This is the best counter argument I've seen from someone regarding the 2003 invasion. But how certain are we that he would've taken Saudi Arabia's oil fields? More importantly the invasion of Iraq was mostly based on some mythical "weapons of mass destruction."
It’s always about money. My dad was in the Air Force for 20 years, so he was just about leaving when the first Gulf War started. He said at the time Iraq was strong militarily. They had around a million active soldiers ready to go at any moment, more tanks, cannons, aircrafts and armored vehicles than the rest of the Middle Eastern powers. Some people might argue that Iran didn’t lose the Iraq-Iran war seeing as Iraq received support from the West while Iran was heavily sanctioned but by the end of the war, Iran was exhausted, was taking heavy losses and Iraq was willing to go all out into total war, draft all their men into battle and bomb all of Iran’s cities whereas Iran didn’t want those problems like that. And then Saudi had incredible wealth, but in regards to war technology, they weren’t seeing the Iraqis on any level. Saudi still isn’t shyt militarily. So Iraq had emerged as the main power in the area. When Iraq tried to take over Kuwait the other countries in the region knew it wouldn’t be long before Saddam tried to expand into their territories, with Saudi being the prime objective. Iraq made Iran fall back, taking Saudi Arabia wouldn’t have been shyt. As usual, the US had its own agenda. We supported Saddam in the Iraq-Iran war because we felt Iraq would be our way of maintaining a sphere of influence in the region but Saddam taking Kuwait would have took us down a path where Saddam might have ended up gaining a large amount of leverage on the world’s energy. So he became a pariah. It’s always about the bread

Saddam argued Kuwait was about money too. It was on both sides kinda. Kuwait needed money to repair their country after being attacked by Iran in the war, so they overproduced oil which made the oil price drop. Which caused Iraq heavy losses. When Kuwait wouldn’t recompense Iraq, it was used as a pretense for war but it wasn’t lost on anyone that acquiring Kuwait would significantly increase Saddam’s power...and he would’ve easily taken it if the US didn’t get involved. This would’ve further strengthened his resolve to reach for Saudi Arabia. It was like 700,000 Iraqi soldiers vs. a coalition of 1 million soldiers on the other side with the US providing 700,000 of that total

They would have got fukked so bad. The First Gulf War ended relatively quick but because Saddam wasn’t killed or forced from power he used that as propaganda against the West....that they couldn’t do anything to him. So he tried again years later. Didn’t go so well that time

Almost all the people in the Middle East that we ended up vilifying and killing, were people we originally supported or financed in one way or another. shyt is crazy.