Iraq War Scenarios...

PH01

Here's a few war scenarios for the war in Iraq.

1. No war: convince Saddam that war is a 100% certainty. He steps down and goes into exile in a Arabic country. UN sends in a small force into to Iraq to oversee the transition.

2. Short war: Two weeks of bombing, then American tank roll over the border - meets little or no resistance. This prompt a coup - Saddam and is cronies are dead. Victory for the Yanks. All over in 21 days.

3. Short war, but not as smooth as we thought: two weeks of bombing and American tanks cross the border, and meet sufficient resistance that slows their progress. They 'break-out' after a week's close quarter fighting and proceed to take apart the Iraqi military. The Iraqi regime surrenders. All over in three months.

4. Long war. Americans meet strong resistance. Aerial bombing doesn't work anymore as targets aren't as rich as they use to be. Iraqi military resort to Guerilla tactics which prolongs the war. Mounting American casualties make the outcome uncertain.

5. Long war but spirals out of control. The war in Iraq spreads to neighbouring countries including Israel. You name it, it happens

Add your own...

6. Bush is ousted from power before he has a chance to launch his invasion of Iraq.

7. Iraq really has super weapons, and Washington is vaporised, in retalitation for the upcoming attack on Baghdad.

ykt0di9url7bc3

8. Iraq detonates a small stolen Russian nuke on American Infantry or underwater on a American Naval battle group, President Bush nukes Baghdad and completes the missle defnse shield and goes into splendid isolation, banning foreign entry and explelling all aliens not emerging until India and Pakistan's fight breaks over into China

9. Iraq sign a treaty with the Borg and overrun the world

davej

10 The pay-per-view bomb-cams don't work properly, depriving the american public of their war-porn. Ratings drop terribly in what is seen as the worst disaster in american history. CNN moves the show off the prime time slot but is eventually forced to cancel it alltogether..

davej

11. Ireland, seeing an opportunity, launches a massive invasion of California, while the eyes of the world are firmly fixed on Iraq.

12. The Iraqi People oust Saddam from power, and turn to face the threat of American Invasion with a chain of peaceful demonstrations. Human Bodies against American Tanks.

MrPudding

13. Peace protesters in Shannon destroy Americas ability to wage war and Bush surrenders to Saddam.

Occidental

14. Bush backs down after Dana threatens to run for US presidency. Saddam sells Iraq to Microsoft and retires to Hollywood. Iraq reopens following refurbishment as world’s first war games theme park. First reports say it’s not as good as Unreal and many of the ideas are robbed from Half Life, but McDonalds safe havens are a big hit.

davej

War. What's it good for?
Answer: Stopping a facist Nazi dictator from taking over Europe and wiping out an entire race.

Couldn't help notice this sig:

For a start, the allies didn't declare war on Germany to save the Jews. The true extent of what the Germans had done only came out after / towards the end of the war.

Secondly it was the outcome of WW1 and the humiliation that Germany felt at the way it was treated afterwards (reparations etc) that led to the rise of Hitler in the first place. War begets War.

davej


I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

--Albert Einstein

Offy

Have to agree with davej on that one,
what is the difference between what Hitler did to the jews and what Bush wants to do to the Muslims?

Bard

Originally posted by PH01

5. Long war but spirals out of control. The war in Iraq spreads to neighbouring countries including Israel. You name it, it happens

Similar to this one, and possibly meant as a joke - this is probably not entirely outside the realm of possibilty...

sceptre

15. UN utterly refuse to sanction an invasion. CIA plant a small tactical nuke in poor areas of Los Angeles, government uses the ensuing deaths as an excuse to turn 25000 square kilometres of desert into a big glass plate.

(ok, that obviously wasn't serious)

The "just in case" budget for a 10-year war is 1.7 trillion dollars.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Meh

Originally posted by davej
Secondly it was the outcome of WW1 and the humiliation that Germany felt at the way it was treated afterwards (reparations etc) that led to the rise of Hitler in the first place. War begets War.

So how do you explain the six decades of peace in Western Europe since the end of WWII?

So how do you explain the six decades of peace in Western Europe since the end of WWII?

Perhaps the utter devastation of massive areas of Germany.

Or the inability of the people to rise above poverty for a number of years after the war, without allied support.

