what is the worst possible scenario in a war against iraq?

what is the worst possible scenario in a war against iraq?

  • US goes virtually alone against iraq,nothing else

    Votes: 3 5.0%
  • oil embargos, american SUV consumers suffer

    Votes: 2 3.3%
  • chemical weapons used by retreating iraqi troops

    Votes: 3 5.0%
  • biological and chemical weapons used on israel

    Votes: 14 23.3%
  • biological weapons supplied to terrorists and deployed everywhere

    Votes: 8 13.3%
  • nuclear weapons issued to terrorists

    Votes: 7 11.7%
  • nothing bad really happens, saddam is assasinated

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • nothing bad happens, saddam dies after a democratic coup

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • WW3 starts as russia, china, N.korea unites behind iraq (yeah right)

    Votes: 3 5.0%
  • a giant dragon eats everyone.

    Votes: 18 30.0%

  • Total voters
    60
It's called "Banana" -option. When people despise the poll or think it has
too less/bad options, they vote for the most insane one.
 
Firing out our planes for the last 11 years? Trying to assassinate a former President? Firing SCUD missiles at apartment buildings in Israel?
 
We, the British and the US have been murdering the Iraqi civilians since the Gulf War by bombing so-called military bases and the like. We've put massive ban on exportation on food and medicine to Iraq. Altogether we have killed more than 500,000 Iraqi civilians, far more than even Hussein could commit with his limited army and airforce on the world. He simply isn't stupid enough to build weapons of mass destruction, you are talking of someone who is intelligent enough to avoided US and British attempts on his life, avoiding potential revolutions and rebellions. I accept he is a bastard and deserves to die, but he is getting old and probably not to soon before he dies.

The invasion is just part of Bush's determinist foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes against people who oppose his imperial expansion.
 
Originally posted by redtom
We, the British and the US have been murdering the Iraqi civilians since the Gulf War by bombing so-called military bases and the like.

I'd like to know where you get these "facts" from. Of course, I'm sure the Iraqi news services are fair and unbiased.

We've put massive ban on exportation on food and medicine to Iraq. Altogether we have killed more than 500,000 Iraqi civilians, far more than even Hussein could commit with his limited army and airforce on the world.

I suppose Hitler and Stalin didn't have anything to do with the deaths of their people, did they? Hussein is no better than either of them.

He simply isn't stupid enough to build weapons of mass destruction...

Really? He invaded Kuwait and opposed just about every country on planet earth. I think he's plenty stupid.

I accept he is a bastard and deserves to die, but he is getting old and probably not to soon before he dies.

And then one of his sons takes over, and continues the Hussein "legacy."

The invasion is just part of Bush's determinist foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes against people who oppose his imperial expansion.

That is the dumbest statement I have ever read on this board. "Imperial expansion?" Only an idiot would believe this.
 
The worst possible is: USA invade Iraq, take it under control, decrease the oil prices, become the country each step of (?which?) influences the economy of the rest of the world greatly
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe


I'd like to know where you get these "facts" from. Of course, I'm sure the Iraqi news services are fair and unbiased.

I suppose Hitler and Stalin didn't have anything to do with the deaths of their people, did they? Hussein is no better than either of them.

Really? He invaded Kuwait and opposed just about every country on planet earth. I think he's plenty stupid.

And then one of his sons takes over, and continues the Hussein "legacy."

That is the dumbest statement I have ever read on this board. "Imperial expansion?" Only an idiot would believe this.

The facts I have provided are well known in Britain and are not just reported in the liberal press. I first read of Britain and America's non stop engagement in protecting the no-fly zone in The Mail, a worringly right-wing newspaper.

The other fact of the many hundred of thousands dying due to the trade embargo's put on Iraq by Britain and US is also well known. This is also a conservative figure, some reports the deaths as high as 700,000 or even 1 million. Many innocent children are dying because we are angry at just one man.

He is not opposed by every country on earth, what about Russia? They've just signed a trade agreement Iraq and same with Jordan. Can you stop thinking in your nationalist persona, your not a country. Many individuals, including some promiment Iraqi rebels oppose a war on Iraq because they also see it as US imperial foreign policy.

We can't say whats going to happen, but I believe in the mode of many dictators, e.g. Tito, Franco etc. there is a good chance of democratic government suceeding him.

This view is offered not just us soft liberals and left wingers but by some leading Americans, like Kissinger.
 
Once again, I ask you that if Hussein isn't responsible for the deaths of his people, was Hitler or Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot? What about Idi Amin?
 
He wasn't, these people are dying due to a ban on medical supplies to Iraq. Idiot.
 
That is the fault of Hussein, not of the civilized world.

Secondly, I shall refrain from lowering myself to the level of petty insults.
 
As the resident pragmatist, both RMS and redtom are correct. Saddam gassed the Kurds (f*cking a$$hole). But the banning of medical supplies has a major effect as well.

Do you know what would be a better alternative? If the US completely removed all military presence from the mid east.
 
MY worst case Scenario, Iraq nukes Isreal, who respons by uusing WMD on Iraq, Middle East Explodes into choas, as soon as pakistan gets involved India nukes it than all Hell breaks loose
 
rm, I was almost about to side with you but then you had to say something like, "The Civilized world." As uncivilized and barbaric as you see Iraqis, they are entitled to their own culture. Laissez-faire man! Leave them alone! :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Perfection
MY worst case Scenario, Iraq nukes Isreal, who respons by uusing WMD on Iraq, Middle East Explodes into choas, as soon as pakistan gets involved India nukes it than all Hell breaks loose

And then the rest of the world gets involved trying to cool it down.
 
Originally posted by newfangle
rm, I was almost about to side with you but then you had to say something like, "The Civilized world." As uncivilized and barbaric as you see Iraqis, they are entitled to their own culture. Laissez-faire man! Leave them alone! :rolleyes:

I never said anything about Iraqi civilians.

Saddam Hussein is uncivilized. He is unfit for the nation and should be properly disposed of.
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe


Of course! We should respect Iraq's right to spray poison gas on helpless women and children! Perhaps if you were an Iraqi Kurd you would have a differing opinion.

Yes.

Duh! Who gave them the gas? We DID support it at the time. What is your problem? Selective memory syndrome?

If I were a Kurd, I would be too busy being attacked by NATO weapons to be thinking much about Saddam Hussein.

Or maybe in ten years you will be telling us that Turkey is evil for what it did to the Kurds ('and why should we support that'), and that's why we should bomb it, conveniently forgetting that we currently supply it with weapons.

You couldn't care a less about the Kurds. Why don't you want to bomb Turkey? You just got whipped up by CNN and want a war which you don't understand.

Thanks for the insight.
 
Back
Top Bottom