 |
6 Dec 2002, 13:50
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 66
|
Hypothetical situation on Iraq
Many people are against a war with Iraq. IF the weapons inspectors find evidence of weapons mass destruction how could the Government deal with this situation without resorting to bombing Iraq off the map which didn't work in the ealry 90s so probably won't work this time.
__________________
Barney is singing about, dancing away the blues, while a racially balanced group of mutant children twitch arrhythmically behind him. And you wonder why rock stars throw TV sets from hotel-room windows.
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 13:55
|
#2
|
|
Guest
|
Re: Hypothetical situation on Iraq
Quote:
Originally posted by StaticX
Many people are against a war with Iraq. IF the weapons inspectors find evidence of weapons mass destruction how could the Government deal with this situation without resorting to bombing Iraq off the map which didn't work in the ealry 90s so probably won't work this time.
|
we hardly tried in the 90s, we were just there to scare them out of kuwait.
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 16:25
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 91
|
Re: Hypothetical situation on Iraq
Quote:
Originally posted by StaticX
Many people are against a war with Iraq. IF the weapons inspectors find evidence of weapons mass destruction how could the Government deal with this situation without resorting to bombing Iraq off the map which didn't work in the ealry 90s so probably won't work this time.
|
We confiscate them and then sell them back to them for oil.
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 16:29
|
#4
|
|
Good Son
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
|
They've got more F-117s and B-2s this time. That means, a crapload of more firepower (bombardment to be exact, precise strikes) than in the early 90's. So, this time they'll be able to wreck havoc efficiently without endangering their own butts.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 16:54
|
#5
|
|
Official Annoyance
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The smaller state
Posts: 365
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tietäjä
crapload
|
That about sums up the Iraq Airforce
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 17:01
|
#6
|
|
Good Son
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
|
In case you failed to notice, I was trying to describe a strength of the US air force the Iraq will have no chance against.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 19:18
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, but looking for a way to escape
Posts: 128
|
IMHO we should send UN inspectors into France
They will of course find "Weapons of Mass Destruction", so we then have an excuse to wiped the french of the face of the planet.
__________________
SELECT everything FROM everywhere WHERE something = something_else;
> 42
|
|
|
|
|
6 Dec 2002, 19:37
|
#8
|
|
∞+♪²
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: :uo!te]o¯|
Posts: 428
|
Hypothetical situation: Country A suspects Country B has mass destruction weapons capable of destroying Country A. Country A sends people to Country B. Although Country A doesn't find the mass destruction weapons, Country A finds an advanced toaster, which resembles a mass destruction weapon slightly, so Country A starts bombing Country B, in order to make Country B feel guilty for having mass destruction weapons. Country B feels guilty, so instead of destroying Country A with the mass destruction weapons that Country A thought they found, in retaliation for being bombed, Country B instead dismantles all the mass destruction weapons, and sends them to Country A with a bunch of flowers and a note saying "Sorry, we won't do it again".
Since I'm not completely sure that the outcome of the above hypothetical situation is a likely outcome, and that's the most likely outcome where the effect of bombing could be considered at all positive, I'm not sure bombing Country B would be a good idea in such a situation.
__________________
Structural Integrity for Creator - since he'll probably make PA turn 3D.
Wikipedia forum
Note to self - Don't write Chinese letters with bold and italics... 猫
<!--Last incarnation: Nov 2000-->
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:54.
| |
Linear Mode
