COMMENTS:
Voted : Cause for concern
wow, this is a new topic. the answer is no.
Voted : No threat
I cant see how they were a threat.
Voted : No threat
Not a threat, in the least.
The only threat was that Western oil companies weren't going to have access to the oil.
Same thing for Iran.
Voted : Cause for concern
Immediate threat? No. Cause for concern over the next decade? Yes probably. Country of real concern? Iran. Then and now. Bush is a moron.
"by the way never threatened to invade this Country"
That doesn't mean a country isn't a threat. If memory serves me right I don't think Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union had made actual threats to invade the US. They were threats weren't they?
"the fact this Country doesn't seem to be able to govern itself or apparently even train it's militia(s"
You appear to be confusing two separate governments. Under Saddam they did have an army (one of the largest). They did govern - brutally. Today's Iraq isn't the same as the one under Saddam.
"Country had abilities to do great harm to a Super power Country"
Well thank Israel for taking out the the Osirak nuclear facility in 1981. As a side note, the French were pressuring Israel to give diplomacy a chance. We saw how well Saddam Hussein responds to diplomacy.
Mild threat
FFLSD: having a large ill equiped army is irrelevant in the current world...is this the army I recall that crawled out of their holes and started kissing the U.S's soldiers' feet in the Bush Sr war to push them back into Iraq ??? that did not launch one airplane in Bush Jr's campaign ? super low tech knowledge and lack of parts for a delivery system even if they did have nuclear technology ? At this point in time they are more like a fly on the wall...to compare them to the German war machine is certainly a quantum leap to say the least..the effects of no "strong man to govern a bunch of fractured factions is manifesting itself and as soon as we are not in the picture let's see what happens...As you said yourself, taking out any above ground facility is very easy for a Country such as the U.S.A anytime they wish to do so...whether the rest of the world likes it or not...As for Saddam, he repeatedly said he did not have WMD's and so far he was right...cause for concern ? I'll grant you that...
Iraq is far more of a threat to America NOW than it ever was or would have been.
Voted : Trivial annoyance
Trivial at most.
Hindsight is 20/20 soothsayer.
All you need is an airplane to deliver an atomic bomb. Even less if it is a suicide mission.
As far as the gulf war, it hindsight it seemed easy. Prior to the actual attack here is the status of Iraq's military:
1.2 million ground troops
5,800 tanks
5,100 other armored vehicles
3,850 artillery pieces
750 fighters and bombers
200 other aircraft
An elaborate missile and gun defense system.
It was hardly viewed as a paper tiger by the US. Most of that equipment was fairly new and almost all of it supplied by France, Russia and China. Most of the type of equipment that was in their stockpile remains in service in many countries including Russia. Iraq had the world's 4th largest military at the time. His invasion of Kuwait was seen as the first in a set of conquests by a man set on dominating the region. He had WMDs such as chemical and biological weapons at the time. If you think he had no ambitions for further conquests, then you are naive.
As far as him saying he had no WMDs, sure if you want to believe that is fine. The concern among most world leaders was that if the sanctions were lifted, he would go back to his old ways and rebuild his military and develop chemical and biological weapons again. He certainly had no qualms about using them against the Kurds. Was that a legitimate threat? Yes, but not immediate. I'm sure the French, Russians and Chinese would have been happy to sell him new weapons.
Saddam's military worked just fine after the first gulf war. He used it brutally repress the Kurds and other parts of the population. So I would say their government was able to govern - although extremely brutally.
"As you said yourself, taking out any above ground facility is very easy for a Country such as the U.S.A anytime they wish to do so."
I did NOT say that. Both Israel's action and the coalition's attacks were carefully planned and executed using new tactics and weapons against an extremely well armed and defended country. They were not easy.
Sorry, but you are making errors in judgment and seem to lack some perspective on this. If that seems arrogant then so be it. Iraq controlling most of the world's oil was a threat to most of the rest of the world. That was a real threat to the security of many countries.
FFLSD;
Hmm, now it's about oil, not WMD's, okay, so now that there's an ongoing war, and iraq is still controlling that oil, now what ???
misjudgement ? If you do a little research on the weaponry used on the kurds, you will find a link leading back to the USA on how they acquired the ingredients for that stuff...while I respect your opinion, it was not as hard as I believe you think it was to take out the nuclear threat in Iraq...when the smoke clears, (if ever) that oil will be on the free market so just like the unacounted for billions you may never be sure what it is buying, unless we stay there "forever"...
|
