Axis Kast wrote:
Hussein provides clear monetary support to Palestinian terror groups, partially enabling them to strike at Israeli targets and kill American citizens. One example is the recent attack on a commuter bus in Haifa that left an American citizen dead.
The only thing I've heard is that Iraq, like Saudi Arabia, provides money to the bomber's families.
Iraq’s direct links to al-Qaeda are consistently denied by every intelligence agency. This does not cover the indirect association of Hussein – or transfer of his money, training, and arms – to al-Qaeda via the Palestinian terrorist circle.
You are making things up. Intelligence agencies are not so naive to look for only direct links, and they certainly would include training, arms, and money under their 'links' section. There are no links whatsoever- if there were they'd be trumpeted from the rooftops.
We know that Saddam is in clear possession of the manpower (scientists, technicians, and machinists) necessary to kick-start programs such as those that led to the al-Samoud missile, or worse, a nuclear effort.
Al-Samoud is a kitbash of pre-existing equipment. It is hardly on the level of sophistication of a nuclear effort.
We know that Hussein, despite prohibitions, now possesses the capability to produce missiles with four times the thrust and far longer range than the above-mentioned weapons.
So can any other shithole country, the Al-Samoud only has little more range than 150km. Hardly indicative of high technology- the Soviets were doing this 40 years ago. As for them being effective, that's another matter.
We know that Hussein already uses his vast wealth from oil sales to support the Palestinian Infitada.
Source please.
We know that Hussein possess drones capable of delivering chemical or biological payloads against American or allied targets – as confirmed by Hans Blix.
Every other country with remote controlled planes also has this 'capability'.
We know that Hussein possesses unexplained equipment – I personally don’t buy his fourteen-year effort to produce 133mm artillery rockets;
133mm artillery rockets? Do you even know what they are? There are anti-tank missiles that are larger in diameter.
there’s too much circumstantial evidence against it – critical to the foundation of a new nuclear program.
Meh?! What do artillery rockets- first seen used in war in WW2 (i.e. Soviet Katyushas, German Nebelwerfers) have to do with a nuclear program?
As President Bush argued, where there’s a will and a means – Iraq’s got both at this point -, there’s a way.
So what? Since when does possible/ probable possesion of WMDs tell someone about what they plan to do with them?
Inspections work only because Hussein is now terrified of American invasion. Hans Blix is pulling certain teeth – nothing more. Iraq has prepared for this eventuality for eight years.
Good. Let em work.
North Korea’s air-defense system includes sufficient artillery that close ground support will be almost impossible.here’s a point at which sufficient numbers of cannon – no matter how “dumb” the projectiles – can discourage even the coordinated, precision flight of American aircraft.
Nonsense. American aircraft can fly well above their effective range, wiping them out with JDAMs or other PGMs. In addition, their primitive fire control radars can be jammed completely without effort, making them even less effective. This was figured out in the Gulf War.
It’s one thing to be able to hit initial targets from above and another to concern yourself with delivering direct assistance to troops fighting in a mountainous theater wherein most of the enemy positions are likely to be found twenty meters or more below the earth’s surface. There are questions whether even a thermobaric nuclear warhead – not that we’d ever deliver one to this region– might have difficulty destroying for certain particular North Korean silos or mountain redoubts.
This all comes under terrain.
North Korea’s army is hardly a “joke” compared to Iraq’s. We’re talking about a navy that tangled with the supremely competent South Koreans last summer and came out on top.
If you call a tussle between patrol boats a tangle with the SK navy, you're out of your mind. The NK navy is nothing but a bunch of floating fodder for Harpoons.
Iraq’s military is far from better-equipped than the North Korea’s. Kim Jong-Il was fielding over 3,500 main combat tanks as of 2001 as well as 2,500 armored fighting vehicles according to FAS.org.
And if you looked further than a cursory examination of the worst military analysis website ever, you'd see that NK's tanks and AFVs are inferior and antiquated- little more than targets to any vehicle that is from 1975 onwards. NK has no T-72s. It still uses T-34s in some cases- and it's most numerous tank is a cheap copy of the Russian T-54, which was introduced in 1947.
You should also be aware that Iraq now has 2,200 tanks- the majority of which (700) are T-72 tanks. The rest are all superior to NK tanks. Iraq also fields 3,800 armored fighting vehicles. Check your numbers next time.
We’re talking about a military prepped for combat around-the-clock and given the entire focus of a single nation – far more than Iraq can boast despite their own somewhat equal intentions.
And we're also talking about a military with hardly any mechanization, hell even motorization, compared to Iraq's, and way inferior equipment, including a very badly equipped air force.
Fighting on the peninsula will be man-to-man.
No, it'll be man to M2 Bradley.
This is hardly the maneuver warfare of the Iraqi desert.We’re talking about facing prepared positions and the possibility of trench warfare. Not to mention the fact that Kim would take this time to pepper the South Koreans with missiles, could potentially lob a nuclear warhead at the United States or a carrier group lying offshore (and I don’t know how we’d respond considering the close proximity of our allies to fallout), and that Donald Rumsfeld himself estimates an army of 700,000 American troops (we don’t even have that many in our army in total) – not to mention millions of our South Korean allies – would be necessary to pursue these goals.
I'm not saying NK wouldn't be hard. But it's army is hardly a worhty opponent to SK and the US.
Also most important is that South Korea refuses to consider even the least aggressive of posturing and yet you expect them to join a war in which their capital would be utterly devastated?
I'm not arguing for war with NK. I'm merely dispelling some myths about the 'scary' North Koreans. Quite frankly, South Korea would kick their ass alone.
The Republican Guard is 5,000 men without the possibility of even minor victory in Iraq. And notice that I said “largely” before discussing the capabilities of the average Iraqi soldier.
Ok this is getting beyond a joke. The Republican Guard consists of eight divisions. Do you know how large a division is, even? What the hell are you talking about, 5,000 men?!
North Korea’s troops are the focus of their nation’s efforts. They eat better for sure than do their Iraqi counterparts.
And you know this- how?
Incorrect. They are a far “tougher opponent” on multiple levels and therefore cannot be handled militarily.
They can be handled militarily. Easily. It will be a long fight, but they are hardly what I'd call scary. To be honest, you've made so many blatant errors in fact I really don't think you should be calling me incorrect.
