Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Central Command states Iraqis feign surrender and then fire on US troops
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Morat" data-source="post: 732989" data-attributes="member: 3008"><p>Wolsely, just a suggestion: Stop a second and think before you post, okay?</p><p></p><p> Why would we do that? I would think the international backlash would be horrendous. We have a lot to lose by violating the Geneva Convention (well, more than we have). Saddam doesn't. Not anymore.</p><p></p><p> Did you think about it? What would happen if Saddam nuked Washington? He'd be nuked in return. He'd <em>only</em> do it if he was screwed <em>anyways</em>.</p><p></p><p> This isn't rocket science. It was the entire basis for the Cold War. </p><p></p><p> People violate the Geneva Convention when the price of <em>adhering</em> to it is greater than the price of breaking it. </p><p></p><p> When you're country is being invaded, and you're <em>losing</em>, it's virtually impossible to make your situation worse. About the only thing that could make it worse was if Saddam used chem or bio weapons, which would end any real support he was getting and any chance of international pressure ending the war. Notice: He hasn't used chemical or bio weapons. I would be very suprised if he did prior to a "last stand" sort of situation.</p><p></p><p> This isn't a difficult concept. It's relatively straightforward.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Morat, post: 732989, member: 3008"] Wolsely, just a suggestion: Stop a second and think before you post, okay? Why would we do that? I would think the international backlash would be horrendous. We have a lot to lose by violating the Geneva Convention (well, more than we have). Saddam doesn't. Not anymore. Did you think about it? What would happen if Saddam nuked Washington? He'd be nuked in return. He'd [i]only[/i] do it if he was screwed [i]anyways[/i]. This isn't rocket science. It was the entire basis for the Cold War. People violate the Geneva Convention when the price of [i]adhering[/i] to it is greater than the price of breaking it. When you're country is being invaded, and you're [i]losing[/i], it's virtually impossible to make your situation worse. About the only thing that could make it worse was if Saddam used chem or bio weapons, which would end any real support he was getting and any chance of international pressure ending the war. Notice: He hasn't used chemical or bio weapons. I would be very suprised if he did prior to a "last stand" sort of situation. This isn't a difficult concept. It's relatively straightforward. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Central Command states Iraqis feign surrender and then fire on US troops
Top
Bottom