Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (20376)	3/1/2002 9:56:53 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

<Heck, they surrendered to Italian camera crews the last time around, and the Iraqi army was stronger then. My big worry is what and whom will Saddam be able to blow up if he thinks he's going down? Can we get him fast enough to prevent it?> Well, I guess it's possible that they have a nuke or two or more, bought from ex-USSR private enterprisers. When the USA was on the road to Baghdad last time and came to a screeching halt, I concluded that: 1....It was better to stop, withdraw and keep sanctions on to keep the price of oil and therefore oil company profits up. That served North Sea, Prudhoe Bay, Russian and other oil exporter interests as well as the oil companies such as BP, Shell, Exxon etc. or 2....Saddam said, "Look, I've got a nuke and if you come past the perimeter, I'm going to go down in a nuclear inferno fired from Israel, but so is a lot more besides and I'll get at least a couple of nukes into Tel Aviv". or 3....The USA couldn't decide what the heck to do when they got there and figured it was easier just to call it a day, declare victory and withdraw. Right now, I imagine that the USA is prepared to call his bluff. Saddam has to have a general or somebody who will actually pull the lever when the crunch comes. The general might say, "Look Saddam, it's game over anyway if I do, so we're having a palace revolution right now to save our bacon - you can't kill the whole roomful with your pistol and the rest of us, including Brutus, would rather stick a dagger in you and hand you over to the USA". Saddam will fire his pistol at a couple of people and the others will kill off Saddam, Uday and a few others to save their own necks. Then they'll call in the USA to set up shop and enforce love and light while a reorganized government is created. The USA will be just down the road anyway, so it won't take long. Yes, it's quite scary to confront a possibly nuclear-armed Saddam, but as with Hitler, the support will be pretty thin on the ground when the game is obviously over. Suicide in the bunker might be the answer. A few German generals were a bit circumspect in the last days and weeks of the war. They were somewhat reluctant to pull down everything because Hitler was facing the Game Over sign. Imagine a democratic Iraq smack dab in the middle of the middle east. Ironically, Saddam might achieve his dream of a great new pan-Arab development centred on Baghdad. But in his absence! Domino theories can work two ways you know! Once Iraq falls to democracy, the rest might topple due to internal revolution. A lot of Moslems are aware that the Mullahs are not the best style of government. They also know that the USA isn't into Moslem murder, but really just wants no more head-hacking and WTC-style destruction. So Moslems aren't going to worry too much about USA political sway. I think they'll welcome it if they get to row their own boats. Mqurice