Upload
Login or register
x

War: First Gulf War

 
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get involved with his invasion. So tanks, IFV and troops crossed the border and easily overrun Kuwait forces.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

15,000 westerners were taken as hostages by Saddam, this little buddy refused to sit on his lap, awkward. These were used as human shields against missile strikes.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Now Saudi Arabia being the little bitches that they are asked the US to help protect it and it's oil from a potential Iraq invasion. So the US setup sanctions, got the UN together and gave Saddam an ultimatum to pull out of Kuwait of face consequences. The US soon began setting up Operation Desert Shield to protect Saudi oil. Fun fact Osama bin Laden offered his service to protect Saudi from Iraq, the saudi's said they would considered it and ultimately go with the US


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Nations in blue are those who contributed troops to help Kuwait.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

While the political stand-off with the UN and the Iraq government went on, famous boxer Muhammad Ali went to Iraq and was able to free 15 American hostages.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

More US troops landing for Operation Desert Shield.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Everyone's favorite BRRRRRRRRT made first used in combat in 1991. The A-10 really showed how resistant and powerful it was in combat.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

The MLRS was also deployed in Desert Storm


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

The harrier jet made an appearance and confirmed the superiority.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

F-16s and F-15s being flown before a bombing run.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Desert Storm was the first use of the M1 Abrams


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Against the M1 Abrams was the Soviet T-72 MBT


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

The T-72 was vastly inferior to the M1 Abrams.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Stealth fighter F-117 used against Iraq


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

After the Iraq time was up and they had not pulled out of Kuwait the US began the air campaign which lasted three days.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

The AH-64 being used in the air campaign.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

After the three day air campaign the ground campaign started, which combat lasted only 5 days.


(Enlarge)
War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

In the background burning oil fields were started by Iraqi forces in a scorch earth policy.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Battleships were used for the last time in this war. They delivered cruise missile and costal bombardment


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Scud missile used extensively by the Iraqis. Some hit Israel, some used against coalition troops.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

One of the iconic images of the war, the Highway of Death. Thousands of Iraqi troops trying to retreat only to be trapped in the main Kuwait road to Iraq. Aerial bombing took out the cars in the front, the vehicles in the back, with no way out, hundreds were bombed.


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

Iraqi soldier after the bombing in the highway


War: First Gulf War. On August 2nd, 1990, Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein invaded neighboring Kuwait with 88,000 troops. He wagered that the US would not get invol

After 5 days, the Iraqis pulled out and the coalition successfully liberate Kuwait. George H. W. Bush decided to leave it as is and not overthrow Saddam Hussein. Thus ending the war. Really short and very popular, this war after the Vietnam war really helped American morale on the military. There was a lot of things I've missed but there was a lot of problems with the pills the military gave our troops to help counter potential chemical attacks.



“The strongest of all warriors are these two — Time and Patience.”
Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

+497
Views: 24897
Favorited: 56
Submitted: 09/18/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to chuchiereaper

Comments(172):

