and if Saddam had WMD, so what?
Texastambul
28-07-2004, 08:01
Pakistan started up nuclear programs in North Korea, Iran and Libya. I'm sure you could find nuclear weapons all over the Central Asia. Does it really matter if we think Saddam might have mustard-gas when we know that all of his neighbors have H-Bombs?
Our Capital building and Corporate News Stations have been attacked with anthrax twice and a ton of it was found in a Texas storage unit. Is it practical to think we can stop some dictator half the world away from producing mustard-gas when we can't stop the domestic production of Sarin-gas?
So, what if Saddam had WMD(s) all along - it really doesn't threaten us that much when you put it in perspective.
The Blue Viper II
28-07-2004, 08:02
*Imitates Suddam coming hitting on Texastambul* "Would you like to inspect MY Weapon of Mass Destruction?"
*streaks through thread*
Politigrade
28-07-2004, 08:09
the percieved threat came from what would Saddam do with his chemical/biological/nuclear weapons? The general concensus was that he would freely give them to any terrorist who had aims on hitting the US. Or perhaps hitting Israel.
I think the fear was him dropping it on countries with Western holiday makers, personally I am very happy that at least they have done something, don't know about you but I rather like the feeling of going on holiday knowing I am less likely to be gased.
Deus Ex Machana
28-07-2004, 08:17
Not to mention he was violating the Gulf War Peace Treaty, or whatever it was called.
Texastambul
28-07-2004, 08:21
the percieved threat came from what would Saddam do with his chemical/biological/nuclear weapons?
Well yeah, we certainly weren't afraid of what he wouldn't do with them.
The general concensus was that he would freely give them to any terrorist who had aims on hitting the US. Or perhaps hitting Israel.
"Terrorist" have already attacked the Capital building with anthrax twice and a guy in Texas had a ton of it in a storage bin. The point I'm trying to make is the act of removing Saddam from the equation didn't change that -- not to mention that it is rather nieve to think that it takes an entire nation, working under the oppression of a dictator to make chemical and biological weapons. Anybody can make them.
It's true that a lot of people know how to make chemical or biological weapons. On the other hand, if you know how to make some of that stuff the odds are that either you have no interest in making it or you lack the means (money etc.) On the other hand, Saddam had loads of money, the facilities (I'm pretty sure) and the know-how. On top of that, we can be pretty sure that had the opportunity showed itself, he would have given anyone interested in making life for the USA difficult any amount of WMD:s (though it turned out he didn't have any). Basically I mean that Saddam was a lot more of a potential threat than scores of home-grown idiots. Anyone can buy a knife and therefore theoretically kill someone, but it's still in everyones interest to keep knives away from people who have a motive and have shown an inclination to stab others.
Furor Atlantis
28-07-2004, 09:43
North Korea is opressing their people far worse than saddam, AND they have WMD.
But they don't have oil. With dubya in the whitehouse, it ain't gonna happen.
Texastambul
28-07-2004, 10:04
It's true that a lot of people know how to make chemical or biological weapons. On the other hand, if you know how to make some of that stuff the odds are that either you have no interest in making it or you lack the means (money etc.)
Your (il)logic baffels me. Let me see if I've got your arguement: only people who have no interest in making bio-chem weapons know how to make them -- that or their poor WTF!? Okay, let me try and follow your train of thought... nope, it's too incompetent. Let's move on.
On the other hand, Saddam had loads of money, the facilities (I'm pretty sure) and the know-how. On top of that, we can be pretty sure that had the opportunity showed itself,
Let's stop right there... Saddam remained in power for over a decade after the first Gulf War, so how long does someone have to have complete control of a country for an opportunity to show itself? What the hell is your point anyway? That he's rich and has power over people who know how to make anthrax and that is somehow scarier than poor people who know how to make anthrax?
Basically I mean that Saddam was a lot more of a potential threat than scores of home-grown idiots.
Yes... I see one guy, half the world away might be able to produce the same weapons that thousands of American nut-cases also know how to make Well, I know I'll sleep better tonight knowing that the nonexistant threat of Saddams WMDs is taken care of.