US was keen to attack Iraq when they invaded Kuwait, but not when China invaded Tibet. Why ?

Question

Is it because Iraq has oil ? Or was it because US was scared of tasting the Chinese missiles ?

Answer 1

Oh its not like Bush is after oil. I mean he is not in the oil business or anything right!!! And why would he be afraid of China, not like they could fight back and they are close in military power.

Is my sarcasm noticeable??

Answer 2

The most important reason is that the US would have got nothing by saving Tibet. China also dared to attack Tibet precisely because it new no one else was interested in protecting Tibet.

Secondary reasons for US not worrying about Tibet are:

1. China provided great commercial opportunities for US companies, Iraq had no such thing to offer.

2. Taking on China is not the same as taking on Iraq given its military might and sheer size.

Tibet was never a part of China, it has been invaded and its citizens oppressed by the Chinese.

Answer 3

In 1959 when China invaded Tibet the US had no real interest in the matter. Trade with Tibet and China was virtually nil. We were busy supporting Taiwan and as long as the Chinese stayed away from there we simply didn't care about Tibet.

Remember that at the time the US was looking inward trying to find communists everywhere, it was the McCarthy era. We had fought in Korea 6 years earlier and were less than 5 years away from sending the first military advisors to South Vietnam.

Bottom line, at the time it did not impact the US economically or militarily to intervene. The Chinese military had little modern weaponry and no where near the number of missiles we had at the time.

Answer 4

I believe it was both. China is too much of a power for the United States notwithstanding of its nuclear power which it claims it wont use. China is a big dog in this world. Iraq has a wealth of oil ,it is because of this why I believe the US keeps aimin for iraqi democracy to attain the oil for cheap or free; Whatever the case the U.S. has to do what it has to do to continue being a world power. Im not saying what they did is right, just smart. It would be to riskful for the U.S. to engage into full combat with a country that could potentially have powerful weapons.

Answer 5

Because US has substantial interest (financially and politically) already invested into Kuwait, and in particular, the entire region. And one of the replier above (Hammer, I believe) is correct, Tibet is considered as part of the People's Republic of China, which was trying to go for independence.

The United States' reason for not declaring hostilities with the PRC is not because of the size of the PLA (People's Liberation Army). In term of fighting capability, we out-match them 8 to 1. The PRC only has a numerical advantage.

United States Armed Forces are indoctrinated to fight outnumbered and win, with the best examples being the Airborne and the US Marine Corps.

A lot of folks out there are still stuck in the World War II mentality, that numbers matter the most. Well, today, its not a decisive factor. The quality of training, maintenance and experience matters more.

US was not keen to attack. It tried diplomancy, through the UN, by forcing a resolution on the Iraqi government. That resolution was also backed by the international community, which includes most of the Arabic nations in the region. When the final dateline passed with no actions by the Iraqi government, a state of war was then declared on Iraq.

If US was keen at that time, we won't have bothered to invoke all manners of diplomancy through the UN. It would be a one sided decision, namely the then senior Bush administration, to declare hostility with the Iraqi government.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those who say it was oil, the PRC also has oil reserves, not as significant as the oil fields in the Middle East, but still a decent sized one. In addition, there are also huge stockpiles of coal, timber, iron, bauxite, and natural gas. Those resources are also valuable. It would be, in fact more lucrative in comparison to Iraq, to seize these by attacking the PRC, since you not only would acquire oil, but other resources in the process.

Answer 6

The U.S. didn't have much a of a strategy to dislodge China from Tibet. Killing 100 million Chinese wouldn't even cause a 10% dent in their population. According to some Chinese officials, a fight with the U.S. would involve nuclear weapons.

Answer 7

The answer is simple: oil. That's why the US attacked Iraq this time also. That's why there's talk of attacking Iran, because they MIGHT have weapons in the future. North Korea, HAS nuclear weapons and antagonizes the US at every opportunity. Isn't it interesting that there is never any talk of attacking North Korea? Why? Of course: No Oil!

Answer 8

The U.S. didn't invade Iraq because they invaded Kuwait. That was the straw that broke the camel's back. Hussein had done enough damage, and Bush decided to take him out. I support that decision.

Answer 9

World War 3 and a nuclear confrontation plus China is a trade
powerhouse everything is built there from electronics, shoes,
furniture, cars you name it and you'll find a sticker somewhere
saying built in China. It would be economically speaking a disaster to mess with them.

Answer 10

2 million Red Chinese.