chuchiereaper has disabled anonymous comments.
Refresh Comments Show GIFs
12>
[ 172 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
101 comments displayed.
+87
#62 - xxnegociatorxx (09/18/2015) [-]
"What are you looking at, smooth skin?"
+33
#109 to #62 - nanglo ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
"Gentlemen, Welcome to Dubai"
+9
#118 to #109 - dingdongpancakes (09/19/2015) [-]
the white phosphorous...dear lord let me forget it.
0
User avatar #157 to #118 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
It's not even real and it sticks with you. This is how fragile we are...
+107
#38 - waratworld (09/18/2015) [-]
+69
#12 - sylaz (09/18/2015) [-]
That's not a T-72, not even close. It's a T-55.
0
User avatar #101 to #12 - segwaynazi (09/18/2015) [-]
Only the tanker is bad, Soviet tanks are flawless!!!
+1
#116 to #101 - myjunk (09/19/2015) [-]
As far as I know the T-72 had insuffiecient armour. It was therefore improved with explosive reactive armour but maybe the Iraqi models didn't get the upgrade and hence were vulnerable.
+1
User avatar #148 to #116 - inyourmind (09/21/2015) [-]
Wouldn't have mattered the U.S. DU (depleted uranium) penetrators are designed specifically to defeat the modern Russian tanks including ones with the modern explosive reactive armor. Explosive reactive armor is apparently not particularly effective against kinetic energy rounds like DU penetrators which is why the U.S. uses DU layers in tank armor to stop them instead.
+89
User avatar #24 to #12 - chuchiereaper [OP]ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Well... it's kinda close, it's just 20 off... i'll leave
+8
User avatar #47 to #24 - failtolawl ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Well what you said still stands. T-72s were garbage.
+2
#136 to #47 - sylaz (09/19/2015) [-]
Nowadays, with advance anti tank missles like the Javalin, Kornets and such, sure. But during the cold war, and a couple of years after it.
It was infact one of the best tanks in the world.
After the USSR was disolved in 91, US and German analysts had a chance to examine Soviet-made T-72 tanks equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA, and they proved impenetrable to most modern US and German tank projectiles. Not exactly bad, when you consider the fact that the T-72 cost less then half of the M1 Abrams.
0
User avatar #149 to #136 - inyourmind (09/21/2015) [-]
Current U.S penetrators are rated to punch through the modern relikt armor.
The M829A2 version resolved the issue with penetration of the explosive armor (released 1993).
+2
#88 to #47 - spetsnaztm (09/18/2015) [-]
What eldiganto said - the tank itself isn't garbage especially if you keep it upgraded (not sure if that's the word I should use but it's along those lines) and the ones the Iraqi's used were trash - no upgrades or anything.
+1
User avatar #83 to #47 - eldiganto ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
not entirely true, true it was outclassed by M1 Abrams but by no means terrible
also it's only fair to point out that the Iraqis only had the T-72M variants, the export version of the T-72 lacking composite armour a proper fire control system and a lot more rather necessity features.
+51
#5 - spookyexplain ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I have that picture mounted in my room
+13
User avatar #28 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I have sort off a theory/hypotethis about battleships and **** , because missile defense systems will continue to evolve and become more advanced after time, i think artillery guns on ships and land will be used more, because the only way to defend against an artillery shell is, well, large amounts of armour. You can't hack a shell, there is really nothing you can do against shells except armour. Does this make sense? or will missiles also evolve into getting resistant against the defence systems?
0
User avatar #54 to #28 - KEpToK (09/18/2015) [-]
That's sort of correct, at least in the way that I understand it. After WWII the global opinion concerning armor was that given the choice of stopping a shell with armor and just not being hit at all, everyone went with not being hit. So everyone threw away the old LT, MT, and HT designations and moved onto MBT. These beauties are fast, well armored thanks to advancements made in the field of metallurgy, and have great big stonking guns.

The same can be said about warships. WWII battleships had tens of thousands of tons of steel for armor that was only half the time successful at stopping a round. So, battleships were redisigned. Instead of heaps of heavy ineffective armor, they were equipped with modern defensive systems and all warships in construction were either converted or scrapped into aircraft carriers which of course are nowhere near any of the combat.

I wish I had a source for my info but everything i've posted is from a tour I was at 6 years ago.
0
User avatar #170 to #54 - niggastolemyname (10/06/2015) [-]
Aircraft carriers do and have in the past been directly engaged by other aircraft, which is why they need to be able to scramble their air fleet quickly
0
User avatar #172 to #170 - KEpToK (10/07/2015) [-]
Yes they have, and thanks to modern technology they can take measures to avoid damage from missile and bomb attacks. Though... if a carrier is in a combat zone without some kind of escort of aircraft or naval vessels to keep threats away it kind of deserves to get sunk, like, what is the Admiral even thinking?
0
User avatar #64 to #28 - atoaster (09/18/2015) [-]
Nah, US Navy is currently developing railguns. Longer range, more kinetic energy. By having such kinetic energy, the force becomes equivalent of those of the conventional shells.

