i don't mean to sound morbid, but i just want to know everyones opinion. lets say we are attacked because of this hostility. do you think if saddam attacked the US, would he drop a nuke or would he use viruses and nasty stuff like that? and do you think he would attack NYC or somewhere else?
nuke or chemical?
1,367 Views | 26 Replies
He would use anthrax on Washington or other governement targets. Saddam is a bitch, but I think that he is like OBL out for morale-lowering targets than to kill as many people as possible... I don't even think the little asshole has nuklear weapons. Thank God... (As a figure of speech of course, I am atheist.)
At 3/18/03 02:33 PM, clownfish wrote: He would use anthrax on Washington or other governement targets. Saddam is a bitch, but I think that he is like OBL out for morale-lowering targets than to kill as many people as possible... I don't even think the little asshole has nuklear weapons. Thank God... (As a figure of speech of course, I am atheist.)
heh heh... good point. although i think he would hit new york or la somewhere populated cuz i think he KNOWS he would only get 1 attack on us before we annihilated him.
Everyone knows Iraq doesn't stand a chance... Saddam is not an idiot, just a dickhead. I think he is somewhere on some island in the pacific, sipping his camelmilk and thinking how he outsmarted those Americans. Then a plane flies by and drops a daisycutter on his Iraqi ass. You see, I think the feds or CIA already know everything about him, from when he wakes up to when he goes to bed again, to the smallest detail. Everyone knows their millitary doesn't stand a chance. Will he even have time to drop one single bomb?
let's start from the beginning. if saddam hussein were to do anything, it would be chemical or biological attack. the reason why is because iraq does not possess nuclear weapons.
not only that, but if the iraqis will lose face if they use any of them, and the iraqi regime's task now is to create the illusion that they are the victim in all of this. if they use chemical or biological weapons, the whole world will be against them. today, a French diplomat, quoted on Fox News, said that if the US troops were attacked with biological of chemical weapons, the French will join in and fight along side the Americans.
Seriously? And just the day before that, those damn hyppocrits were talking about not going to support the US, and using their veto for the right cause and that kind of stuff. Well I must say I am not really a fan of America, but I certainly don't think the French are much better. Isn't there a single decent politician in this world?
yea the french turned out to be big pussies... i dont understand because we did so much for them and now when WE need THEm theyre like " fuck you "
It would definitely be bio-weaponry. Saddam knows his artillary won't stand a chance so he's going to be sneaky and give America something to think about when he's dead.
I heard a while back that he was going to infect several people with small pox and other fatal diseases and have them walk around in public in major US cities. It really wouldn't cost much, and he would just need several suicidal volunteers. Whatever happens, I think it is likely that the homefront is in more danger than the frontline.
the French just don't believe that the iraqis have and weapons of mass distruction. let's just call it denial i suppose. so if they ever use them or we demonstrate their existence, then i guess they'll help.
i think no weapon will efect Saddam. He has Nuke bio- and chem- weapons and if u look thru news a great amount of russian balistical missiles are somewhere outside russian borders.
The bunker where he is meaby is made by soviet standarts(Even if u fire 200 nukes it wont be destroyed or dammaged)
At 3/18/03 03:58 PM, SleepingSun wrote: i think no weapon will efect Saddam. He has Nuke bio- and chem- weapons and if u look thru news a great amount of russian balistical missiles are somewhere outside russian borders.
The bunker where he is meaby is made by soviet standarts(Even if u fire 200 nukes it wont be destroyed or dammaged)
damn that makes me nervous
200 nukes, and it won't be destroyed or damaged?
That seems excessive.
ANYTHING would be damaged by 200 nukes.
Even if it's underground, eventually the nukes would blast to it.
At 3/18/03 01:57 PM, ifuckbecky wrote: do you think if saddam attacked the US, would he drop a nuke or would he use viruses and nasty stuff like that? and do you think he would attack NYC or somewhere else?
wasn't 9/11 simple enough to make us recognize that we aren't immortal and invincible? There are plenty of large buildings with underdeveloped military protection to destroy. By the way, there's a military site,in a suburb of DC that if destroyed with cause chaos+free biological warfare.
And yes i will site my home state: NJ, if anyone has ever been on the NJ Turnpike one will notice at between exits 12 and 15 lies oil refineries up the wazoo, and many, many oil containers in clear view. I've always pondered what could happen if someone in a simple car like Malvo were to fire one bazooka shot at any target in that range and what havoc it would cause. All things considered, although this probably didn't get much media attention due to the RI Nightclub fire, one such oil container was lit on Staten Island, a few miles off of the Turnpike.
So you do the math: Saddam needs not invest millions in nukes or their cannisters, nor biological warfare. He'll destroy us through our own poorly defended sites.
