Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
If Saddam Was Still In Power...  
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1570 times:

Would the possibility of nuclear war between Iraq and Iran be high?

Let the discussion begin.

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1565 times:

Not now, but eventually I would think that it could possibly escelate to that point, although I'm sure other countries would have stepped in before it got to that point. I can't image everyone sitting around with two countries like that posessing nukes and having them aimed at each other.

User currently offlineAleksandar From Serbia, joined Jul 2000, 3235 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1553 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Thread starter):
Would the possibility of nuclear war between Iraq and Iran be high?

I guess you had a time of Iraq-Iran war in mind. Personally, the mutual hatred was big enough to expect one side to use everything against the other, but I don't think they would go that far. Both sides had territorial gains at the time and using nukes in that situation seems almost ridiculous. You can actually crush down your enemy with it, but it won't be too smart to go into his teritory after that.



R-E-S-P-E-C-T
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1550 times:

Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
I can't image everyone sitting around with two countries like that posessing nukes and having them aimed at each other.

I disagree. Iran and Iraq would have held each other in check, just like India-Pakistan, US-USSR, etc.

The problem would have come down to Saddam. Saddam was a complete moron, unlike most dictators. Hitler and Stalin had a form of genius beneath their cruelty and megalomania. Saddam is just a dumb brute who simply was willing to be more brutal and merciless than anyone else. He had a habit of picking fights he could not win. All Iran would have had to do was wait for Saddam to do something stupid to someone else, and they would have the openning to do whatever they wanted.


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1547 times:

Quoting Aleksandar (Reply 2):
I guess you had a time of Iraq-Iran war in mind

No, I'm thinking now. What would Saddam do if he was still in power, with the sanctions most probably lifted. And how would Iran react to the probably real threat of Iraq.

Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
although I'm sure other countries would have stepped in before it got to that point. I can't image everyone sitting around with two countries like that posessing nukes and having them aimed at each other

Like the success in North Korea? Or Pakistan? Or India? And countries and the UN have stood by powerless so far to stop nuclear proliferation.


User currently offlineAleksandar From Serbia, joined Jul 2000, 3235 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1545 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 4):
No, I'm thinking now.

Well, it's hard to say that. Saddam showed what he knew in case of Kuwait, so the sanctions (some kind of it) would still be there and the most important part of them would never be lifted (OK, maybe IA would fly, but they would have no chance to renew their fleet). You see, the problem with sanctions is that they are imposed at once but lifted in phases and not always completely until some goals are met.



R-E-S-P-E-C-T
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2175 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1512 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
Iran and Iraq would have held each other in check, just like India-Pakistan, US-USSR, etc.

The situation involving India is more complex than India vs Pakistan, despite popular characterization. Our weapons program is a direct fallout of the 1964 Chinese tests, and there are authoritative statements from no less than the US state department in 1966 mentioning we've everything in place to test in under a year at the time, if we chose to. We ultimately did in 1974, and subsequently validated multiple technologies ranging from conventional fission to thermonuclear fusion to low yield tests tailored specifically to subcritical testing.

The Pakistani program is entirely driven by their usual desire to try to emulate what India does, but the Indian nuclear doctrine seldom refers to them, simply because the combination of the two nations' doctrines entails their use of nukes will be a Samson Option for them, not a conventional deterrent posture. Deterrence, on the other hand, is indeed a stance between India and China, particularly considering recent revelations that Indian stockpiles are much larger than initially assumed before the recent India-US deal.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineRolfen From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 1796 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1490 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Thread starter):
If Saddam Was Still In Power...

there would have been peace in iraq.



rolf
User currently offlineAirxLiban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4504 posts, RR: 54
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1478 times:

Quoting Rolfen (Reply 7):
there would have been peace in iraq.

Unfortunately, that is spot on.

However with a little bit of luck all this effort will lead to a much improved Iraq in the long term.



PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offlineDelta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1470 times:

Quote:
Would the possibility of nuclear war between Iraq and Iran be high?

No, because Iraq had no Nuclear/WMD's.

-Delta767300ER


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1464 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Thread starter):
Would the possibility of nuclear war between Iraq and Iran be high?

