Saddam and Iran Prepare WMD

efreedomnews.com ^ | August 15, 2002 | Jonathan Rhodes

[greggy]

Within HOURS of the incident occurring, there were MASSIVE overflights which headed for Norfolk - I have lotsa family doewn there too - AND DID NOT COME BACK. Only an idiot would not realize they were being deployed, even if the had no relatives in the military.

The only problem with your story is how it ends. Weeks later. It should have ended, "Within hours of deployment, nuclear bombers ringed the landing sight with ten mega ton bombs on advancing Chinese columns, while marines landed at the landing site and rescued the crew. Once evacuated from the site, the entire landing field was nuked out of existence. All returned safely home the following week."

...talk...

[VaBthang4]

"Without doubting anything you say, something like that still seems distinctly possible. These are not sane people."

Maybe to people who dont understand the capabilities of the US Military and lack thereof of the Iraqis and Iranians [Of which there seems to be a great many participating in this thread including its originator].

Their sanity has no impact on either.

[greggy]

I believe the main reason ...

Isn't a lack of strong intel the pits?

[VaBthang4]

"a war that has virtually no public support in this country"

Another creator of magic sentences not supported by facts. Back it up with legitimate polling numbers [The only way you could discern public support] or from here on out I'll beat you over the head with this quote.

[greggy]

If Iraq was to launch (WMD) against Saudi Arabia oilfields, while at the same time Iran attacked Bahrain and the US forces, what would be the position of the US and her allies?

Can anyone confirm the story I read years ago about the US navy sinking half the Iranian navy in one night, and the only thing that saved the other half was they simply were not in the region?

[Mr. Mojo]

No offense, but that is probably the nuttiest thing I've read in a long time. First of all, Israel would never surrender to anyone under any circumstances. If they were going down, every Arab nation would be going down with them. Remember, Israel has literally hundreds of hydrogen bombs, not just a few. They could kill every living thing not only in Iraq, but in every Arab nation. And believe me, they wouldn't hesitate to do so (Mecca and Medina included).

Secondly, The U.S. would never allow it to happen in the first place. We could take out most of their Scuds in a few hours, and our Patriot ABM technology is considerably more advanced than it was a decade ago. With several batteries of Patriots devoted to each Scud, I'd be very suprised if even one of them made it to its target.

You're absolutely right about Saddam being a madman and caring not a whit for his people, but I think you're severely underestimating the military prowess and sophistication of both Israel and the U.S. ...And the idea of Sharon surrendering to Saddam is downright laughable.

[greggy]

This would then put Iraq and Iran in a very strong barginning positon.

Saddam's insanity IS his strong negotiating position. Israel can vaporized Baghdad and Iraqi scuds will just keep on flying. It will be Sharon's moment of realization that the only way he can stop the scuds is to agree to Iraq's terms of surrender. Killing Iraqis won't do it!!!

[VaBthang4]

You have no concept of the things you are discussing.

Log off and never speak of this again.

[greggy]

First of all, Israel would never surrender to anyone under any circumstances

Excuse me? Do you know Sharon?

If given only the choice of annihilation, Sharon would nuke every Muslim in the world.

But that was not my scenario. To Sharon, Israel's EXISTENCE is everything. He will surrender under some terms (paying tribute, adopting some laws, retaining nukes) to keep the state of Israel from going under.

In my scenario, he won't have any other choice. And in my scenario, you cannot provide him with one that would work to save Israel as a state. Thus, he will choose life for Israel over extinction even under terrible circumstances looking for the day their Messiah comes to liberate them from their enemies.

[greggy]

We could take out most of their Scuds in a few hours

1991 didnot demonstrate this ability whatsoever. What do you know of our improvements to detect and destroy, seeing that we have less troops in the region?