Let me repeat, NOTHING could withstand 200 nuclear weapons.
hey even america has that kind of bunkers. they are made to witstand even an earthquake and they are used for operating after the nuclear war.
k meaby not 200 nukes but who in the hell woud fire 200 nukes into 1 spot
the soviet rockets meaby(not shure) are ssn-20 or 22 both multiple warhead missiles(10 mini nukes in 1) can heat multiple targets. For exmpl if it's fired in some state then there will be 10 hiroshimas in that place. Or it can hit some other targets. another exmpl 10 warheads will fly to 10 nearest city's from the place the main rocket got out of fuel and blow them up Kaboom
damn thats a scary hypothesis about new jersey. and due to all the 9/11 mayhem saddam and all the rest of them and every other madman after him has the balls to try to attack america now, because 9/11 DID in fact show everyone that we are as vunerable as any other country.
yea. everyone's in a panic down here because on the news they found the diary of one of the terrorist here. it said that we are one of the places on the list. however, what kind of good terrorist loses a diary where he knew police would find it? its possible the information is false to create a diversion. i dont know, though. im one of those people that can believe any kind of conspiracy possible, so i tend to have elaborate opinions on everything
Good points all around. But I do disagree with one statement. That Saddam is not in Iraq. He isn't as smart (cowardly?) as Bin Laden.
Saddam will not see 2004.
"A witty quote proves nothing."
~Voltaire
At 3/19/03 02:56 PM, TheShrike wrote: Good points all around. But I do disagree with one statement. That Saddam is not in Iraq. He isn't as smart (cowardly?) as Bin Laden.
Saddam will not see 2004.
i agree with you
How about an anti-matter bomb? It's still in development thogh, I think. Instead of the traditional way of nukes, it uses ant-protons, and it's many times stronger than the bomb they dropped on Hiroshima. Iraq can't possibly have one though... Say, is this me, or don't nukes leave a crater smaller than, for example, a daisy-cutter? I always thought they went mostly over the surface, because the only thing that makes an actual crater is the nitro, or whatever they put in there. The nuclear explosion itself just creates a wave of air that can destroy a house about a mile away?
well, no matter what they have or what they dont have, it wont be enough to wipe us all out! lol
At 3/19/03 03:24 PM, MSIfaggot wrote: well, no matter what they have or what they dont have, it wont be enough to wipe us all out! lol
No, not all of us, but I think if Bush made another of those speeches, half the population would die of
not being able to bear his stupidity.
At 3/19/03 03:28 PM, clownfish wrote:At 3/19/03 03:24 PM, MSIfaggot wrote: well, no matter what they have or what they dont have, it wont be enough to wipe us all out! lolNo, not all of us, but I think if Bush made another of those speeches, half the population would die of
not being able to bear his stupidity.
muhahahahahahahahahaha
If i was Saddam what i would do is this...
Send in a load of people with supplies of anthrax hidden in their pockets. It doesn't smell and will be deadly.
Send in a load more suicide bombers, a lot of people hate America.
Or I would do this...
Get a Nuclear Warhead (just the warhead) and put it in a van. To let you know, a warhead (and only the warhead) will fit in the boot of the car and isn't very heavy. A man could pick it up without straining himself too much. Then i would put that in the back of a 60' articulated lorry. I would cover the rest of the lorry with things like cat food, or flour sacks.
Then, nobody would find it at customs (especially if the lorry said 'Tesco' on the side or something. I would drive it to the middle of New York. Then i would detonate it.
At EXACTLY the same time. I would detonate similar lorries in Washington DC and about 10 major cities.
Brilliant isn't it?
At 3/19/03 03:52 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:
Brilliant isn't it?
actually, yes it is
I'm sure Saddam has considered all these sort of sneaky ways of attacking America. He wasn't really a threat to the US over the last 10 years, but Bush might have antagonized another 9/11. He claims to be doing this for the safety of the American people, but I've never felt more scared of Saddam. New York, due to its proximity and population density, is surely a potential target for another attack. I live in North Jersey and had porch seating for the Twin Towers. It was enough to strip any notion that the US is invincible.
If Saddam does sneak bio-weapons over and causes a large amount of destruction, I want to know if you pro-war people would still think it was worth it to rid him of his political position. Would thousands of innocent American and Iraqi casualties be the price of removing a recently dormant, but still tyranical, dictator?
so Vas, you'd definitely know what i'm talking about with the Turnpike thing
At 3/19/03 04:36 PM, NJDeadzone wrote: so Vas, you'd definitely know what i'm talking about with the Turnpike thing
Yeah, I drive through there whenever I go back and forth between my home and college. There are hundred of those cylindric gas containers. Anyone who has seen the intro to the sopranos has seen it too, the ones that say "Drive Safely". That Newark area is definitely a time bomb of chemical plants.
