The Madman Speaks

[Zombie]

I haven't seen this report so let me paraphrase to make sure I understand.

Saddam wants to fire nuclear weapons at Israel, so everybody would then retaliate by firing nukes at Iraq. This would in effect wipe out a large chunk of the Middle East.

And the downside of this is....?

[Zombie]

Hmmm, nobody came to Saddam's aid during the Gulf War, what makes you believe that it would be 'global' thermonuclear war?

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be overjoyed at the prospect of all the innocent people dying, but then again everybody in that part of the world seems to hate everybody else, including each other. I could conceivably consider a limited strike in that area as a necessary evil. Call me cold-blooded.

[Zombie]

I dunno...Russia is in bed with Iran. Iran hates Iraq. It would be strategically beneficial for Russia to allow the U.S. to take part in blowing the fuck out of their ally's enemy, all the while staying neutral in the matter, as long as we didn't make a 'Chinese Embassy' type targeting error and punch a hole in Iran.

I've got to admit, though, I'm not really all that worried about this call for Jihad. This is sort of an annual Christmas letter for Saddam. He's been saying basically the same thing for the last 20 years.

[Zombie]

I disagree. They all been killing each other for as long as anybody can remember. The thing that gets me is that the Palestinian refugees have been offered relocation and compensation as part of this latest package, but no, they want THEIR land, e.g. the land in Israel that they fled from 40 or 50 years ago. The Palestinians that are out there throw rocks at the Israelis and getting their asses shot off have never lived on the land that they are fighting for. This would be much like me trying to go over to Ireland and reclaim my 'my' land. Fuck that, it's not where you live, it's how you live. Palestinians, it seems, would rather live in shanties and raise their kids to throw rocks rather than get some money, get some land (elsewhere), and live their lives. Now, if you want to talk about who was there first, the land belongs to the Israelites from back in the Roman days. And I can see the Israeli point of view about not wanting the refugees back; there's almost as many refugees and there are Israelis. The refugees have apparently been humping like rabbits for the last half century.

As I understand things, previous to Israel fighting for their independence it was the other way around; the Israelis were the ones getting regular ass-whippings at the hands of the Arabs.

They are all morons. If they want to cook each other in the warm glow of atomic fire, more power to em.

[King Bastard]

Originally posted by Zombie:

They are all morons. If they want to cook each other in the warm glow of atomic fire, more power to em.




My only problem with all this, the may roast, but from that course of actions, I will be brown around the edges. Fuck all that. The sheer stupidity displayed by all concerned people in this matter is staggering. I'm with RW on this, lets just send a team of Seals in there, and pop a few dozen caps in Saddam's head. And if you are gonna say something like "Well, some one else will just come along and take his place", I say kill them as well. If it's a matter of a few thousand lives weighed against a few BILLION.... it's a no brainer.

[Koliedrus]

Popping a cap in the fucker's head would only serve to vacate the position of Head Lunatic. You don't control an entire country as he's done by words alone. There's obviously a sophisticated hierarchy in place.

Iraq reminds me of that pawn-shop owner from Men In Black; shoot off the head and it'll just grow another one.

Yup, a big friggin mess is a definite possibility.

Has anyone checked the Vegas odds on this shit? We should start a pool on when it'll start. $100 gets you in and the one closest to the date of the first blast gets the pot.

[Mudflap]

I have a question:

If Saddam where to suddenly die of lead poisoning, (or any other cause...jut as long as he croaks) who would his successor most likely be and how would he be chosen?

Next question: If Saddam's successor were to mysteriously die, as well as his successor, and the next one....get my drift? How many would we have to take out before the U.S. government could covertly assume control of the Iraqi government?

[Zombie]

Unless I miss my guess, Saddam's successor will be one of his sons, probably the same one who murdered the brothers-in-law who defected. For those who have not read about this fascinating (and scary) family affair, I went out and dug up a link:
http://news2.thls.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/newsid_692000/692784.stm

Unfortunately, if successor after successor started dying off it would no longer be a 'covert' attempt by the U.S. to change the leadership in that area. And whether we did it or not, we would be blamed and that would be leverage for OPEC to put the squeeze on us (which is our Achille's heel) or some other form of retaliation. Not a smart move on our part.

[Koliedrus]

Even so, wouldn't "wetworks" complicate matters? I'm under the impression that the "head" has conditioned the "body".

Is there a peaceful solution?

[Koliedrus]

My stomping ground is the "Melting Pot". My kids interact with people from all around the planet.

My mother is German and lived through WWII. Colonel Dad found it in his heart to find love for the people he tried to defend. I'm one of the results of his love, devotion and beliefs.

