
April 6th, 2003, 03:02 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: DC Burbs USA
Posts: 1,460
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: [OT] Military (non-political) discussion of Iraq war
Quote:
Originally posted by primitive:
Thermo:
From your link:
"From a strategic perspective, long-range missiles such as the Scud could offer a means to deliver chemical weapons in response to Israel’s nuclear threat."
They are designed to be terror weapons. They are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. That's sad, but it's not stupid.
|
I don’t see it that way. Israel has never invaded Syria, they have kicked them in the pants on
several occasions, but the ground wars were defensive as far as Israel was concerned. Israel
can not use their nukes as a first strike weapon, the world would not stand for it. And Israel has
no territorial designs on Syria, they already captured the high ground many years ago. So why
does Syria need the WMD if not to use them for a first strike attack on Israel? And in so doing,
they would kill some Israelis that were in the general area of the targets. But then, Israel would have enough support in the rest of the world to actually get away with nuking Damascus. It would be a measured response. And one that I think Israel is capable of undertaking.
Personally, I think that is what makes it stupid, why have weapons of limited use that also make
you a target for weapons that will utterly destroy your own country. The Israelis WMD vastly
trumps Syria’s WMD.
__________________
Think about it
|