The Lancet recently published a study going back more than 50 years showing more than 500,000 deaths a year from "sanctions". We're truly monsters. Kuwait was a province of Iraq carved off by the British as usual.
Looking forward to reading Chapter One!
Mr. Ritter, we here in an Oregon small south coast town support your efforts and you. Thank you for your reflections, history and insights. The Frost poem inserts were well received. You exhibit great courage, you are truly a Marine through. Our higher power and Guardian angels see you.
Always True
mbloker
Gary Holland on the Jeff Rense program yesterday saying that in the Vietnam War 1970's they (USA) ordered heaps and heaps of military gear, camouflage, for "Desert Storm" conditions not the tropics. Though perhaps they expected Agent Orange to turn the rainforests into deserts quickly (not likely). I wonder if Colon(sic) Powell, who in part covered up for the Mai Lai massacre, had something to do with those desert gear purchases too. Nothing would surprise me (and what rense said Sadam Hussein said when he had read Jeff Rense's own book on where AIDS was created (usual suspects ) "nothing would surprise me with the Americans". Nothing can surprise me with the youknowwhos, up to and including the Samson Option.
This is a excellent piece, you describe well Desert Storm, not as a standalone event, but as the operational birth of the unipolar moment, an “unfinished war” that set a direct course for the conflicts that followed.
But was it not just an other event in a long series of tragic events which most of us will never fully grasp. I’m struck by what one might call a historian’s dilemma. Where does the story truly begin? You rightly note its operational roots in repurposed Cold War plans. But its strategic cause was the calcified aftermath of the Iran-Iraq War, which left Saddam bankrupt, bitter, and primed to miscalculate in Kuwait.
And that forces us to look deeper still, to the 1947-48 Partition of Palestine. That rupture didn’t just create a refugee crisis; it shattered the regional order and ushered in the era of American superpower intervention, secular nationalism, and religious revival that defined the modern Middle East. It was the true start of the “American Era” , it began in 47 not 91
Thank you, Scott for your courage and standing up for what's right.
Thought you might find this interesting
https://youtu.be/ckDb3tgp2Ko?si=suooEG9PH1FoA24t
One need not look too far back to find Britain`s fingerprints on most every conflict since the crusades . For the last century we can call it the American empire era, but historically I think it will be known as the Anglo-American era, and I doubt America will get a full century given its trajectory
The ideology of Europe that keeps trying to weaken Russia shows that science, technology and data are not all powerful. Russia has superior weapons and the largest battle hardened army in the world.
Or even the history of the West's over 100 years of attacks on Russia recently laid out by Prof Jeffery Sachs is ignored or probably just ignored.
And the transcendent power of capitalism, the new religion, expects some day to plunder Russia.
Or, maybe it is the old guard and newly rich holding onto their power.
Ukraine will be settled on the battlefield.
I just joined for $70 for a year's membership. Good luck in your fight against debanking.
Your perspectives are very insightful Scott. I often reflect on the same events as you and I are about the same age.
New information, clear, infinitely valuable.
Thank You!
Hi Scott, you do amazing work! I am proud of you and admire your strength and perseverance! Thanks a lot for sharing your book chapter by chapter. And I recommend to still sell the book once finished and I am happy to connect you to a good publisher in Germany.
I love the interleaving (all puns intended) of Frost’s poem with your own thoughts. Thank you for continuing to keep your work free.
😀 😃
This seems not to be widely known...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HVGLCRp3I8