I'm not 100% about what gisuar said, but there is the phalanx system of which land system is designed to intercept very slow moving rounds such as artillery and mortar rounds. But you're right: there's nothing that defends against stuff like that, because with missiles and stuff, it's all outdated. That in turn changes the battlefield back into, as mentioned earlier, the railguns. Right now I hear they're designed for precision land bombardment (can't be used for "artillery" like in WW2 because the rails degrade too quickly), but there's definitely a use for them.
+2
User avatar #68 to #64 - heartlessrobot (09/18/2015) [-]
However, one perceivable problem with railguns is you cannot lob the shot without circling the earth 3 times, so it's harder to hit behind, say, a mountain.
0
User avatar #69 to #68 - atoaster (09/18/2015) [-]
Dude, you obviously don't know physics. If you can have it circle around the earth three times, but if you angle it right, it can go around the mountain.
+1
User avatar #71 to #69 - heartlessrobot (09/18/2015) [-]
You'd have to aim it at an 89 degree angle.
And even then, a railgun put into use by the military would have the power to just launch it into space.
Regular artillery would still be needed for something like that.
0
User avatar #171 to #71 - niggastolemyname (10/06/2015) [-]
No, even a huge naval railgun can't shoot something into space, a railgun that can send something into space would have to be way, way longer than a naval gun.
0
User avatar #72 to #69 - heartlessrobot (09/18/2015) [-]
Or a Railgun mounted to a satellite.
0
User avatar #115 to #72 - fargfive (09/18/2015) [-]
Space based WMDs are outlawed by the Outer Space Treaty, which was signed by just about anybody who could conceivably build something like that.
0
User avatar #143 to #115 - heartlessrobot (09/20/2015) [-]
A Railgun is a precision strike weapon, not a WMD.
-1
User avatar #144 to #143 - fargfive (09/20/2015) [-]
"A weapon of mass destruction (WMD or WoMD) is a nuclear, radiological, chemical, biological or other weapon that can kill and bring significant harm to a large number of humans or cause great damage to human-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere"

if your railgun isn't classified as a WMD you need to replace it with one that works.
+1
User avatar #145 to #144 - heartlessrobot (09/20/2015) [-]
You could do that with a handgrenade.
-1
User avatar #147 to #144 - womd (09/21/2015) [-]
This is correct.
0
User avatar #94 to #64 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
By artillery guns i also meant railgun, as i said in #51
0
User avatar #79 to #28 - violenthandjob (09/18/2015) [-]
I like the idea but the same systems capable of intercepting a missile travelling anywhere from hundreds to thousands of miles per hour could easily defeat an artillery shell.
0
#111 to #28 - jakeattack (09/18/2015) [-]
issue with them is range is tiny compared to a carrier and planes.
but w8 for railguns m8
0
User avatar #112 to #111 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I have written lots of times about railguns in this thread.
0
#113 to #112 - jakeattack (09/18/2015) [-]
oh okay m8
0
User avatar #166 to #28 - lieutenantderp (09/24/2015) [-]
limited range compared to missiles make artillery obsolete in the future.
+4
#43 to #28 - gisuar (09/18/2015) [-]
Rheinmetall Air Defence : NBS MANTIS artillery shells are explosives and thus can be detonated midair by shooting at them
+1
User avatar #44 to #43 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
HE shells i'm not retarded, i know my **** , but they would most likely use AP shells when the enemy starts getting stronger armour. But what the **** are you talking about, thats idiotic, thats like trying to deflect a bullet by shooting the bullet.
+4
#46 to #44 - gisuar (09/18/2015) [-]
Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortar (CRAM) System
0
User avatar #51 to #46 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Still this system is not failfree, there is a reason Israel still gets hit by rockets and **** , and it would be even more difficult to hit a shell, and considering the modern shells velocity probably being higher than a cruise missiles and much smaller, maybe 1 out of 1 million shells will be taken out by the CRAM system, even if it is more efficient, have you heard of railguns? Good luck stopping that.
+1
#55 to #51 - gisuar (09/18/2015) [-]
if it had a success rate of 1 out of a million it wouldn't be used
and the reason for it not to being used by isreal might be because firing a ******** of projectiles into the sky in some crowded area seems like a bad idea at least to me
or it's just not cost efficient

