[ninenot]

Nikita Kruschev had a bunch of Hbombs. Don't recall any of them hitting the USA....do you??

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

No I don't. I also don't see what that has to do with ANYTHING being discussed.

[carton253]

No offense... but there is a huge difference between the Soviet Union and Islamic militancy. And I'm not calling Saddam an Islamic militant. First of all, the Soviets were "rational". History proves time and time again that when faced with idealogy and survival, the Soviets chose survival everytime. As for Islamic militants... they are not rational. They are terrorists. They systematically target civilians for assault to inspire fear to reach their political, idealogical, and religious means.

Even that Saddam is not looking to spread the glory of Islam throughout the world, he is more of a self-serving Pan-Arabist. He wants to return the Arabs to their former glory, with he being the newest Saladin. He is not above using the Islamic militants to further his goal; neither are the Islamic militants above using him to further their goal.

There is a basic irrationalness to Saddam's pathology. It equals the same irrationalness that a Bin Laden has. Both Pan-Arabism and Militant Islamic Terrorists are bound up together in reaching their goals.

The Cold War is over... You cannot use it in this context. Nor can you say... hey, the Soviets didn't do it, so Saddam won't do it. Saddam is not the Soviets.