LIEUT GEN Sir Peter de la Billiere who commanded British troops in the Gulf War, acknowledged this week that he did not understand Iraq or Saddam Hussein. History would help him.
What influences formed Iraq and Saddam Hussein? The story is indirectly connected with Ireland.
Iraq is an artefact of imperialism's afternoon. After the first World War, Britain and France carved up the Ottoman Empire. North of Mesopotamia lay one of the few large oil sources then known. The Royal Navy wanted it garrisoned to assure supplies. A huge area, 20 times the size of Britain, was named Iraq.
Field Marshal Sir Henry Wilson had troop shortages. His overriding preoccupation was Ireland. "If we don't reinforce Ireland by every available man, horse and aeroplane... we would lose Ireland . .. and (consequently) ... the empire," he declared.
The cheap solution strongly urged by Winston Churchill was to control Iraq from the air. A [monarchy with a pro British king was set up.
Wilson was at his sardonic, disloyal and pungent best on this. Agreeing with a colleague, he wrote, "I do not believe in Winston's ardent hopes of being able to govern Mesopotamia with hot air, aeroplanes and Arabs... supposing that we put Faisal on the throne, and supposing that we try and keep him there by bombing any recalcitrant Arabs who `cock a snook' at him."
The plan went ahead. There was unease in Britain about the aerial bombing and machine gunning. The new King Faisal met general Kurdish opposition. Their mud villages were easily destroyed; tribesmen in the open desert had no cover.
The memoirs of RAF officers show that the job was often done with gusto, although at least one senior officer resigned after visiting a hospital "full of tribesmen recovering from the effects of bombing".
Saddam grew up in a society where artificial boundaries, hypocrisy and air action against dissidents - especially the Kurds - were normal.
Following the Gulf War in 1991, Saddam attacked the Kurds. The legal position of the subsequent Allied intervention has been much debated.
The American international lawyer, Richard N. Gardner, said that "no government has asserted the right to intervene militantly in another country for the purpose of correcting human rights abuses there." Article 2(4) of the UN Charter forbids this.
Other writers have said the intervention challenges the Peace of Westphalia, which set up the principles underpinning modern state sovereignty. But we must remember, civilians were dying.
The latest action is on shakier ground. The no fly and safe zones are not part of Security Council Resolution 688, but were imposed to protect humanitarian supply. Undoubtedly, the short 1991 intervention solved the humanitarian problem.
Some of this week's missiles are new "Block III" Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs). They use satellite navigation in addition to contour matching for better accuracy. The range is 1,650km, an increase gained by reducing the warhead weight.
A recent Jerusalem Post article covers the escape of Jews from Iraq 25 years ago. Their helpers were Kurds led by Mullah Mustafa Barzani. The same Kurds have now called in the Iraqis to counter the Iranian invasion.
"God will forgive me my many sins" for helping Jewish children, Barzani said. Mustafa Barzani is dead. His son gets particular mention for refusing money for saving a Jewish family. Does he now lead his father's tribesmen?
Mr Menachem Begin, in his time, would have considered the Barzanis' actions a sacred debt. In his way, like the Barzanis, he was a simple man. What of Mr Benjamin Netanyahu?