US Issues warning on WMD

[GT98]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=2&cid=578&u=/nm/20021211/ts_nm/bush_security_dc

Scary stuff..but how much of a derreant will it make to some nut job like OBL?

[KvHagedorn]

The deterrant would be that he would lose a LOT of support in the Arab world.

[KvHagedorn]

Honestly, there is no reason for us ever to have to use nuclear weapons against Iraq. We have so much firepower that we have no need. A squadron of B52s carpetbombing wherever would be more effective and carry a lesser stigma. Now, attacking Israel with WMD would be a very, very stupid thing to do. They have nukes and a hardened attitude and if it looks like they might lose a war, you can count on Mecca, Medina, Cairo, Baghdad, Damascus, and the Aswan Dam to be no more.

[Dr Mordrid]

At the very least. You would think by now that everyone there knows not to screw with Israel...but some of 'em seem to have a death wish......

IMO I don't see the need unless we need to respond to a hardened target deep underground, and even then there are prototype weapons that *might* be used instead.

I'm thinking mainly of a space-to-surface weapon that can take out even deep underground structures. It would be launced from space and impact over an underground structure at hypersonic speeds, whereupon it penetrates (deep) and vaporizes...causing a massive underground over-pressure.

For a vision of such a device check out Jerry Pournelle's book "Footfall".

Also interesting is this quote from Donand Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense;

"New earth-penetrating and thermobaric weapons could make obsolete the deep underground facilities where today terrorists hide and terrorist states conceal their weapons of mass destruction capabilities"

Dr. Mordrid

[High_Jumbllama]

This is insane. Nukes against people who hide/live/work in caves and/or very small buildings. That's like using a cluster bomb to kill an ant colony an taking out several nearby houses. I do hope this is just a threat and nothing more. The thousands of innocents that would be killed and the thousands of irradiated innocents if not millions that would suffer 'til death would make the U.S. "The Great Satan" that we are called by many.

We are too technologically advanced to resort to such a brute force and careless method/weapon choice.

[Dogbert]

Seems like a 2nd cold war to me.

[Joel]

I do hope this is just a threat and nothing more. The thousands of innocents that would be killed and the thousands of irradiated innocents if not millions that would suffer 'til death would make the U.S. "The Great Satan" that we are called by many.

We are too technologically advanced to resort to such a brute force and careless method/weapon choice.

I think they are just saying that we reserve the right to use them as a last restore. Of course by the time we do get around to using them there already will be thousands of innocents dead and thousands if not millions that would be suffering 'til death. It's just that it will be our innocents. The key to remember here is defensive not offensive. In our words we reserve the right to defend ourselves and others againist WMDs by use of the same.

Joel

[The PIT]

Page been nuked by the look of it.

[thop]

I believe carpet bombing or even nukes won't help much against the Iraq. IMO when the US attacks Iraq they wont (and cannot) stop until Saddam is either killed or caught. So Saddam will hide in one of his underearth palaces, and pull all his forces into Bagdad and other big cities.
And i dont see even the US carpet bombing a whole city and killing tens of thousands innocent civilians. The only way to get him then is to march in with troops into this very hostile environment, and i believe the US are not really looking forward to 1vs1 fights.
What does everybody else think?

[James_D]

Originally posted by thop
I believe carpet bombing or even nukes won't help much against the Iraq. IMO when the US attacks Iraq they wont (and cannot) stop until Saddam is either killed or caught. So Saddam will hide in one of his underearth palaces, and pull all his forces into Bagdad and other big cities.
And i dont see even the US carpet bombing a whole city and killing tens of thousands innocent civilians. The only way to get him then is to march in with troops into this very hostile environment, and i believe the US are not really looking forward to 1vs1 fights.
What does everybody else think?

I agree... But also worried for the rest of the arabian countries, that a war, could result in a more radical islamic world. Wich would mean bad news for everyone...

James.

[Dr Mordrid]

Let Saddam take refuge in one of his bunkers.....we'll just seal 'em up and let him rot inside. After that we can level the "palaces" and build something useful on top.

No problem

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

I _know_ I'll be flamed for this, but...

You wanna stop radical Islamics?

Nuke Medina.

Then make it clear that Mecca is next.

- Gurm

[Joel]

Problem is Doc he won't do something like that. He will more than likely hide out in some sort of residental area, around a hospital, school or something of that nature using the civilians of the area as human sheilds. Then if we don't do any bombing then he will probably do it himself just to try and make it look like we did it. He has after all in the past gassed his own people. That's the kind of cowards that they are.

Joel

[Joel]

Don't worry Gurm, you are not the first to have suggested that. Some of the nation's top military advisors have suggested it already. But then again for us this is not a religious war and we would be feeding right into their hands to make it one.

Joel

[thop]

I hope they were put in a mental institute in the meanwhile.