"Open Season" on bad guys...

ferroferro
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Everyone is so concerned with Bin Laden lately...



what worries me is the next bad guy on the list...



Saddam Hussein knows he is next and we know he has nuclear weapons and we know he has used/attempted to use chemical/biological weapons in the past...



And he is watching all this unfold and can prepare for it...



we know this guy is prepared to do really bad things and his history will dictate a even swifter responce... in our attack against him... thus escalating the intensity of battle...



Him having time to prepare gives him the upper hand...



Hussein is many times more dangerous than Bin Laden... he has major influence and power... access to REAL armies and ample access to bio/chem/nuclear/projectile/explosive weapons...



this guy is to be feared... we have delt with him before...



this guy makes Bin Laden look like a sissy girl...



-E PLURIBUS UNIX-

-----------------------------





[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    doctorgonzodoctorgonzo Posts: 529member
    [quote]this guy is to be feared... we have delt with him before...



    this guy makes Bin Laden look like a sissy girl...<hr></blockquote>



    I guess we shouldn't have sold him the equipment to make all these weapons after he gassed his own people.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    thinkinsanethinkinsane Posts: 39member
    He had plenty of time to prepare last time as well, and from my prospective (which involved lots of Persian sand in my undies), all that preperation time didn't do him a whole lot of good.



    It's funny, put when we were getting ready to deploy for Desert Storm (well, Desert Shield at the time), everyone was saying that it wouldn't be a cake walk over there. That the Iraqi's had two thousand years of desert combat experiance to draw on, that they had the fourth largest army in the world. All that shit didn't really help them too much, did it?
  • Reply 3 of 8
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by FERRO:

    <strong>

    Saddam Hussein knows he is next and we know he has nuclear weapons</strong><hr></blockquote>



    We do? Where'd you get that from?
  • Reply 4 of 8
    ferroferro Posts: 453member
    [quote]We do? Where'd you get that from?...<hr></blockquote>



    OH come on.... Scott



    you dont think Saddam Hussien can get/has nuclear weapons...



    Our prior experience with him would dictate he will again use/attempt to use wepons of mass destruction...



    with the further development of bio/chem/nuclear/projectile/explosive weapons it wouldnt be even easier for Hussein to obtain these things...



    Bin Laden may have $$$ but Husssein has $$$ and access...



    <a href="http://www.state.gov/www/regions/nea/iraq_white_paper.html"; target="_blank">Past History</a>



    E PLURIBUS UNIX

    -----------------------------





    [ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
  • Reply 5 of 8
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by FERRO:

    <strong>



    OH come on.... Scott



    you dont think Saddam Hussien can get/has nuclear weapons...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    There's a big difference between wanting one and having one. We don't "know" he has one. We "know" he wants one.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    thinkinsanethinkinsane Posts: 39member
    Good point about the nukes. I had totally overlooked that in FERRO's original post. Last I checked, Iraq didn't make the list of nuclear capable countries. He might want it, he might have the money, but so do lots of other countries that haven't managed to get a seat at the nuclear table. Hell, they don't even have a delivery system. I guess they could duct tape an atomic warhead to a scud, and hope it does just fly a hundred yards and crash.
  • Reply 7 of 8
    ferroferro Posts: 453member
    OK... I concede...



    but I still hold the possibility open for the use of nuclear weapons by iraq...



    however this is only one form of mass destruction waepons that are now employable by the "Terrorists" of our day...



    And the US use of force to destroy any abilities for use of these weapons by sending an army of missiles, bombs and military personel over to activaly stop the bad guys will..... (let me make sure i spell this right) Exacerbate a bad situation to a "really" bad situation where saddam may see fit given the constant barrage by the US to use his various "weapons of mass destruction"....



    thats my concern...



    E PLURIBUS UNIX

    -----------------------------

  • Reply 8 of 8
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member
    Let me rant here...



    The amazing thing is that nuclear weapons have only been used in warfare twice. Why?



    Because it is a nasty ****ing weapon. One that even Saddam knows that wouldn't even make much sense in using. Nuclear weapons are not weapons of use, they are weapons of fear and power.



    Now small nuclear devices or "dirty" nuclear devices are more of a concern to me. "Dirty" ones are just bombs with nuclear waste...and smaller devices that target an area signifiant to the terrorist are just as deadly and easier to build and deploy.



    yes, I fear this but still if the enemy wanted to use these they would have...at least not yet.



    Honestly, Saddam Hussein is pretty worthless right now (thanks to ThinkInsane and his buddies)....despot without a cause.



    Correct me if I'm wrong...and please, give proof.
Sign In or Register to comment.