Nope, Saddam would not mind if Iran had Nukes ... He would most likely use his influence at the UN to arrive at a peacefull agreement. Then he would join New Zealand in a non proliferation pact for the entire middle east.

And Sunnis and Shia's would hug each other and all would be peacfull in the land for a thousand years.



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1451 times:

Quoting Delta767300ER (Reply 9):
because Iraq had no Nuclear/WMD's.

But what could have he developed in three years? And read up of A.Q. Khan of Pakistan, that is interesting reading.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1449 times:

Quoting AirxLiban (Reply 8):
However with a little bit of luck all this effort will lead to a much improved Iraq in the long term.

I think the world is holding its collective breath on this....but its not looking good right now...... Sad

If anything, This President and his cronies should be tried for crimes against humanity..

over 100,000 Iraqis have either died or have been maimed........



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1439 times:

C'mon guys, lets not get off the subject. If both Iraq and Iran now had nuclear weapons, would the world stop them from using them against each other or against Israel?

Quoting Rolfen (Reply 7):
there would have been peace in iraq.

With only a few more mass graves.

Now this is a real subject. If somebody hasnt bothered to read about A.Q. Khan, I will tell you his contributions to the world. He is considered the founder of the Pakistani atomic bomb, and has confessed to having been involved in a clandestine international network of nuclear weapons technology proliferation.


User currently offlineBHMBAGLOCK From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1389 times:

The numbers of dead on both sides during the war between Iran and Iraq was staggering. I think Saddam would certainly not have a philosophical problem with nuking his neighbor as gassing of his own people is not considered a bad thing in his book. On the Iranian side, the current leadership is more unstable in some ways than what existed during their terrible war. So, yes I could see either side nuking the other if Saddam was still in power.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 13):
If somebody hasnt bothered to read about A.Q. Khan, I will tell you his contributions to the world. He is considered the founder of the Pakistani atomic bomb, and has confessed to having been involved in a clandestine international network of nuclear weapons technology proliferation.

This history is why the US(and others) are more willing to normalize military relations with India than with Pakistan. This idiot has single handedly made a shambles of non-proliferation. Hopefully the damage he left behind will be cleaned up before it results in a nuclear war.



Where are all of my respected members going?
User currently offlineBushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1371 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Thread starter):
Would the possibility of nuclear war between Iraq and Iran be high?

I think less, because Iraq was under sanctions and has more or less shown that WMDs in any form didnt exist. Also the US presense in Iraq and Afghanistan has urged Iran to work fast on nukes. Iran might still want to enrich uranium but would be more willing to listen to international concerns. But as Iran sees it right now, the great satan is on two sides and it cannot afford not to work on nukes.

Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
I can't image everyone sitting around with two countries like that posessing nukes and having them aimed at each other.

Its been discussed earlier, but except for a certain strategic resource in each of those countries sOIL, I would imagine a few select folks around the world in power positions wouldnt mind if those countries destroyed each other.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
I disagree. Iran and Iraq would have held each other in check, just like India-Pakistan, US-USSR, etc.

Exactly, and now the US has Iran surrounded more or less and they see it as vital in thier national security.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
If GWB Was A Character In Star Wars posted Fri Jan 21 2005 20:23:19 by Yukimizake
Saddam To Stay In Power? posted Sun Feb 16 2003 13:51:33 by Galaxy5
Who Was In Power When You Were Born? posted Sun Mar 13 2005 02:20:43 by StevenUhl777
If Gore Was The President, Will 911 Still Happens? posted Sun Mar 3 2002 02:30:53 by Jiml1126
If Santa Was To Fly A Plane Instead? posted Mon Dec 18 2006 02:53:42 by FighterPilot
Pinochet Still In A Very Critical State. posted Mon Dec 4 2006 11:54:21 by RootsAir
4y/o In Power Ranger Costume Scared Off Robbers posted Fri Dec 1 2006 06:00:31 by Jimyvr
Bush Still In Denial Over Iraq posted Tue Nov 28 2006 22:09:12 by Falcon84
If A.net Was A Country... posted Thu Nov 9 2006 07:12:50 by Lazarus31
Poll: Americans Want Dems In Power posted Fri Jul 14 2006 19:56:43 by Maury