Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Saddam Use Chemical Weapons?  
User currently offlineRyanb741 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 3221 posts, RR: 15
Posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1288 times:

I ask this because he didn't use them in 1991 (I never understood why he dodn't but am glad he didn't!). Do you think he will try to use them (assuming he does possess them).


I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1242 times:

He has nothing to lose this time, so he'll throw anything and everything at the forces this time. Iraq has said they'll use "daggers, swords and sticks" against the U.S..

User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1237 times:

The answer is yes. Without question.

He has already moved artellery within range of US forces that could deliver chemical tipped shells. Plus yesterday he named the inner-circle thug who carried out the chemical attacks on Kurds 20 years ago as the military boss of southern Iraq, the first stop for invading forces.

Of course, if he uses them first strike, he's delivering a big fat "I told you so" for use by George Bush and Tony Blair. He's going to hold on to the world sympathy card, which in his mind is much much bigger that it really is. But when he finds himself alone diplomatically after 48 to 72 hours of war, all bets are off. By all accounts, he's looking to make his last stand in Tikrit and Baghdad. Thats where most of Iraqi's remaining capabilities have been withdrawn to.

There are no rules to this war. He will use chemical weapons.....plus, he likely will kill US prisoners on the spot, kill Iraqi civillians without a second thought, and target Israel with the most potent instruments in his hands, probably sooner rather than later.

It's going to be an ugly week.


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1216 times:

Will Saddam Use Chemical Weapons?

It's already happened, against Kurdish Iraqi's.

It's going to be an ugly week.

For Kurdish Iraqi's, it's been an ugly 12 years.







Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1214 times:

I thought Saddam had recently denied that he still had chemical and biological weapons? Smile

User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1211 times:

The US is about to comit an act of war on his country. A war without UN approval, if he has them then he has every right to use them.

I hope he doesn't, but I can't see why he shouldn't.





ADG


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1206 times:

A war without UN approval

Let's see:
1. France did not ask for UN approval to go into Ivory Coast recently.
2. China did not for UN approval to go into Tibet.
3. Syria did not ask for UN approval to go into Lebanon.
4. Iraq did not ask for UN approval to go into Iran or Kuwait.
5. Argentina did not ask for UN approval to go into the Falklands.
6. Morocco did not ask for UN approval to go into Spanish Sahara.






Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1190 times:

If Saddam uses Chemicals against Israel and kills a signifacant amount of people in Israel, he will become the new prophet of the arab world. The arab world will see him as the new mohammed. He can't win against the US forces, but he can get some chemicals into Israel....

Wherever you or yours are in the next few weeks, take good care of yourselves and best of luck


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16862 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1184 times:

There is UN Approval, there are 17 UN Mandates for Iraq to dis-Arm including the Latest 1441.

That's 17 more than NATO had against Serbia.

Iraq signed a treaty in which they pledged not to develop or field WMDs.

They also were directed by 17 UN Mandates to destroy all WMD, Iraq claims not to have any. If they use any WMD that means they have them and have been in direct Violation of all the UN Mandates.

France, Germany, Russia have been opposed to Military action against Iraq on the Sole basis of there not being proof that they have WMD.

If Iraq uses them, then obviously they have them. Which means the US and UK were 100% right legally and morally to attack the Iraqi regime, which will then make France, Germany, Russia and especially ADG look terrible.

ADG that was pretty wrong to say Iraq has the right to use them, they are not supposed to have them under International Treaty and 17 UN Mandates.

The "Un-Just war" argument is based solely on the theory that Iraq has already Dis-Armed, if they use them they have them which automatically puts the US, UK, Australian and Spanish actions on solid ground and makes people opposed look foolish.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13561 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The US is about to comit (sic) an act of war on his country.

Technically, we've been at war with Iraq since 1991. The cease-fire agreement (which, by the way, the Iraqis agreed to) basically said "We get to patrol the established 'no fly zones' and put restrictions on your country until we say otherwise."

So we've been in a state of war with this country for 12 years now. We've just now decided that diplomacy is dead and the only thing Saddam Hussein understands is brute force.




"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1170 times:

I agree with Heavymetal and Artsyman. Things could get very, very ugly on our blue planet.

User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13561 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1167 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well said, STT757!  Big grin

You replied far more eloquently than I. The only thing I'll include is that several months ago, the President indicated that the use of chemical weapons by Iraq would result in the U.S. possibly using tactical nuclear weapons in retaliation.

