andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:08 pm

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

Let the discussion begin.
 
NeilYYZ
Posts: 2443
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:55 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:17 pm

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.
It may be too early to drink scotch... But it is NEVER too early to think about it...
 
Aleksandar
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2000 11:43 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:50 pm

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
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:53 pm

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.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:55 pm

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.
 
Aleksandar
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2000 11:43 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:01 pm

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
 
BarfBag
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 7:13 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 12:06 am

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.
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 1:03 am

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

there would have been peace in iraq.
rolf
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 1:30 am

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.
 
Delta767300ER
Posts: 2436
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 7:12 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 1:39 am

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

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

-Delta767300ER
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 1:54 am

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 !
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:35 am

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.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:37 am

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!"
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Fri Apr 14, 2006 2:57 am

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.
 
bhmbaglock
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:51 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Sat Apr 15, 2006 5:15 am

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?
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: If Saddam Was Still In Power...

Sat Apr 15, 2006 8:06 am

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.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DocLightning, luckyone, NWOrientDC10, OA412 and 19 guests