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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (538443)2/10/2004 10:41:15 PM
From: Sedohr Nod  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
You assume that Saddam was in control at any point during the invasion?....Command elements were targeted from the start and the premise that Saddam was directing much of anything might very well be faulty....I doubt he was in control of his own fudge.



To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (538443)2/11/2004 6:29:21 AM
From: JDN  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Do you not remember the initial news reports of our satellites seeing LONG CARAVANS of trucks heading across the Syrian border in the days leading up to the war? Why they have dropped this information is beyond me. It was only reported briefly then dropped as the battle began and they had other more interesting things to report. jdn



To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (538443)2/11/2004 9:58:57 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Actually, the Syria scenario is perfectly plausible, but hard to verify. The reason that they did not use WMDs in the war was that we could too easily nuke them in retaliation, and Saddam does not understand that we would have a restrained response (i.e., he would have nuked us, so he expected to get it). As for being a madman, that has to do with unpredictability, it does not mean he was devoid of calculations........