Perhaps it was the fact that the allies helped rebuild germany, rather than demand repriations that they'd never be able to provide.

Perhaps it was the destruction of two generations, leaving a people capable of forgetting the past.

perhaps it was also because the world had changed, and people/governments were too aware of Russia & America facing each other over germany's streets.

Perhaps it was also the pernament forces that America left in germany.

perhaps it was also the creation of orders within the german armies infratsructure, that each & every officer and soldier, must question any command that is given to them, should they feel it to be morally wrong.

what is the difference between what Hitler did to the jews and what Bush wants to do to the Muslims?

Perhaps the fact that theres no chance of Bush succeeding in doing it? For Gods sake, i admit i don't really like the present american government, but even i don't think the Bush administration would support such an action. Bush would be arrested and put away for life if such an idea was broached.

Victor

Originally posted by Meh
So how do you explain the six decades of peace in Western Europe since the end of WWII?

Mutual Assured Destruction and War by Proxy, but you artificially try to exclude NATO -v- Warsaw Pact, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Greece, Northern Ireland ......

Victor

Iraqi "Ghost" army awaits U.S. fighters
From:Reuters
Monday, 3rd February, 2003
By Khaled Yacoub Oweis

LONDON (Reuters) - President Saddam Hussein has decentralised the Iraqi army in preparation for urban combat and will rely on his son Qusay to co-ordinate a defensive war in the cities, according to exiled generals monitoring Iraq.

"The Americans will be fighting ghosts. They will find it very hard to know were the enemy is. Those who are betting that Saddam will be defeated quickly are mistaken," Lieutenant General Tawfik al-Yassiri told Reuters.

"Tens of thousands of elite Iraqi forces have spread underground, above ground, in farms, schools, mosques, churches... everywhere. They are not in camps or major installations. These units are prepared for city warfare and have the experience for it," said Yassiri.

Yassiri took part in a 1991 uprising against Saddam and now heads a council of exiled officers. The officers say they still maintain contact with their former comrades inside Iraq.

Full story: http://home.eircom.net/content/reuters/worldnews/240962?view=Eircomnet

Offy

daveirl

that doesn't even deserve a response but I can't resist. You are an idiot.

Ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleansing whether it is in a concentration camp or by blanket bombing.

bonkey

Originally posted by Offy
Have to agree with davej on that one,
what is the difference between what Hitler did to the jews and what Bush wants to do to the Muslims?

Go away and stop trolling.


jc

mike65

...I'd just send Alanis Morrrisette and Shania Twain in, that would do it.

Mike.

PH01

Originally posted by Bard
Similar to this one, and possibly meant as a joke - this is probably not entirely outside the realm of possibilty...

Well what do you know? Scary stuff isn't it?

MrPudding

Originally posted by davej
Couldn't help notice this sig:

For a start, the allies didn't declare war on Germany to save the Jews. The true extent of what the Germans had done only came out after / towards the end of the war.

Secondly it was the outcome of WW1 and the humiliation that Germany felt at the way it was treated afterwards (reparations etc) that led to the rise of Hitler in the first place. War begets War.

davej


I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

--Albert Einstein

I know that the saving of the Jews was not a priority for the allies, I know that they knew it had begun but did nothing about it. My sig simply points out what the results of the second world war were. So a question to you: Did WW2 stop a Nazi dictator from taking over Europe and wiping out a race? I don't mean to sound like a lawyer from a cheesie movie but just answer the question asked.

bonkey

Ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleansing whether it is in a concentration camp or by blanket bombing.

And by the exact same logic, something which is not ethnic cleansing is not ethnic cleansing, whether your personal opinion of the individual orchestrating events says otherwise or not.

Exactly what ethnicity is being cleansed here, and where is it being cleansed from? And by who? And how? Are you asserting that Bush wishes to ethnically cleanse the Muslim religion? Or just the Iraqi people? Or what?

