Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC_Steve
but the thing about the Al Samud missiles was all over the news. Who knows why they didn't use them... but they were there (probably old). But their still long range missiles that they should have destroyed and didn't
|
Did you see the figures? Iraq was allowed to have missiles with a range of 150 km, but Al-Samud-2 went about 180 km. Iraquis claimed that this range was only reached without a warhead, and that the range with a warhead would have been within limit.
However, a few days before the war started, Iraq started to destroy these missiles.
Al-Samud-2 went a bit longer than allowed, but by military standards, it was still a
short range missile. It would not even have reached Israel, not to mention Europe or even the US.
About the "democratic domino effect": netghost2.0 has put together arguments why it will not work in his great post. The Iraq is not a country populated by a more-or-less homogeneous population. They are more compareable to, say, the former yugoslavia. It will be very difficult and expensive to install democracy there instead of a civil war. There are two more likely effects that could happen (alternatively or successively): The "anarchy domino effect" and the "taliban domino effect". How long do the US troops plan to stay there to prevent these effects? 10 years? 20 years? Forever?
__________________
If you think my English is bad, wait till you read my Polish.
Last edited by ammoQ; April 18th, 2004 at 23:52..