Odds are the Iraqis will not use their WMD in battle, but the U.S. commanders will probably find a great many Iraqi officers who are more than willing to show them where they are once Baghdad has been taken.

Again, making France, Germany, Russia, and ADG look incredibly foolish.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineOvelix From Greece, joined Aug 1999, 639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1163 times:

yyz

Let's see:
1. France did not ask for UN approval to go into Ivory Coast recently.
2. China did not for UN approval to go into Tibet.
3. Syria did not ask for UN approval to go into Lebanon.
4. Iraq did not ask for UN approval to go into Iran or Kuwait.
5. Argentina did not ask for UN approval to go into the Falklands.
6. Morocco did not ask for UN approval to go into Spanish Sahara.


Nice group of nations you put USA with.

Kostas


User currently offlineDavid B. From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3148 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1153 times:

Don't forget about the so-called fair democracy of Israel. They only have 70 something


Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 14, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1142 times:

Where is Saddam anyways, I am pretty sure that when the bombs start falling he wont be sitting in Iraq. I am also pretty sure that he wont have any relevent weapons sitting there to be destroyed by air attack.

Jeremy


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Saddam is finding his safest cover in the sprawling suburbs of Baghdad. I've read he actually sleeps far from his dozens of charming McPalaces, in random civillian homes, which is interesting....if some sort of a pattern can be found as to the security pre-sweep and chosing of said locations, he's killable.

Unless Coalition Forces have something up their sleeve (perhaps a trusted Saddam lieutenant who spills the beans) and they can cut the head off the snake in Hour One, he'll find relative safety in the sprawl of Baghdad. At least until there's nowhere to go except the sprawl of Baghdad.

That's where we'll either get lucky, his own men decide to cut their losses, or, my own personal belief, he appears magically in Damascus or Tunis, offered exile....he's too much of a bastard coward to actually go down with the Iraqi ship, and my guess is he planned his save-my-ass exit strategy awhile ago.



User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1117 times:

Nice group of nations you put USA with.

Since the UN is a equal-opportunity club for democracies & tyrants alike, if these 6 nations did not need UN approval to go to war, why should the US?




[Edited 2003-03-17 23:25:27]


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16862 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1111 times:

Saddam has a plane waiting for him , either within Iraq or in Syria or Jordan to take him to a certain African Nation.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineOvelix From Greece, joined Aug 1999, 639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1098 times:

if these 6 nations did not need UN approval to go to war, why should the US?

Because they are the good guys?


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1080 times:

Ovelix, the overwhelming majority of conflicts since the UN was born have NOT had any kind of UN sanction. That's a fact. The UN is not a judge/jury as to whether war should/should not be taken.

No nation need get UN approval to take action it deems necessary to it's national security or national interests. That does NOT justify this upcoming conflict, because I believe the case has not been made, but as far as I'm concerned, I'll be damned if the American people have to run to the UN every time there is an event that the U.S. thinks threatens its security.


User currently offlineOvelix From Greece, joined Aug 1999, 639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1053 times:

Yyz, if you try to justify this war don't use the "Other scums did it too" argument. There are many other reasons and points of view. We may not agree but to think that USA can be justified by Syria and Iraq actions is utterly ludicrous. After all, nobody in the pro-war side used these examples.

Just a clarification.

No nation need get UN approval to take action it deems necessary to it's national security or national interests.

National Security and National Interest are totally different things when we talk about war. The first one lies on the very existence of a nation and its people, the latter can mean many things.

Kostas


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1041 times:

These next few weeks are going to be extremely hellish. I recently watched a program about Saddam's use of chemical weaponry in the Iran-Iraq war, and they showed footage of Iranian soldiers who had been exposed to these chemicals. It was a disturbing sight to see badly burned soldiers struggling to gasp for each breath they took, with looks of horror on their faces. I do not wish for any of our troops to suffer this same fate.



User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1039 times:

One would have to wonder what Germany, France's and Russia's response would be if they did.


Would they still deny that he had them???



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineBO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1030 times:

I wish military action could of still been held back but it seems that its most remotely to happen. I personally don't like war. IN fact I HATE IT!
I think one of the reasons why I don't like it because of the story of my home country of Korea and its fate during the Korean War.
Yes War will solve alot of problems like removal of SadDAM, but it will stir up new problems and reinforce old grudges. I'm glad Canada is not taking part except to the aftermath recovery efforts.

