John D. Giorgis wrote:
> At 11:43 AM 9/3/01 +0200 Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM wrote:
>>The reason I have heard for this is that with Saddam Hussein in place, at
>>least the world will know what to expect. If Hussein were replaced, it would
>>be impossible to tell beforehand what might happen. Maybe the new president
>>would be a wonderful guy who would bring democracy to Iraq -- or maybe he
>>would be even worse than his predecessor.
>>
>
> There are other theories. There are reports that towards the end of the
> Gulf War, Hussein launched a Scud Missile into an uninhabited portion of
> the Israeli desert. According to Stratfor.com, this missile was found to
> contain an empty canister that was configured to deliver a payload of
> biological weapons. Stratfor.com theorizes that this was a "note" from
> Saddam Hussein that if the Allies pushed to Baghdad, he would blow his wad.
>
I find it hard to believe that the Israelis or Papa George
would have been intimidated by this.
Some thoughts; If we had completely subdued Iraq and
removed Hussein there would have been some pressure from our
own people and the west in general to replace the government
with a more democratic one. But a democratic Arab nation,
especially one the size of Iraq, would have been an anathema
to the Saudis...
Just a possibility.
--
Doug
new email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zo.com/~brighto
