Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

Explain to me how this works.

Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.

(QUESTION)

Where and how does this money flow?

v/r
R

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

Explain to me how this works.

Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.

(QUESTION)

Where and how does this money flow?

v/r
R

Starting with Chomsky:

"It is noteworthy that today the strongest support for Israel in the international arena comes from the United States, Canada and Australia, the so-called Anglosphere – settler-colonial societies based on extermination or expulsion of indigenous populations in favor of a higher race, and where such behavior is considered natural and praiseworthy."

Part of that "strongest support for Israel..." stems from billion$ of corporate welfare directed at US defense contractors:

"From 2009 to 2018, the United States is scheduled to give Israel--the largest recipient of U.S. assistance--$30 billion in military aid. Through its illegal 44-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, Israel misuses U.S. weapons in violation of U.S. law to kill and injure Palestinian civilians, destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, blockade the Gaza Strip, and build illegal settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem."

Maybe this is where fiscal austerity in the US should start?

US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation*:*How Much Military Aid to Israel? www.aidtoisrael.org

 

[Kondor3]

georgephillip, et al,

Explain to me how this works.

Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.

(QUESTION)

Where and how does this money flow?

v/r
R

Starting with Chomsky:

"It is noteworthy that today the strongest support for Israel in the international arena comes from the United States, Canada and Australia, the so-called Anglosphere – settler-colonial societies based on extermination or expulsion of indigenous populations in favor of a higher race, and where such behavior is considered natural and praiseworthy."

Part of that "strongest support for Israel..." stems from billion$ of corporate welfare directed at US defense contractors:

"From 2009 to 2018, the United States is scheduled to give Israel--the largest recipient of U.S. assistance--$30 billion in military aid. Through its illegal 44-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, Israel misuses U.S. weapons in violation of U.S. law to kill and injure Palestinian civilians, destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, blockade the Gaza Strip, and build illegal settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem."

Maybe this is where fiscal austerity in the US should start

US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation*:*How Much Military Aid to Israel? www.aidtoisrael.org

Nahhhhh...

Cut off aid to Egypt first...

Cut off aid to the rest of the Muslim world second...

Cut off aid to Asia third...

Cut off aid to Africa fourth...

Cut off aid to South America fifth...

Cut off aid to Central America sixth...

Cut off aid to Israel seventh...

Cut off aid to Canada and Europe and Australia last...

It's all about friendships, and who, we like best...

We've always liked the Jews better than we've liked the Muslims...

Much better...

And 9-11 pretty much cut that in stone...

 

[Hossfly]

There was no shortage of proud white racists who felt entitled to be racists in the US or South Africa during the middle of the 20th century; those private sentiments were reflected in the public statements of elected leaders, city mayors, for example:

"The recent brouhaha over comments made by Upper Nazareth mayor Shimon Gapso has intensified with a tongue-in-cheek op-ed Gapso published yesterday in Haaretz. Of course, anti-Zionists—for an array of reasons (moral, ethical, hateful or ignorant)—have long charged Israel’s governing ideology with being racist at its core. So is Gapso any more racist than Zionism would predict from a holder of public office in Israel?"

"In some ways, it’s a blogger’s dream when a public figure doesn’t deny a label thrust on him (on charges of racism, Gapso may be all the wiser thanks to the musical Avenue Q), but instead cuts right to the chase: if he’s a racist, so is the entire Zionist project."

Israeli Mayor: If I'm Racist, So Is Israel - The Daily Beast

If the entire Zionist project is racist to its core, why should the US continue funding a violent, vindictive ethnocracy in the Middle East without any O-I-L?

Our government is now going to give Pakistan over a billion and a half dollars (in addition to all the money already given previously), but Georgie Boy couldn't care less even though a lot of this money goes to the terrorists to target our military. And, of course, Georgie Boy, has no problem with the Sunnis murdering the Shiites and Ahmadis there plus Christians and Hindus. If the Jews are not involved, Georgie Boy just fluffs this off. You don't have to ride in the back of the bus anymore, Georgie. Why not take a vacation from your Cut and Paste jobs and enjoy Sunday in Los Angeles? Take a bus to someplace you have never been; or if there is a bus going down Pico to the beach, take it and relax by watching the waves of the Pacific rolling in. As an aside, after over 100 posts on this thread, one would think that even Georgie Boy has had enough but he keeps on with his Cut and Pastes jobs while innocent people are being murdered in the Muslim world because of their religous beliefs. What a fine dhimmi he makes!!!

 

[Hossfly]

Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?

It's not about race - it's about religion - and symmetry - and the lack thereof.

"Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations..."

That too... sounds like fun...

Strange how Georgie Boy never says anything about the mentality of people who have no problem killings others in the name of their religion. As you can see, Kondor, he certainly makes a good Dhimmi for them even though so many of them would consider him an abd. If his new friends kill thousands in a month, he doesn't even sit up and take notice because no Jews are involved.

 

[georgephillip]

There was no shortage of proud white racists who felt entitled to be racists in the US or South Africa during the middle of the 20th century; those private sentiments were reflected in the public statements of elected leaders, city mayors, for example:

"The recent brouhaha over comments made by Upper Nazareth mayor Shimon Gapso has intensified with a tongue-in-cheek op-ed Gapso published yesterday in Haaretz. Of course, anti-Zionists—for an array of reasons (moral, ethical, hateful or ignorant)—have long charged Israel’s governing ideology with being racist at its core. So is Gapso any more racist than Zionism would predict from a holder of public office in Israel?"

