SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: stockman_scott who wrote (64211)1/3/2003 12:30:16 PM
From: michael97123  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Scott,
If saddam gets nukes he can control the region without firing a shot. Which Arab state would believe for a second that s future US govt would risk a WMD attack(combo bio, nuke and delvd by iraqi agents and/or al quaida or palestian terrorists). Hell I wouldnt sacrifice NY for Kuwait.
DeGaulle didnt believe the US would risk annihilation for europe and built the French bomb in the early 60s for the same reason. And thats the reason for the Israeli deterrent as well during the cold war. Much would depend on who was the leader in the US at the time Saddam chose to act..

Picture this.
Saddam says he wants Kuwait and has deployed nukes on ships, in cities and/or bio weapons with his agents or terrorists abroad. What would the American people tell their government to do. Go to Kuwaits defense and risk 20 million american dead? See this is the real danger of saddam and the academics make the wrong assumption that the US will always go to war in this circumstance. Not true.
And using the cold war as an example of how this worked is false as well. These weapons were not mobile and most disputes were fought with conventional weapons with balance on both sides, both conventional between combatants and nuclear between US and USSR. Look at vietnam or korea where this went on. It is the very fact that iraq will not be our wmd equal that makes it so dangerous. There is no red phone hot line in play here. Am i making any sense with this line of reasoning? Mike
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News