and those things aim and fire autonomous it just takes a human to confirm
0
User avatar #98 to #55 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I know that they are data-controlled, and they don't use the CRAM in Israel? i think i remember something like that defending against missiles in Israel.
0
User avatar #60 to #51 - mrblueftw (09/18/2015) [-]
If railguns do become the main weapon of the US navy, which there is a chance they will be, they will probably mount them on new destroyers, rather than battleships. why mount 5 on a huge target when you can have 3 on smaller targets that you can make for half the price?
0
User avatar #95 to #60 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I worded my original comment wrong, i meant the usage of non guided weapons such as missiles on ships would be decreased, and they would focus more on weapons that are difficult to stop, like a shell, or in this case a railgun shell. But yeah you're right.
0
User avatar #97 to #95 - mrblueftw (09/18/2015) [-]
i wish battleships made a comeback, they are so ******* cool, and i played battlestations pacific and midway all the time and loved using battleships, but realistically they arent practical anymore.
0
User avatar #99 to #97 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Yeah, man battlestations pacific and midway was amazing games, only thing left is ship simulator grinding edition World of Warships
0
User avatar #102 to #99 - mrblueftw (09/18/2015) [-]
always wanted to try that out
i have a hard on for ww2 naval battles, and the USS Iowa is my only cure
0
User avatar #103 to #102 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Lol, wanted to try it out? just download it, it's free.
0
User avatar #104 to #103 - mrblueftw (09/18/2015) [-]
i sucked at world of tanks
and world of planes
and war thunder
you can see why im hesitant to waste time downloading world of warships
0
User avatar #105 to #104 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Ah i see. I sucked at WoT, i sucked at WoP, i sucked at WT, but i'm quite decent at WoWS.
0
User avatar #106 to #105 - mrblueftw (09/18/2015) [-]
hmm, that gives me confidence.
only sad part is i know with these games im gonna start out as a cuban on a door having to work my way up to the good **** .
0
User avatar #108 to #106 - inzix ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Yeah, but if like big ass ships firing big ass guns this is the game for you, love it, also the Kriegsmarine German navy will probably be added soonish.
+2
#40 to #28 - trainalf (09/18/2015) [-]
I read something similar to this is a science fiction book. But it makes sense in theory- the reason a missile is so easy to destroy is you wreck the propellant and targeting wiring- that's how fragile they are. Good luck stopping giant metal shells.
0
User avatar #65 to #40 - atoaster (09/18/2015) [-]
Hm... for future reference, the official use of the Phalanx CIWS is "to destroy a missile's airframe and make it unaerodynamic". Remember, you don't want the missile to blow up or anything, just fall into the water.

Especially with the land based system of the Phalanx, it's to destroy artillery shells with explosive rounds.
+10
#56 - wafflebrewery (09/18/2015) [-]
The T-72 isn't necessarily a bad tank if you use it right. It was supposed to be used from a "sniping" position behind hills and vegetation. In an open sandbox the guy with the better sensors+range wins. In this case the Abrams. Its main weakness is the ammo carousel just below the turret. Aim an rpg under the turret ring and the whole tank goes up in flames. No idea why the Syrians take them into urban combat. It's basically suicide for the crew.
0
User avatar #140 to #56 - pirateseatcarrots (09/19/2015) [-]
Arabs can't into tank warfare source I'm Arab
+11
#81 to #56 - zmranger ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
>Hull down position
>T-72
+7
#90 to #81 - wafflebrewery (09/18/2015) [-]
That's why all modern T-tanks come standard with an entrenching plough on the front to dig themselves in. Because that's apparently cheaper than fixing the barrel movement range.