My Dad taught me that I shouldn't judge a person by the history of their nation's beliefs. Once upon a time, I momentarily felt shame when a schoolmate referred to my Mom as a nazi. I knew better.

The children in the midst of our current conflict should be our first priority.

No matter the genetic, political or religious backgrounds, the inhabitants of this planet should try to find a way to evolve without destroying each other. Unfortunately, it appears as though the cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

I've learned much about war. My parents were on opposing sides.


I refuse to believe that war is a solution to any problem. Sometimes, though, it's an unavoidable circumstance.

Be well

[Zombie]

I may be wrong in this, because I'm certainly not an expert in Middle East affairs, but my assessment is this:

There won't be any peace in the Middle east, ever, because the main source of contention is religious in nature. It has been my experience that any time religion is used to determine a 'litmus test' of whether or not two (or more) groups get along, they can never get along because of the ideological bent of most religions, e.g. if they are not our religion, then we must convert them. If we cannot convert them, our God cannot tolerate their beliefs and they must be destroyed. Hence they whole 'holy war' crap.

The land grab thing is pretty much just an excuse to keep hating each other. They've got religious symbols all over the place there, and they attach ownership of those symbols to nationalism and thereby make it a military target to acquire the land the symbols are on.

The thing that makes me laugh is this: I've never been over there, but I have seen pictures. They are basically fighting over a bunch of fucking rock that you couldn't sell any other place in the world.

So in answer to your question, Kol, no I don't think there is a peaceful solution, due to the fact that they actually have a word in their language for the concept of 'holy war.' You would have to be able to modify their whole cultural and belief systems to accomplish true peace.

[Mr. Snrub]

I think, RW, that you underestimate the human desire for self preservation. Iraq will not nuke Israel because they know Isreal and the US would nuke them back. For all their rhetoric Iran, Syria and Iraq are as much the petty kingdoms they were a hundred years ago. The reason there has not been an islamic jihad against Isreal is because the Arabs in power are little different to any other kind of ruling elite - they want to extend their own power, and the sentiments of their people are merely tools to achieve this. One need look no further than the Syrian occupation of Lebanon for evidence of this. So; Saddam will not use nuclear weapons against isreal, because he is not stupid enough to throw everything away for mere politics. But he will use anti-isreali sentiment to prop up his own rule.
And it cannot be certain that he has nuclear weapons, although i do not doubt Isreal does. i believe, and i have seen evidence to suggest, that the CIA is buying up any nuclear devices that have made it to the black market - they certainly have more money then the Arabs, and the Russians do not particularly care who they sell it to. Russia, and the Russian, do not feel any kind of connectedness with the Iranians or anyone else: Russias sole aim in the middle east is and always has been to spread her own influence, being totally politically expedient toward this end. Russia would not support any Arab nation if she thought she would be worse off for doing so. They have no true loyalty.

I fervently await the day when alternative fuels research bears fruit and those damn towelheads lose their income and go back to being barbarians not just in mind but also in economic capability.

[Asmodeus]

My question is this: who says they are not barbarians now? It has always been my opinion that anyone, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Southern Baptists(yes, they are a seperate catagory), anyone who bases everything they do on scriptures and brain farts written hundreds of years ago never should have evolved in the first place much less have rule and consequence over others.
There is a precedent of change involved. If a people cannot change then they are doomed. That is final, finito, etc. Let them do as they will and let the US and the other nations of influence lift not one finger to help nor harm those mental infants. For in so doing, they are condemming themselves to the same sort of idiotic stagnation.
As for those who think we should help the inferior and downtrodden, read my signature.

------------------
Good shot...shoot him again.

[Koliedrus]

Unfortunately, religion has had a powerful influence on government for thousands of years. Although it SHOULD not be so, the fact remains.

Islamic belief is generally considered to be masculine in nature. Spreading the "word" through armed conflict is sanctioned. Common sense takes a back seat.

[Mudflap]

Somedays I think that we were never meant to evolve past hunting and gathering. Mankind became a plague to this earth when it formed what we call society.

Staying on topic:

Saddam = nutjob with power
Middle Easterners = fanatical wastes of skin

[Asmodeus]

It is agreed that religion has had a significant role on peoples and cultures throughout history. And, I fear, will continue to exhort influence on lesser minded folk for many years to come. That does not mean I have to agree with it. There are so much more nobler causes for war than the religious standpoint, "He worships the wrong God. Let's kill him and everyone he knows!" Plain old, honest aggression works quite well without a religious excuse, thank you very much. I was always fond of "Because I can." But, that is just me.

------------------
Good shot...shoot him again.