War on Iraq won't be 'cakewalk' - GoFuckYourself.com

NoCarrier · 04-29-2002, 07:53 AM

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak25.html

One military thinker, considered one of the Pentagon's best brains, put it this way: ''The risk of going through with this scares the [expletive] out of me. That's why a lot of us are rooting for Colin Powell to settle this somehow.''

The worst-case scenario would trigger a Middle East war, with the Arab world aligned against a nuclear-armed Israel.

Would an Iraq under attack repeat its 1991 missile launching against Israel? Would Israel retaliate, as it did not in 1991, perhaps this time with nuclear weapons? Would this lead to an area-wide war? Would it align the United States and Israel against the Arab world?

LoveAsianChicks · 04-29-2002, 08:20 AM

The worse case senario would be Iraq being able to infect People with a modified "camel pox" virus, which is very similar to smallpox.
I read that Iraq was/is working with this virus for many years.

Babaganoosh · 04-29-2002, 08:25 AM

I can hear those shitheads now...

"American planes, everyone throw pebbles!"

BabeHunter · 04-29-2002, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NoCarrier

the Arab world aligned against a nuclear-armed Israel...
...Israel retaliate with...nuclear weapons...
United States and Israel against the Arab world

sound good to me...

a1ka1ine · 04-29-2002, 08:28 AM

"nuke iraq"

(it had to be said sooner or later...)

Pathfinder · 04-29-2002, 11:33 AM

Not one of Robert Novak's better articles.

The logistics are a bigger problem then the battle. It has already been proven that the Iraqi Military cannot fight. Another concern that is in question; will the Iraqi people be aligned with the over throw of Sadam. It is often easier to defeat a government and its military then it is to defeat the anger of the people.

While it is true that the unexpected can happen when engaged in war; the only way that I see Israel ever using Nukes, is when their total destruction is inevitable.

The entire Arab world is not going to rise up against Israel because that in essence is rising up against the USA, and even if they did, what military forces they have would be quickly defeated.

Bottom line polictical solutions are always prefferable because of the uncertainty of war.

Amputate Your Head · 04-29-2002, 11:36 AM

As a participant in the last Iraqi ass-whuupin', I can tell you, we won't have any problem doing it again. Those idiots were facing the WRONG direction!!! And the rest of them were pussies.... gave up without any resistance, begging and pleading.... the morons that didn;t were burned alive.

Yeah... tough enemy there.

not.

Hawkeye · 04-29-2002, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head
As a participant in the last Iraqi ass-whuupin', I can tell you, we won't have any problem doing it again. Those idiots were facing the WRONG direction!!! And the rest of them were pussies.... gave up without any resistance, begging and pleading.... the morons that didn;t were burned alive.

Yeah... tough enemy there.

not.

So if they have such an ineffective military, why is George Bush telling us that they are a threat?

Amputate Your Head · 04-29-2002, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawkeye

So if they have such an ineffective military, why is George Bush telling us that they are a threat?

why does George Bush invent words like "compassionitivity"?

he's an idiot.

Pathfinder · 04-29-2002, 04:04 PM

HawkEye:

Because Sadam is a nutty despot that is seeking to build weapons of mass destruction which makes him a threat to surrounding nations, as well as possible terrorist activities against other nations, including the USA.

04-29-2002, 07:53 AM	#1
NoCarrier We need more free porn Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Montreal Posts: 16,356	War on Iraq won't be 'cakewalk' http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak25.html One military thinker, considered one of the Pentagon's best brains, put it this way: ''The risk of going through with this scares the [expletive] out of me. That's why a lot of us are rooting for Colin Powell to settle this somehow.'' The worst-case scenario would trigger a Middle East war, with the Arab world aligned against a nuclear-armed Israel. Would an Iraq under attack repeat its 1991 missile launching against Israel? Would Israel retaliate, as it did not in 1991, perhaps this time with nuclear weapons? Would this lead to an area-wide war? Would it align the United States and Israel against the Arab world?

04-29-2002, 08:25 AM	#3
Babaganoosh ♥♥♥ Likes Hugs ♥♥♥ Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: /home Posts: 15,841	I can hear those shitheads now... "American planes, everyone throw pebbles!" __________________ I like pie.

04-29-2002, 11:33 AM	#6
Pathfinder theking of trailer parks Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Tehachapi, California Posts: 2,277	Not one of Robert Novak's better articles. The logistics are a bigger problem then the battle. It has already been proven that the Iraqi Military cannot fight. Another concern that is in question; will the Iraqi people be aligned with the over throw of Sadam. It is often easier to defeat a government and its military then it is to defeat the anger of the people. While it is true that the unexpected can happen when engaged in war; the only way that I see Israel ever using Nukes, is when their total destruction is inevitable. The entire Arab world is not going to rise up against Israel because that in essence is rising up against the USA, and even if they did, what military forces they have would be quickly defeated. Bottom line polictical solutions are always prefferable because of the uncertainty of war. Last edited by Pathfinder; 04-29-2002 at 11:34 AM..

04-29-2002, 11:36 AM	#7
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	As a participant in the last Iraqi ass-whuupin', I can tell you, we won't have any problem doing it again. Those idiots were facing the WRONG direction!!! And the rest of them were pussies.... gave up without any resistance, begging and pleading.... the morons that didn;t were burned alive. Yeah... tough enemy there. not. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

04-29-2002, 08:20 AM	#2
LoveAsianChicks Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: -CANADA- Posts: 1,464	The worse case senario would be Iraq being able to infect People with a modified "camel pox" virus, which is very similar to smallpox. I read that Iraq was/is working with this virus for many years.

04-29-2002, 08:28 AM	#5
a1ka1ine Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 3,387	"nuke iraq" (it had to be said sooner or later...)

04-29-2002, 04:04 PM	#10
Pathfinder theking of trailer parks Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Tehachapi, California Posts: 2,277	HawkEye: Because Sadam is a nutty despot that is seeking to build weapons of mass destruction which makes him a threat to surrounding nations, as well as possible terrorist activities against other nations, including the USA.