Something something in Soviet Russia barrel elevates you.
+10
#63 - patriotpenguin ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
If you decide to make a second post, May i suggest doing the yugoslav wars?
0
#110 to #63 - borderlineparanoid ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
is this from Ukraine?

something about it seems weird, both of them a pretty calm considering there are loads of people below them.

unless those are blanks.
0
User avatar #152 to #110 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Those are blanks. The bullets are rounded.
0
User avatar #117 to #110 - dingdongpancakes (09/19/2015) [-]
It's a training exercize in the ukrainian army from what i've heard. Still cool though
0
User avatar #124 to #63 - chuchiereaper [OP]ONLINE (09/19/2015) [-]
/War+bosnian+war/funny-pictures/5688565/

You mean like this war? which i did today?
0
User avatar #125 to #124 - patriotpenguin ONLINE (09/19/2015) [-]
you sweetheart
+1
#126 to #125 - chuchiereaper [OP]ONLINE (09/19/2015) [-]
Anytime
+5
#67 to #63 - amonlavtar (09/18/2015) [-]
i aprove, just dont forget Slovenia
+9
#75 - zmranger ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Iraqi fries.
+8
#89 - donbionicle (09/18/2015) [-]
So when the US fields troops across the ocean, they unload their planes facing backwards. Gotcha.
+6
#82 - goggins ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
+10
#59 - tuhuar (09/18/2015) [-]
"Everyone's favorite BRRRRRRRRT..."

Oh **** , my sides. I lose my **** every time someone says something like that.
+5
#96 - ianosity (09/18/2015) [-]
This kills the man.
+4
User avatar #100 to #96 - ssssssssssssnek (09/18/2015) [-]
What're you lookin' at smoothskin?
+4
#107 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
Kuwait was part of Iraq way in the past and Saddam went to "take it back" by force, Before the war in Kuwait Saddam fought Iran for 8 years over a piece of land which he GAVE UP to war in Kuwait, Then he went to war America when they invaded Iraq, before his death, He released all the prisoner's in iraqi Prisons to unleash hell upon Iraq and American Troops, And now.. nearly 15 years after his death, give or take, Iraqi people are still suffering from 1 man that many fuucking ******** praise as the holy leader of Iraq



Source: Me, Iraqi living in Baghdad

You guys may hate refugees but not all of them are bad, not all mudslimes are bad, Sometimes we just want peace

It's been over 30 years of continuous wars, During the reign of Saddam we were Literally North Korea.
0
User avatar #154 to #107 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Why are you not running while you still have the chance?
+1
#155 to #154 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/24/2015) [-]
Because I can't, there's no way I can, Recommend me a way to reach the U.S safely and fast as a refugee, can you?
0
User avatar #156 to #155 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Does it have to be that country and status?
+1
#158 to #156 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/24/2015) [-]
Yes, considering Europe right now, besides i have friends in there whom can help me once i reach it.
+1
#161 to #158 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Is looping through Iran an option, considering everything west of Iraq is Hell on Earth?

The route South to Basra seems "safe" according to this ISW map. Not sure how recent it is, though. Plus, you'd probably need a cartload of papers to cross the border and stop in Khorramshahr or Abadan.

From either those two towns, the A81 zig-zags North (stay on the East side of this road for good measure), Eventually meeting the A82 past Bakhtaran, and hitting a fork with Urmia to the East, and Benab to the West. Take the Western road until you hit Tabriz, from there you take the A01 Northward until you hit the Turkish border.

