Persian Gulf War 25th Anniversary, 2 August 1990

At 0100 hrs (Kuwait time), 2 August 1990, I Corps and II Corps, Republican Guard Forces Command (RGFC), commanded by Lieutenant General Iyad Futayyih Khalifah al-Rawi, attacked across the Kuwaiti frontier.  The Hammurabi Armored Division supported by the Nebuchadnezzar Motorized Infantry Division, and the Tawakalna Mechanized Infantry Division with the Al Faw Infantry Division in support, spearheaded the main attack south into Kuwait along the Safwan-‘Abdally axis, driving toward the Al-Jahra pass.  

Farther west, the Medina Armored Division supported by the Adnan Infantry Division and the Baghdad Mechanized Infantry Division also crossed the frontier. Simultaneous with the main attacks, units from the 8th As Saiqa Special Operations Divisions conducted an air assault attack on key installations in Kuwait City; and an amphibious attack on Bayan Palace, the Amir’s official residence.    

By 0530 the two attacking columns had linked up with the special operations units just west of Kuwait City. By 1900 hrs they had captured Kuwait City and were pressing toward the coastal, port cities.  

On 3 August 1990 The New York Times reported, “Without warrant or warning, Iraq has struck brutally at a tiny Kuwait, a brazen challenge to world law. Iraq stands condemned by a unanimous UN Security Council . . . President Bush’s taste for bluntness stands him in good stead: ‘Naked Aggression!’ is the correct term for President Saddam Hussein’s grab at a vulnerable, oil-rich neighbor.” 

Recommended readings: 

Ballard, John R. From Storm to Freedom: America’s Long War with Iraq (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press), 2010. 

Conduct of the Persian Gulf War: Final Report to Congress (Washington, D. C.: Department of Defense), 1992.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Scholarly Apparatus in a Popular History Book

In a recent post I called attention to three history books that were based on primary sources and, through the scholarly apparatus, let the reader check the interpretation against the sources. Moreover, all three books contributed a new and deeper understanding of their subjects and a provided fresh interpretations. The direct relationship between the usefulness of the interpretation and the reliance on primary sources is unavoidable. Let us consider a recent history book that was well reviewed and successful in the market place that did not contribute a new and deeper understanding or suggested a fresh interpretation: David Halberstam, The Coldest Winter: America and the Korean War (New York: Hyperion), 2007. Halberstam was a long-time, successful journalist, a capable narrative writer, and winner of many awards. He was intelligent, a good interviewer, and an above average writer. The book is based mostly on secondary sources with a few author interviews. Halberstam’s book has 20...
Read more

Veteran's Day 2009

A good friend with whom I served in Southeast Asia (SEA) in 1968 and 1969, made, during a recent email conversation, an observation about many in the draftee Army of that era. He wrote that many of the men with whom we served were draftees (as he was; I was RA and we were both enlisted) were upset about being drafted, being in the Army, and being in SEA. They resented that their lives and careers had not only been interrupted, but put on hold; that they had been placed in conditions that were at worst very dangerous and at best very miserable. Many, such as my friend, were college graduates who wanted to get on with the careers. Many had some college or technical school and wanted to complete their degree. Many were married or engaged and wanted to move on with their personal lives. They all had lives that markedly differed from the Army’s agenda. However, my friend went on to write that the vast majority of those with whom he served no matter how much they hated the Army, hated being ...
Read more

Cut Backs

According to an article in The Columbus Dispatch (Mark Niquette, “Society Board: 26 Jobs History”, April 12, 2008, pp. B1-B2), the Ohio Historical Society (OHS) is discharging 26 employees; curtailing its operations at its main facility, the Ohio Historical Center (OHC) in Columbus, from six days a week to four; and cutting hours at many of its 52 state-wide sites. Moreover, 21 open positions will not be filled and 49 current employees will be working fewer hours per week. These cut backs are the result of a $2 million deficiency in OHS’s annual budget. This short fall, which accounts for approximately nine percent of the Society’s annual budget, has been primarily caused by the state legislature’s failure to support the OHS. State funding for the OHS accounts for nearly 60 percent of their total budget, according to the OHS Annual Report (2007). The State began reducing their support for the OHS in 2000 and there is no indication at present that either political party or the governo...
Read more