Anti-Balistic-Missile-Defense

“he could get pissed off and launch chemical and bio weapons at israel…”

Exactly what ‘he’ are we talking about?

“I would say, “I believe our country is a little more stable than yours, and the same with our leadership.””

Good answer! :roll: Bush may be dumb (even a Republican can make wisecracks about him :wink:) but at least he’s more responsible and clearheaded than that Saddam Isane. God knows what little “victory celebration” he has in store for the world want he steps down due to age. :roll:

@HortenFlyingWing:

“I can agree. What we should’ve done in the first place was oust Saddam right after Desert Strom. I think the charges of the wholesale murder of thousands of Kurds, political opponents, religious, and ethnic groups should be more than enough to fill the crimes against humanity list.”

European Allies I believe pressured America to not press ahead. But that is only an impression I have, and i wasn’t old enough to understand how serious george hw was.

I can’t remember that the europeans did that. For not taking Saddam out, i think there are multiple reasons:
(1) The war was about liberating Quwait, and the UN supported it for that.
(2) To keep the arab allies, the interference had to be minimal
(3) Who knows how the iraquis (sp?) would have fought if the declared aim was “unconditional surrender”, like in WWII the germans never gave up fighting, because they knew they stood with their backs against a wall (so to say).
(4) Who knows what Saddam might have done and ordered (in use of mass destructive weapons) when his very existance was threatened.

I’m more worried about the chemical, biological weapons that Saddam had in store for our little Allied Soldiers. However, I think it would’ve been worth the risk, rather than let him be the nuisance he is today.

And I would say, your American Goverment has killed it’s own, indiginous, people. It has used Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear weapons. Your country just has bigger guns and can rule through force.

@TG:

I’m more worried about the chemical, biological weapons that Saddam had in store for our little Allied Soldiers. However, I think it would’ve been worth the risk, rather than let him be the nuisance he is today.

yes.

[Prematurely] But cased closed!

@yourbuttocks:

ABMD systems:

Laser Based-Air bourne Laser, Space Bourne Laser.

Non-Laser Based- Aegeis, Patriot, Thor, and all the rest

Laser technology is only one part of it.

There is Patriot on it !?! I wish it’s a new version, these anti-missile were dangerous.

Oh god, those outdated Scuds? Come on, the Scuds were obsolete even when the Russians had them. And most of the Scuds Iraq had were “has-beens” from the Iraq-Iran War. :wink:

But the other missile platforms are some of the best. The Aegeis missile system will plain knock out any missile from the sky given half a chance

they reached israel alright!

And the V1 “Buzz bombs” hit London alright. Still, unless those are tactical nukes (and the Scuds Saddam used were only HE’s), accuracy counts for a whole lot. Saddam wasted his scuds on some civilian buildings and many of them landed way off their intended targets. (Of course, Saddam was really trying to incite the Israelites into the war so, accuracy and damage assessment wasn’t key)

I was in Israel during the Gulf War and my whole house shook when Saddam’s scuds passed over my house! It was scary. I was in the gas masks too, which were near impossible to breathe in.

Wow, talk about a real war experience.

Scuds couldn’t carry a nuke, they have a relatively small payload.

@Yanny:

Scuds couldn’t carry a nuke, they have a relatively small payload.

I’m sure they could hold biological and chemical payloads…hitler wasn’t even crazy enough for that!

I believe they did carry those payloads :)

Hitler didn’t use Chem/Bio weapons because of a mutual unsaid agreement between the Axis and Allies to not use them.

Yes, i wonder how real gulf war syndrome really is.

Who had more bombers, Hitler or the allies…would it benefit him to use those weapons? The threat remained to the end, even when moron eisenhower slowed our forces even more, because fear of the “National Redoubt.” My grandfather would tell my dad stories how his tank and all the others were well supplied and ready to go, b ut stalled so the Russians can advance more. What a load.

“Who had more bombers, Hitler or the allies…would it benefit him to use those weapons? The threat remained to the end, even when moron eisenhower slowed our forces even more, because fear of the “National Redoubt.” My grandfather would tell my dad stories how his tank and all the others were well supplied and ready to go, b ut stalled so the Russians can advance more. What a load.”

Damn politics have to ruin everything, don’t they? Who got supplied following the liberation of Paris, Monty (Market Garden) or Patton (Saar)? Whoes plan was much more feasible? And yet the supplies and the lies still went to Monty. Same thing with Berlin. Patton could’ve taken Berlin but we had to give it up to the Soviets, who in turned raped and looted it.

BTW: THe SS-1 SCUD could use nukes. It’s Warhead had a weight of 1892 lb, which included HE, chemical, training, 40kT or 100kT tactical nuclear.

The scuds could have carried nuclear warheads, but Iraq doenst have nuclear weapons thanks to Israel.