[Mr. Mojo]

Understand that Iraq has a very limited number of Scuds. But let's just say he has 50, which is probably a gross exaggeration. Out of the 50, say we can only locate and destroy 10 (a very conservative estimate). Out of the 40 remaining, say half survive getting shot down by American Patriot ABM's (and as I already mentioned, we could probably get them all with our new technology). That's 20 Scuds to hit Israel.....but wait, not all of them will reach their intended targets. (If you remember from the Gulf War, many landed harmlessly in the desert, hopelessly off course). That leaves 10 Scuds actually landing inside Israel with bio-chem weapons on board. Yes, thoudsands of Israelis would die, but Israel has millions of people. This worst case scenario I outlined is far from being powerful enough to bring Israel to its knees......FAR.

[Mr. Mojo]

What do you know of our improvements to detect and destroy, seeing that we have less troops in the region?

I already told you, we've upgraded our Patriots considerably since the Gulf War. I've read about it in several military journals over the past couple of years, and I'll link you up after I dig through some online archives.

[Mr. Mojo]

Oh I see what you mean....seek and destroy the Scuds before they're launched with fighter/bombers. I haven't read about any improvements in that area, but that doesn't mean there haven't been any. And anyway, we were more successful in this area in the Gulf War than you're giving us credit for.

And remember, Saddam has a very limited number of Scuds. He's already shot most of his impotent load.

[John_11_25]

The Strait of Hormuz needs to be nagigated by all US ships, and the coast of Iran runs the length of it. Hundreds and Hundred of Miles, with a very narrow and difficult turn. The US could be attacked at any stage.

The US has a powerful airforce I will admit, but when you are in someone elses backyard, you need to be carful, or do you forget the US Cole was attacked with just a simple rubber boat, so no need to out-manouver anyone.

You do not fight the larger more powerful enemy (US) at its mode of battle, but the one of your choosing, obviously you have not read Sun Tzu

These people are not interested in consequenses, they would be in a holy war and prepared to die for their course, whereas Allied troops, would be trying there best to keep out of arms way.

Kamakazi, Plastinian Suicide Bomber or Tamil Tigers and Vietnamese, all people who were prepared to die for their freedom.

They would not attack with tanks or armies the oil fields of Saudi, but would use WMB as I mentioned, so would be un-usable by anyone for a long time.

Like wise the Strait of Hormuz leaves, Bahrain, Qatar or any of the emirates just minutes away from attack and they are so small, they would be obliterated in matter of hours. (IRan is too large to hit all the airfilds or missle sites in a matter of hours, once the attack began, the missiles would start flowing.

The US and its allies taking over the oilfields of Iran and Iraq, well my friend, we would then see the true meaning of the word "Jihad" and I would recommend investing in a company that sells bodybags, as we would need them by the ship load.

[John_11_25]

Can anyone confirm the story I read years ago about the US navy sinking half the Iranian navy in one night

They would not need to attack them with their navy, rubber dingy was enough to take out the USS Cole, but Rockets from anywhere on the Strait's of Hormuz would have catastophic conseqences. (Check out the map on message #4)

It would be madness to attack the US with ships or jets, as we all know they would be outnumbered and destroyed easily, unless of course they have exercet missles from France, which I am sure have improved a lot since the falkland Island war. Then they were fired from longer distances than the width of the Strait of Hormuz.

[American in Israel]

Are you thinking clearly?

I am, I have lived with these terrorists for a few years. You assume that they will not fire because we will fire back. What pray tell was 9-11? I have no doubt they will fire. They really are that crazy. MAD does not work if one side wants to die in a blaze of glory. To think that it would work with a Jihad is, well, mad.

We better learn to think eastern, and fast.

[American in Israel]

More than one informer has said Saddam has nukes. When he fired his last scud at the Dimona nuclear plant in Israel filled with concrete it was assumed that it was a test load for a nuclear weapon. The head of Sadams weapons procurement defected to the US and said he had two and would have 2 more a year at present rate. That was three years ago.

I figure we are going in because of the Anthrax mailed in the US, and expect the worst.

[American in Israel]

any WMD attack by Iran and/or Iraq would be met with a retaliation by us (with hydrogen bombs) that would shake the foundations of Hell itself. It would be total and utter suicide for them.

You and I agree, read Isaiah 14-19 and Jer 49-51. They descibe just that.

