[xJones]

You know you're going to get "incoming", but there has been something strange about picking out Iraq as El Hombre Numero Uno. North Korea is rattling proven nuclear drums, but Saddam remains the primary target.

[richardtavor]

North Korea has probably been bought off Iraq. You can time their statements (and Scott Ritter's) to times that Iraq is under serious heat. Another note from this guy that compares Israel with Iraq and NK, Israel will only use it's weapons for self defense--I don't think you can put Iraq and NK in tht category.

[richardtavor]

North Korea has probably been bought off Iraq. You can time their statements (and Scott Ritter's) to times that Iraq is under serious heat. Another note from this guy that compares Israel with Iraq and NK, Israel will only use it's weapons for self defense--I don't think you can put Iraq and NK in tht category.

[veryconernedamerican]

the north korea situation is proof of the axis of evil. as we prepare to get rid of hussein, north korea steps up rhetoric in an attempt to distract us. let's see what they are saying in a few months when the iraq situation is finished up. my guess is they will shut the hell up, in knowledge that they will be stepped on otherwise.

[kesg]

You know you're going to get "incoming", but there has been something strange about picking out Iraq as El Hombre Numero Uno. North Korea is rattling proven nuclear drums, but Saddam remains the primary target.

Not strange at all. If anything, the North Korea rattling makes it that much more urgent that we solve the Iraq problem sooner rather than later in order to get it out of the way. Ignoring Iraq now solves nothing and only makes both problems worse.

[angkor]

but there has been something strange about picking out Iraq as El Hombre Numero Uno.

Not if our goal in the war on terror is to destabilize the entire Middle East.

And that is is the goal.

[DAnconia55]

You know you're going to get "incoming", but there has been something strange about picking out Iraq as El Hombre Numero Uno.

Not necessarily.

What if the strategy is a cleansing of the entire mid-east by removing EVERY government that is dangerous to us.

Iraq has the largest army in the middle east. And the most weapons.
Invading and garrisonning Iraq also surrounds Iran. From our position there, we could destablize Iran into student led revolution, perhaps even arming the rebels across the border.

Now we have the territory from India to Saudi Arabia under our control, or occupied by friendly regimes.

The Saudi's are now sandwiched between our forces and Israel. Wanna bet how quick they'll negotiate?

Lastly, there's no way to deal with North Korea without using nuclear (preferably Neutron) weapons. The army is too close to Seoul, the artillery in range of millions of people, and we're way out numbered.
We can't simply use conventional air raids to take out their bunkered army, and nuclear research facilities. Has to be nuclear. So there's no reason to rush 200,000 men to the DMZ, when 200,000 won't be enough anyway - and when we have to make a move against NK, the attack comes from a sub or planes and is over in 15 minutes anyway.

[Stavka2]

Saddam, interestingly, has only used WMD when he knew he could get away with it...a reason he did nothing against Isreal. And for that matter, there was little real out cry by the US when it was used on Iran or the Kurds...who were helping their oppressed relatives in Turkey.