These instructions might not be spot-on, but it's still giving the conflict zone a wide berth.
+1
#163 to #161 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/24/2015) [-]
You don't seem to understand the situation brother, Thank you for your effort, it's greatly appreciated, seriously, that's amazing

We are at war, What comes with war? great sacrifices, but also, the economy is drained in the process, There are no more jobs here, almost no way to provide money, and so most of the people who choose to refuge take extreme measures of selling EVERYTHING they own for half price, houses, cars, shops, anything, just to gather enough money to go in an illegal route just to have a chance of peace.

I don't have that much money, and supposed I do, You have no idea how hard it is for me to go to turkey, or go through Iran, Iran hates Iraqi's ,we are 4th degree world to them not even 3rd

I speak great English, Turkish people don't like to speak it tho, which would create me an obstacle and I'd have to stay there for at least a few years before my case is reached and by that time who knows what could happen?

FJ is my family, I spend most of my time here, I am a very old member u can check it on my profile, I have no complains, this is how life is i guess, live it to the fullest, I just wish it ends soon, the war that is
+1
#164 to #163 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
I understand completely. Desperation is one of the few truly clear-cut things in this world.

Still, you could at least head south while you're still breathing.

This map is much more recent.
+1
#165 to #164 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/24/2015) [-]
I will head to Basra soon i suppose
+1
User avatar #167 to #165 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
You know more than me, it's your backyard.
0
User avatar #159 to #158 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Let me look a map for a second.
+1
#160 to #159 - Smashyy ONLINE (09/24/2015) [-]
Okay
0
User avatar #162 to #160 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
Done(?).
+2
#25 - motherfuckingkenji (09/18/2015) [-]
Isn't this particular picture from the movie Jarhead? From the part where they were on the bombed highway?
-20
#45 to #25 - therwasno (09/18/2015) [-]
USA at its best useing depleted Uran ammunition..radioactive contamination birth defects raised by 800 % in war areas..u didnt heard about it yet..u will hear more about it in the Future !! US war crimes!
+9
User avatar #52 to #45 - crazyeyedbioll (09/18/2015) [-]
Hahahaha. No.
0
User avatar #26 to #25 - chuchiereaper [OP]ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
I don't know, I found it titled charred iraqi soldier in the highway of death. I'll need to rewatch Jarhead to see if it was from there.
0
#134 to #25 - hismomo (09/19/2015) [-]
Taken during the war, on the "Highway of Death," IIRC
+2
#42 to #25 - radratdude (09/18/2015) [-]
This is the real thing. But yes, Jarhead too had some crispy corpses in it.
+3
User avatar #48 - willindor ONLINE (09/18/2015) [-]
How many people did Muhammad Ali beat the **** out to save those hostages?
+2
#91 to #48 - garykn (09/18/2015) [-]
That man beat the **** out of every single one of the Iraqis. Why else do you think our boys had such an easy time with them. It was because they had not yet recovered from their previous ass kicking.
+2
#84 - wootsauce (09/18/2015) [-]
Ah the days when we Americans we actually fight wars to win...
+2
User avatar #50 - mattdoggy (09/18/2015) [-]
Because the US was allowed onto "sacred Saudi soil" Binladin got majorly ticked off and this can be seen as one of the major turning points in his life.
0
User avatar #153 to #50 - scowler (09/24/2015) [-]
It seems like the Middle East today is an American mess.

I'm telling you, "Democracies" can't win.
+1
#151 - tomtomvdp ONLINE (09/22/2015) [-]
What are the best gulf war related movies and documentaries !? PLSSS
+1
User avatar #168 to #151 - wolverinebamf (09/25/2015) [-]
Jarhead is pretty good.
+1
User avatar #93 - gemli (09/18/2015) [-]
How did Muhammed Ali free the 15 hostages, did he threaten Saddam with a beating or something?
+1
User avatar #86 - hellspawner (09/18/2015) [-]
Almost makes me want to watch Jarhead
12>
[ 172 comments ]
<
>
 Friends (0)