[DBtoo]

I ended up finding an article last night that claimed Iran is indeed number 3 in oil supplies. I don't know for sure whether it is correct. Of course there are other factors involved such as the quality.

[VaBthang4]

Ughh...

I asked you how Iran would take Bahrain....you didnt reply.

"The Strait of Hormuz needs to be nagigated by all US ships, and the coast of Iran runs the length of it. Hundreds and Hundred of Miles, with a very narrow and difficult turn. The US could be attacked at any stage."

And the vessels already in the Persian Gulf and in the Arabian Gulf? How would they be destroyed? How would their response be defeated? Or is it your assertion that the US navy would line their ships up one after another and send them into Iranian fire while holding their own?

"The US has a powerful airforce I will admit, but when you are in someone elses backyard, you need to be carful, or do you forget the US Cole was attacked with just a simple rubber boat, so no need to out-manouver anyone."

What? One has nothing to do with the other...you acknowledged that the US air force is supreme and then offer up some high school augury to erase speaking anymore and exposing your lack of operational knowledge.

"You do not fight the larger more powerful enemy (US) at its mode of battle, but the one of your choosing, obviously you have not read Sun Tzu"

Oi...you cant be this dense. If you just abandon your position now, I will fully understand. To continue to talk in vague admonitions and Hokie forboding is only making you look foolish.

"These people are not interested in consequenses, they would be in a holy war and prepared to die for their course, whereas Allied troops, would be trying there best to keep out of arms way."

You mean the same way the Syrians were forced to chain their soldiers to Anti-Tank and Anti-Aircraft guns lining the approaches to Damascus because they were fleeing in light of Israeli advance? An asinine, disrespectful sideline comment that doesnt require futher consideration.

"They would not attack with tanks or armies the oil fields of Saudi, but would use WMB as I mentioned, so would be un-usable by anyone for a long time."

Really....how about 24 to 36 hours depending upon the wind direction in the AO. Neither has Nuclear weapons and those are the only ones that would accomplish what you claim.

"Like wise the Strait of Hormuz leaves, Bahrain, Qatar or any of the emirates just minutes away from attack and they are so small, they would be obliterated in matter of hours."

Again, by what? Show me the Iranian military equipment that will bring this about? Show me the Iranian military equipment that can defeat American tactics.

"Iran is too large to hit all the airfilds or missle sites in a matter of hours, once the attack began, the missiles would start flowing."

Missiles tipped with what?

"The US and its allies taking over the oilfields of Iran and Iraq, well my friend, we would then see the true meaning of the word "Jihad" and I would recommend investing in a company that sells bodybags, as we would need them by the ship load."

There is already a shipload of something right here....it's called a BS from a guy who has absolutely no relative military or combat experience. Who does not know the combat capabilities of the forces involved or the logistical requirements to accomplish what he proposes is remotely possible.

You really should humble up and walk away. You are light years out of your league here.

Neither Iran or Iraq posses Nuclear weapons or the capability to effectively deliver them. What amount of chemical weapons they do have will remain where they are as a result of the absolute certainty that the government who employs them first and the popuation it rules will be on the receiving end of a Nuclear response. Neither has the ability to take or hold foreign terrain in light of the American presence that already exists in the region.

Air Supremacy is already in American hands.

No sizable armoured force [A requirement in invading another country] can move from Iraq or Iran and not be destroyed the moment it is percieved as a threat. No Iranian or Iraqi Air force could take flight and effectively engage American aircraft or air defenses. For any ground force to make an effective assault across any border means they would first have to lay down comm and bring up their supporting artillery...all of which we can see...once Iran or Iraq did this they would be met with an American counter move to negate what they intend to do.

Those are the baseline realities that you cannot argue against.

Those are the baseline realities that decapitate your assertions.

I dont mind people brainstorming....it is healthy....but to brainstorm you have to be competent in the subject you are discussing. To this point, you have not been. You have no facts...only Sun Tzu quotes and thirty year old examples of military desperation.

You continue to disregard the absolute that if either Iran or Iraq employed biological or chemical weapons the US response would effectively end the debate and the conflict.