Also I have heard on the news that damm Sad DAM may have purposely removed caps to some of his oil wells thus resulting in oil spilling in the desert.
I really hope that he doesnt pull another Fires of Kuwait. That would be very foolish of him to do such a thing to his own oil in his own country. Perhaps it may reinforce that fact that US forces are just there to steal his oil as some analysts have said.

Anyways, these next 36 hours will be critical for all involved coalition forces. Turkey may potentialy open up some bases to allow a northern front. Israel is already preparing with gas masks and drills. I'm not sure how Palestine's are doing in this situation as whether they too are preparing for the worst or perparing for victory.

US Naval forces are ever so close to the Iraqi coastline. Even if they are still a few hundred kms away they still have enough range to knock out Basra just like that.
Oh yes, and from what a US Military expert on the news had said; the main US armor and infantry divisions(Kuwait) With the Royal Marines MAY attempt a sweeping claw like assault by Aiming to the north then South of Basra just like the German Schieffen Plan in WW1. Goal here is to cut off Iraq's Southern city Links such as Shipping and communications.



Chance favors the prepared mind.
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 24, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1012 times:

So, I ask, how is this war unjustified if he indeed has chemical weapons? A lot of people on this board are saying he doesnt have them, and we dont have any right to go in. Then again, these same people are saying he will use them. I dont get it.

25 Ryanb741 : So, I ask, how is this war unjustified if he indeed has chemical weapons? A lot of people on this board are saying he doesnt have them, and we dont h
26 S.p.a.s. : ...the President indicated that the use of chemical weapons by Iraq would result in the U.S. possibly using tactical nuclear weapons in retaliation. A
27 JetService : Well, nearly all the anti-war folks here have been saying there's no proof of WMD. So I assume when they are used or found, those folks will say "I gu
28 Boeingnut : If and when Saddam, in his infinite brilliance, decides to use WMDs against our men and women in the Gulf, we can strike back at them AND still mainta
29 Post contains links NoUFO : France, Germany, Russia have been opposed to Military action against Iraq on the Sole basis of there not being proof that they have WMD. Nonononono! W
30 Jwenting : Nonononono! Why do you think Russia, France and Germany frequently announced that Iraq had to disarm? They oppose to military actions because diplomat
31 NormalSpeed : What chemical weapons? Signed, Saddam Hussien
32 Heavymetal : The same chemical weapons that killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Dont you remember?
33 Srbmod : France has now said they will support the U.S. attack only if Iraq uses a WMD. Now isn't that like the bloody French? As Dennis Miller has said "First
34 Post contains images L-188 : Could be be entering the CYOA time for Chirac??? Because he knows where a good bunch of the material that Iraq used to build it's WMD's came from?
35 David B. : yes, it came form the US
36 Dragon-wings : If Saddam uses chemical weapons then the whole world will know he has them and Bush was right all along. But if Saddam doesn't use chemical weapons, a
37 STT757 : Heavymetal, Here in NJ Anthrax was used as a terrorist weapon shortly after 9-11, although it did not kill in the thousands it sure did kill. And the
38 Heavymetal : If you think I was "making light of it", you truly didn't get my point. Sorry.
39 STT757 : If I mis-understood you then my apologies, I took your post as a sacarsmic remark that Chemical weapons have never been used by terrorists. I think th
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...
Saddam Gives Order To Use Chemical Weapons posted Tue Mar 25 2003 05:49:08 by Jcs17
Saddam Arms Troops With Chemical Weapons posted Tue Mar 18 2003 00:41:11 by B747forlife
Will Hamas Use Sharia Law In The Territories posted Wed Feb 1 2006 15:37:15 by Dtwclipper
Chemical Weapons In Iraq posted Fri Nov 11 2005 01:34:53 by MD-90
Iraqi Forces Find Suspected Chemical Weapons Lab posted Thu Nov 25 2004 17:20:04 by EA CO AS
More Chemical Weapons Found In Iraq posted Fri Jul 2 2004 04:51:41 by B757300
Use Economic Weapons Against US, R.Malaysian Pm posted Mon May 10 2004 11:11:03 by Greaser
'Chemical Weapons' Found In Iraq posted Sat Jan 10 2004 21:20:30 by VS340
Breaking News! Chemical Weapons Found (no Joke) posted Sat Dec 20 2003 11:31:51 by LoneStarMike
Will Saddam Say Anything About WMD posted Tue Dec 16 2003 22:04:09 by Qb001