The next war

[Minoosh]

The 2003 invasion was a continuation of the 1991 war. Did you imagine them to be disconnected?

To some extent, yes. For one thing, I can't imagine why we waited 12 years if his cease-fire violations were so flagrant. My history is not great, but yes, I believe the U.S. kept up limited airstrikes for much of that 12-year period.

But starting a land war with such a shaky invasion strategy is a different order of involvement. I don't know what really changed to set off events in 2003. Except, apparently, that Dick Cheney perceived some urgency to invasion that didn't exist in 1991.

 

[bikerdruid]

I don't know what really changed to set off events in 2003. Except, apparently, that Dick Cheney perceived some urgency to invasion that didn't exist in 1991.

don't you remember?
it was because of imaginary WMD's.

 

[Ziggurat]

To some extent, yes. For one thing, I can't imagine why we waited 12 years if his cease-fire violations were so flagrant.

Because we were hoping on solving the problem on the cheap. It didn't work.

But starting a land war with such a shaky invasion strategy is a different order of involvement.

Sure, but the objection that we took the wrong strategy is different from the objection that we started it. We didn't.

I don't know what really changed to set off events in 2003. Except, apparently, that Dick Cheney perceived some urgency to invasion that didn't exist in 1991.

What changed was our risk tolerance towards hostile terrorist-supporting rogue nations, and our willingness to use military force to do something about them. That changed because of 9/11. But again, the conflict predated 9/11, and we didn't start it.

 

[Ziggurat]

OK, naively perhaps, I don't know how you set up a nuclear strike without leaving your fingerprints all over it. Isn't everyone sort of monitoring everyone else? Does the path of projectiles live in some satellite or atmospheric record? I have no idea, these questions are pure curiosity.

Ballistic missile launches would be picked up with satellites, and they are easy to track. If we got hit by a ballistic missile-launched nuke, we'd know exactly where it came from and go after the culprit directly, and probably wouldn't bother with anyone else. But the scenario Wildcat was addressing was a case where a nuke was smuggled into the US and then detonated. Neither North Korea nor Iran have ballistic missiles capable of hitting the 48 states from their territory (NK might be able to hit Hawaii or Alaska), and as a first-strike attack, that sort of attack seems more likely. And if anyone gave nukes to a terrorist group, it would almost certainly be smuggled to the target, not launched via missile.

 

[Manopolus]

Any nation that makes itself a threat to peace, freedom and justice in the world IS our business, as it should be of all great nations.

Hmm... I'd say this little statement makes us our own worst enemy by definition. How about we Americans invade the U.S.A. instead?

 

[Minoosh]

What changed was our risk tolerance towards hostile terrorist-supporting rogue nations, and our willingness to use military force to do something about them.

And the biggest threat was Saddam? No.

 

[kevsta]

Hmm... I'd say this little statement makes us our own worst enemy by definition. How about we Americans invade the U.S.A. instead?

this. and how about you bring the troops home to do it.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

and politicians and banksters and crony capitalists and apologists for state terrorism and and and...

 

[Ziggurat]

And the biggest threat was Saddam? No.

I'm curious about who you think was a bigger threat. But he was an easier threat to deal with than, say, North Korea.

 

[BenBurch]

And the biggest threat was Saddam? No.

Not hardly. Attacking Saddam was like shooting the neighborhood bully because the neighborhood serial killer is harder to find.

 

[BenBurch]

I'm curious about who you think was a bigger threat. But he was an easier threat to deal with than, say, North Korea.

China
Iran
AlQ
Libya
US White Supremacists
Mexican drug lords
North Korea
Pirates

Each one more of a threat to the USA that Saddam COULD have been.

He was a threat to friendly states in the region until the Gulf War, but after that he was more of a bloody annoyance.

 

[noch1Narr]

...and don't forget that the 'shrub' had a personal axe to grind because Saddam had blundered in his (alleged) attempt to have Pa George assassinated!

 

[mikeyx]

Hmm... I'd say this little statement makes us our own worst enemy by definition. How about we Americans invade the U.S.A. instead?

can we drive the fundies into the ocean?

 

[bikerdruid]

can we drive the fundies into the ocean?

oh, please do....

 

[MaGZ]

Probably, as they should be doing. A nuclear Iran is a direct threat to their safety, security and sovereignty.

The US should do all it can to support any action that leads to the destruction of Iran's nuclear program and all it's associated assets.

And will you be surprised when there is blowback?

 

[MaGZ]

How is it a direct threat?




Israel is widely regarded as one of the world's biggest threats to peace, freedom and justice. Should the CIA be there "arranging accidents"?

Yes, the CIA should start with Israel’s biological warfare complex in Ness Ziona.

 

[MaGZ]

i haven't seen you use 'islamofascist' for a long time.
as i remember, it was proven to be absolutely meaningless quite some time ago.
can anyone else remember that?

I think CIA-Mossad mole James Woolsey fist came up with that terminology.

 

[MaGZ]

No, that's not at all what's being suggested. If we got hit by a nuke and went after both Iran and North Korea in response, we wouldn't also go after China. Similarly, China would have no reason to go after us.

You go after all the likely culprits if you don't know which one is guilty, and we're not on that list for the scenario you describe.



Then we say, "tough ****, that's what you get for breaking the NPT and being our enemy."

You remind me of General Buck Turgidson in the film Dr. Strangelove.

 

[MaGZ]

My question referred to the Iraq War, not the Gulf War. How did Saddam start the Iraq War?

By not yielding to Bush’s ultimatum.

 

[MaGZ]

A better next war is to push Mexico's border back about 500 miles and set up a heavily mined no man's land.

Let’s just build a 20-foot wall and close the border.

 

[MaGZ]

i don't know what israel has on america and canada, but we are certsinly their 'yes' men.
we are certainly either blind to israel's atrocities, or are being blackmailed...
in any case, we are blind to anything israel does, other than to blithly approve of it.

I think Israel has everything on all major politicians in the US. Their agents here using the cover of the ADL and other like organizations have for years been compiling information on all American politicians. Blackmail is the only logical explanation for American foreign policy in the Middle East.