Saddam

[DraconisRex]

According to the Associated Press, Saddam Hussein said yesterday that, "Anyone who attacks Iraq will fail."

I wonder what his epitaph will read....

[Menchise]

I wonder what the point of this thread is...

[Guest]

It will read.

"Don't F^&k with the US, they will put you here too"

or

"Saddam, means "so damn stupid""

I know those were both real bad, but I am NOT awake yet. When I get some cafienne flowing we'll see what happens.

[CommanderJohnson]

His epitath will probably read:

"I STILL think that the United States will fail."

[Guest Grayfox]

careful jag... youll just piss off the bleeding hearts again

and who really cares what the point of this thread is??? someone wanted to post about something so they did... dont like it? then dont reply

'nuff said

[DraconisRex]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menchise:

I wonder what the point of this thread is...

---

The New Islamic World Order (no, it doesn't exist to my knowledge, but it is a cool name...), wants to turn the entire Middle East into an Islamic Regime, which would, eventually, want to expand into European quarters.

Now, if they are able to take over Israel, what little control we have over that powderkeg will be gone -- it's the only refuge that seems to truly accept the United States and its values.

However, this is where it gets sticky. The following is a potential scenario I foresee as a threat to world security.

I don't know if you've ever looked at a map of the Middle East and the surrounding countries. To give an idea to anyone who hasn't, Israel's western coast is the Mediterranean Sea. Barring Jordan, who seems to befriend all the countries around it, there's Egypt (Africa and Lybia are west), Saudi Arabia, Iraq (and Iran), Syria, and Lebanon, all of whom don't like the existance of Israel. It's in a bad place. In a pure democracy, it would be the wolve's dinner.

If Israel falls, we lose baseline control of the Middle East. That means fallback positions to the European states would be required, as Russia and China still don't like us.

However, that's not really the problem. Israel will probably nuke whoever crosses its borders in vast numbers. "If you take me down, I'm taking you out." The U.S. might not support this directly, but it would do little to stop it. World War III? Almost...

Enter China. (All statistics stated herein are from the CIA World Factbook, unless otherwise noted.) Population: 1,273,111,290.

Enter Russia. Background:

quote:

---

The defeat of the Russian Empire in World War I led to the seizure of power by the communists and the formation of the USSR. The brutal rule of Josef STALIN (1924-53) strengthened Russian dominance of the Soviet Union at a cost of tens of millions of lives. The Soviet economy and society stagnated in the following decades until General Secretary Mikhail GORBACHEV (1985-91) introduced glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) in an attempt to modernize communism, but his initiatives inadvertently released forces that by December 1991 splintered the USSR into 15 independent republics. Since then, Russia has struggled in its efforts to build a democratic political system and market economy to replace the strict social, political, and economic controls of the communist period.

---

The reason for my quote here, is that, with the 15 republics (aka governments), the strategic capabilities have probable limitations, and first-strike options for the Russian Federation might be limited. This is important, as you will soon see.

As we devote our troops and weaponry to the Middle Eastern conflict (which I'm betting will come if we don't nip it in the bud), China would have a perfect opportunity to expand.

To give you an idea of the SIZE of the problem, Russia has 145,470,197 (July 2001 est.) people. Of that, 38,866,147 (2001 est.) is the maximum available manpower. China has 366,306,353 (2001 est.), or 9.42 times Russia's availability. Minor problem here...

Should China decide to broaden its horizons, there is nothing to stop them, short of a nuclear exchange. Even then, China has the better odds.

Crowding in China is the number one problem. Although Russia is colder, it's also pretty spread-out. And gives China the upper-hand on many world events.

So. If we lose the Middle Eastern conflicts, we take a chance of losing Russian assistance. China is still Socialist, and people tend to forget that. Westernizing China isn't really working, as the government says okay to levi's, but no to freedoms.

Nuclear strikes in the Middle East... Chinese Empire, er, Socialist Expansion in Russia... And India.... And Pakistan.... And Afghanistan... Etc., etc., etc.,... Sounds like World War III to me....

The Berring Strait connects Russia to Alaska, and it wouldn't be much of a problem striking Canada in that case, or simply taking it over. They could effectively control our access to Alaska going that route. So long as they don't strike us, there is little we could do. But that strangle-hold is a bit frightening...

So, you asked what this thread is about... Does thast help, Menchise?

[ 08-10-2002, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: DraconisRex ]

[Menchise]

No.

quote:

---

and who really cares what the point of this thread is??? someone wanted to post about something so they did... dont like it? then dont reply

---

I was just wondering.

[ 08-10-2002, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Menchise ]

[DraconisRex]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menchise:

No. I was just wondering.

---

Uh... Okay.

[Guest Grayfox]

quote:

---

I was just wondering.

---

lol

POOP!

[ 08-11-2002, 12:11 AM: Message edited by: Grayfox ]

[Guest Buzz]

quote:

---

According to the Associated Press, Saddam Hussein said yesterday that, "Anyone who attacks Iraq will fail."

---

what will they fail grade 2 math

1 US soldier+1 Iraqi soldier= 1 iraqi coffin (made from real iraqi wood)

hey it's a large military force givem something to do besides playing BCM.(even though it is habbit forming)

lets see Dumbass (oooppps sorry) Sadam (Madas(s) Backwards) weasel his way out of a military action designed to roust him out of power (which should have been done during the gulf war.

The only problem I can see is WHAT THE HELL IS THE WORLD GOING TO DO WITH HIM

Ship him off to microsoft?

[CommanderJohnson]

In the best interests of all parties involved, Saddam should be "killed in a friendly fire accident" in one of his palaces in Iraq. Short of that, we'll have to put up with him ranting and raving in a public forum, feeding propoganda to radical Islamic countries and supporting terrorists.

As for that long explanation on the fall of the world due to China invading Russia, Russia would nuke China. They don't even need 20% of their nuclear capabilities to take out China. Besides, China knows that all it takes is a few nuke on Beijing and other major cities to defeat the whole concept of a war.

[Commander Elio Jason]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buzz:

Ship him off to microsoft?

nah.ship him off to work for AOL.

[Guest MIKE113]

Here Lies Saddam Hussein

"I Just Didn't Like Kurds In My Way"

[DraconisRex]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dredd:

In the best interests of all parties involved, Saddam should be "killed in a friendly fire accident" in one of his palaces in Iraq. Short of that, we'll have to put up with him ranting and raving in a public forum, feeding propoganda to radical Islamic countries and supporting terrorists.

As for that long explanation on the fall of the world due to China invading Russia, Russia would nuke China. They don't even need 20% of their nuclear capabilities to take out China. Besides, China knows that all it takes is a few nuke on Beijing and other major cities to defeat the whole concept of a war.

---

I would agree that it is unlikely that the scenario as described would occur, but then again, if the Russians fire on the major cities in China, China will retaliate. Remember -- most of the population centers of Russia are centralized around Moscow -- there's a lot of Russia that ain't Moscow... Especially toward the Berring Strait, which is the reason for my scenario. China still wins, albeit with a civilian population reduction.

[ 08-12-2002, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: DraconisRex ]