And if ethnic cleansing is so wrong...What about Saddam and his blatant efforts to remove the Kurds out of his nation? Surely this would also make Saddam as bad as Hitler? After all, ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleansing. So surely you should be supporting action against him, not opposing it.

jc

growler

15 american gets rid of saddam, eventually (inevitably really) and in a few years Iraq is governed by a democratic regime and becomes a secular, non-fanatical, non terror sponsoring state thatis an example to the middle east and the wider arab world

which is not an option i had ever really considered until i read this article
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030101faessay10218-p0/fouad-ajami/iraq-and-the-arabs-future.html

which was very very interesting , for example:

"Yet for all these differences, the Japanese precedent is an important one. In the space of a decade, imperial Japan gave way to a more egalitarian, modern society. A country poisoned by militarism emerged with a pacifist view of the world. It was the victors' justice that drove the new monumental undertaking and powered the twin goals of demilitarization and democratization. The victors tinkered with the media, the educational system, and the textbooks. Those are some of the things that will have to be done if a military campaign in Iraq is to redeem itself in the process. The theatrics and megalomania of Douglas MacArthur may belong to a bygone age, but Iraq could do worse than having the interim stewardship of a modern-day high commissioner who would help usher it toward a normal world."

you know for all our pessimism and suspicion of the motives of the USA , it might just work out (this is scenario 15 after all)
better than the other options above !

davej

Originally posted by MrPudding
I know that the saving of the Jews was not a priority for the allies, I know that they knew it had begun but did nothing about it. My sig simply points out what the results of the second world war were. So a question to you: Did WW2 stop a Nazi dictator from taking over Europe and wiping out a race? I don't mean to sound like a lawyer from a cheesie movie but just answer the question asked.

Yes, as a statement "WW2 stopped a Nazi dictator from taking over Europe and wiping out a race" this is mostly true (although the "taking over" part is a bit dubious).

Unfortunately this is only half of your sig. The first half asks the question "What is war good for?". I could equally create a sig thus:

War, what's it good for?
Covering up the fact that you are exterminating an entire race from the planet.

At most your sig tells us that war has unintended consequences but it doesn't even do that very clearly.

davej

Nuclear war would really set back cable.

--Ted Turner

Davej, the same can be said of most people's sig.

Some might find your use of Nuclear war as comedy as being a bit offputting.

TBh, i didn't really notice his sig, since nearly everyone here changes their sig so often.

davej

Yeah I agree with you klaz, it's just that you know when someone asks you personally to respond to a question on a thread you are likely to reply. I didn't mean for it to sound as if I'm labouring the point..I just thought it was relevant to comment on the sig because of the thread/forum we were on.

davej

MrPudding

Originally posted by davej

At most your sig tells us that war has unintended consequences but it doesn't even do that very clearly.

davej

Nuclear war would really set back cable.

--Ted Turner

I disagree, stopping Hitler was not an unintended consequence. Whilst stopping the extermination of the Jews was not initially a goal once the scale of what was happening got out I think it became one.

I am not a war monger, it is a dirty and vicious thing but I firmly believe that it is a necessary evil. How would you have stopped Hitler? Forget about why he got into power, each new generation has to deal with the consequences of the last one. Maybe Germanys treatment after WW1 was the root cause of WW2 but that is irrelevent. For whatever reason a man came to power in Germany and for the good of the world he had to be put down.

I disagree, stopping Hitler was not an unintended consequence. Whilst stopping the extermination of the Jews was not initially a goal once the scale of what was happening got out I think it became one.

Generally the average allied soldier didn't know what was going on with the Third Reich until the 1st number of concentration camps was freed. The allied governments all knew what was going on within germany with the Jews prior to the invasion of Poland, and didn't do anything to stop it. It was only when it seemed that the German War Machine was being too victorious that the French & the British, chose to step in. Otherwise the war would have started in the early 1930's when the first labour camps were started.....

For whatever reason a man came to power in Germany and for the good of the world he had to be put down.

So what happened with Cuba? or Russia when Stalin rose to Power? These leaders weren't put down simply because they were too powerful or because the worlds main countries weren't affected enough by them. Iraq is being put down not because of his ability to attack us, but because they stand in Americas way of gaining the Oil Fields. Not for the "good of the world", but just for the good of America.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Offy

off topic daveirl

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Dempsey

Originally posted by klaz
Iraq is being put down not because of his ability to attack us, but because they stand in Americas way of gaining the Oil Fields. Not for the "good of the world", but just for the good of America.

I would agree with you there, Bush is after the oil and he is using the weapons of mass destruction as an excuse to get at Saddam with the backing of NATO.