"In some ways, it’s a blogger’s dream when a public figure doesn’t deny a label thrust on him (on charges of racism, Gapso may be all the wiser thanks to the musical Avenue Q), but instead cuts right to the chase: if he’s a racist, so is the entire Zionist project."

Israeli Mayor: If I'm Racist, So Is Israel - The Daily Beast

If the entire Zionist project is racist to its core, why should the US continue funding a violent, vindictive ethnocracy in the Middle East without any O-I-L?

Our government is now going to give Pakistan over a billion and a half dollars (in addition to all the money already given previously), but Georgie Boy couldn't care less even though a lot of this money goes to the terrorists to target our military. And, of course, Georgie Boy, has no problem with the Sunnis murdering the Shiites and Ahmadis there plus Christians and Hindus. If the Jews are not involved, Georgie Boy just fluffs this off. You don't have to ride in the back of the bus anymore, Georgie. Why not take a vacation from your Cut and Paste jobs and enjoy Sunday in Los Angeles? Take a bus to someplace you have never been; or if there is a bus going down Pico to the beach, take it and relax by watching the waves of the Pacific rolling in. As an aside, after over 100 posts on this thread, one would think that even Georgie Boy has had enough but he keeps on with his Cut and Pastes jobs while innocent people are being murdered in the Muslim world because of their religous beliefs. What a fine dhimmi he makes!!!

So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
What's your problem with that?

"A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."

Same as Iraq?

Baghdad cafe bombing kills at least 38 | Reuters

 

[Kondor3]

"...So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt..."

Well, Pakistan and Egypt, anyway... we don't like them as much...

Besides... two out of three ain't bad...

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

I'm a bit confused again.

So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
What's your problem with that?

"A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."

Same as Iraq?

(COMMENT)

So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?

v/r
R

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

I'm a bit confused again.

So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
What's your problem with that?

"A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."

Same as Iraq?

(COMMENT)

So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?

v/r
R

I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.

"Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.

"With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

"This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.

"He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

"Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."

Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.

Iraq: A War For Israel

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.

georgephillip, et al,

I'm a bit confused again.

So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
What's your problem with that?

"A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."

Same as Iraq?

(COMMENT)

So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?

v/r
R

I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.

"Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.

"With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

"This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.

"He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

"Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."

Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.

Iraq: A War For Israel

(COMMENT)

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Kondor3]

"...He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war..."

It's all a Kornspiracy by those pesky Joooooos, I tellz ya...

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.

georgephillip, et al,

I'm a bit confused again.


(COMMENT)

So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?

v/r
R

I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.

"Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.

"With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

"This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.

"He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

"Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."

Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.

Iraq: A War For Israel

(COMMENT)

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

 

[toastman]

georgephillip, et al,

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.

I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.

"Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.

"With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

"This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.

"He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

"Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."

Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.

Iraq: A War For Israel

(COMMENT)

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

 

[RoccoR]

toastman, georgephillip, et al,

In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.

georgephillip, et al,

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.

(COMMENT)

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

(COMMENT)

Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable. No footprint, no WMD.

Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD. It would have been impossible to move without detection. Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

toastman, georgephillip, et al,

In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

(COMMENT)

Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable. No footprint, no WMD.

Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD. It would have been impossible to move without detection. Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.

Most Respectfully,
R

I agree.

And, could Saddam move WMDs out of Iraq without Mosad riding shotgun?

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.


(COMMENT)

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?

 

[toastman]

toastman, georgephillip, et al,

In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

(COMMENT)

Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable. No footprint, no WMD.

Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD. It would have been impossible to move without detection. Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well, the problem is, I know nothing about these issues, so thanks for clearing it up for me

 

[toastman]

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"

Iraq: A War For Israel

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?

I'm confused (it's early in the morning) . Would Saddam have acted in self defense if what ?

 

[RoccoR]

toastman, georgephillip, et al,

Recognizing this is the wrong thread for this discussion.

How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .

IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?

I'm confused (it's early in the morning) . Would Saddam have acted in self defense if what ?

(COMMENT)

Probably not, although I don't think anyone is really sure.

Remember, that Saddam (as well as everyone else in the Region, as well as all the Allied Powers in the Coalition) understood that even if he had a tactical nuclear capability, such a strike would not have changed the outcome. The retaliatory strike would have devastated Iraq. Iraq would have lost in any event; and what would have been left would have been assimilated by the regional Arab powers.​

Targeting would have been the big question. If you were Saddam, and you knew you were going to take an action that would seal your fate, what would you target within the region?

• Israel?
• A regional capital?
• Coalition Forces?
• Mecca or Medina?
• A major oil complex?
• The Gulf Straits?

My guess would be Mecca and Medina (something with decisive or far-reaching consequences that the other Arab nations would remember forever). Saddam understood the real enablers to the Coalition Strike was the other Arab Countries, and not Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Kondor3]

Regional Target(s) for a hypothetical Iraqi nuclear attack in either 1991 or 2003?

The mustering areas for Coalition conventional forces, once most of the boots and assets are in-place?

Cook-down a few Divisions before they sortie?