With war now seemingly unstoppable, what is Saddam Hussein going to do?
Latest reports say he has now officially put his forces on a war footing, and has apparently positioned SCUDs and artillery in range of Kuwait and Israel. BUT, at the same time he has invited inspectors back to Baghdad.
Now what?
Is he going to just sit and take it up the %$@#? Or will he dare to lauch a pre-emptive spoiling attack to try and inflict as much damage on the enemy before he cops it. He would be legally in the green to do this according to the UN charter.
Is it too late for him to cough up ALL and admit to ALL of his hidden weapons the US & the UK maintain he has?
By: Arabella-Cox - 20th March 2003 at 04:59
“Garry wants cheap oil…”
Garry doesn’t want cheap oil… Garry wants oil to be $1,000 a barrel.
Maybe then fuel cells and solar power and wind power will get a bit more investment and mature much quicker. The only reason we have fuel cell technology now is from the conventionally powered submarine air independant propulsion investment and development… otherwise it would have been ignored as a technology…
Of course that would be bad for oil states like countries in the ME and indeed Venesuala and Russia, but good for countries with the technology to develop fuel cells to a level where they are competitive… countries like the US and Japan and Germany.
But there is too much investment in oil. Exxon Valdez II anyone? Can’t happen with Hydrogen. (Don’t confuse Hydrogen as a fuel in a fuel cell with, say a hydrogen bomb or the Hindenberg. To make a hydrogen bomb you need a special isotope of Hydrogen called deturium… commonly found in sea water… you also need to heat it to about 3 million degrees celcius. The hindenberg burnt with bright orange flames… hydrogen fires are invisible… the horrific burning of the hindenberg was the nitrocellulose that was used to make the skin and part of the structure. The rest of the structure is aluminium. Nitrocellulose is also known as guncotton or smokeless powder in modern firearms, while aluminium powder is used in fireworks. The fireball that was the hindenburg was the skin and structure burning… the hyrdogen helped the fire of course, but replace the hydrogen with petrol (gasoline) and it would have exploded rather than just burned… ie been much worse.
By: Glenn - 20th March 2003 at 03:57
Originally posted by Scooter
Glenn – I doubt the Iraqi Air Force will even get off the ground!
Some of them did last time. In fact quite a few but most fled east to Iran.
By: TJ - 20th March 2003 at 03:32
>Quick question for you TJ. News has been showing image >intensifier footage from what would appear to be a GR.7 cockpit >showing Paveway’d up Harriers flying. This part of the OSW >package that went out tonight? If so I thought we were just >tasked to ONW???
Yeah, it was a GR.7. These are flying out of an undisclosed base and have been in action in the Southern No Fly Zone. The RAF Op Telic website has images of them in the Gulf.
Snippet from the following webpage:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2862203.stm
“British Harriers ‘come under fire’
Two British Harriers have come under heavy anti-aircraft fire for the first time since the start of the Iraq crisis, pilots say.
The planes were operating in Iraqi airspace near the Kuwait border when the attack occurred, the airmen said.
The volley of 10 shells exploded just seconds behind the planes as they carried out a night patrol mission over the weekend, it is said.
Oxfordshire-born veteran RAF Harrier pilot Flight Lieutenant Jocky Wilson, 40, said he was “happy to be alive”.
The father-of-three said: “We were flying a regular mission on Saturday night in just a pair and we had passed over an area of known Iraqi military activity and we realised they were shooting at us…..”
TJ
By: Jonesy - 20th March 2003 at 02:19
LOL 😀 !!!!
Quick question for you TJ. News has been showing image intensifier footage from what would appear to be a GR.7 cockpit showing Paveway’d up Harriers flying. This part of the OSW package that went out tonight? If so I thought we were just tasked to ONW???
Regs
By: TJ - 20th March 2003 at 02:11
Aaaagh! The BBC (News 24) have just picked up the same story and the same footage as Sky News. They’ll be calling the Tonka fuel tanks MOAB’s next! I give up!
TJ
By: Jonesy - 20th March 2003 at 01:45
TJ,
Thanks for putting the pieces together on that one – thought the described configuration i.e single missile (not to mention the timing) was a little…..well….odd! Would have expected Tusa to do a little better though. Like you said though – numpty!
The fact that a significant tasking has been made to OSW started to muddy the waters when I heard about tonights strikes too. Wouldve expected the range of assets utilised for them to be tasked for the main event, not still p1ssing about with OSW missions, if everything was going off tonight.
Noises being made now about a mission on the Al Faw peninsula following up on the air strikes down there. Busy times ahead for 3Cdo Bgde possibly!
By: Arabella-Cox - 20th March 2003 at 00:35
Glenn – I doubt the Iraqi Air Force will even get off the ground!
By: TJ - 20th March 2003 at 00:32
>Whichever seems like he’d better get a move on about doing it >if he’s going to. Just seen a report on Sky News that troops >have moved into the Kuwaiti demilitarised zone inside 5 miles >from the Iraqi border and that RAF GR4’s have just been seen >with live Stormshadows hanging on them.
Steve,
It was reported that Saudi Arabia would accept him. Idi Amin is there already and has been for many years now. Maybe they can get together for a few games of Tennis? I’m sure Hans Blix would volunteer for umpire duties?!
The “Storm Shadow” story has been running on Sky News all day. It was all down to their defence bod, Francis Tusa, who misidentified a GF Goodrich Raptor recce pod on a GR.4. It all snowballed from there with him being convinced that they were Storm Shadows. It was a very poor piece of reporting and despite e-mailing the Editor they continued to run with this “news scoop.” They were still reporting it 10 hours later! Sky News did the same thing during March 1999 with an F-15 combat-jettisoned fuel tank claiming it was wreckage of a Serb MiG-29. Media numpties!
TJ
By: Glenn - 19th March 2003 at 23:38
Where to?
Bahrain.
The story: Bahrain Offers Safe Haven for Saddam
By: Glenn - 19th March 2003 at 23:25
I wonder how the Iraqi AF will behave this time?
By: Arabella-Cox - 19th March 2003 at 18:04
see Geforce
Originally posted by GarryB
“He most probably will flee iraq…”Where to?
His neighbours love him…
And Vortex is right Geforce… how shallow of you to want peace for your birthday… or at any time… cheap fuel everytime we go to the pump is much more important than peace…
(Good luck getting it anyway… when in world history has there ever been a time of peace? )
Garry wants cheap oil…so sucks to be your birthday.
By: Glenn - 19th March 2003 at 13:09
Also.
Just heard an unconfirmed report that Saddam’s deputy has fled to Turkey to seek exile.
By: Jonesy - 19th March 2003 at 11:55
Whichever seems like he’d better get a move on about doing it if he’s going to. Just seen a report on Sky News that troops have moved into the Kuwaiti demilitarised zone inside 5 miles from the Iraqi border and that RAF GR4’s have just been seen with live Stormshadows hanging on them.
Bushs’ 48hr deadline expires at 0100 GMT so whatever else it looks like were going tonight
By: KabirT - 19th March 2003 at 07:25
I read Saddam can run to Syria or Libya?
By: seahawk - 18th March 2003 at 13:25
Originally posted by Glenn
He will stay, at least thats what he is saying at the moment..
I doubt he has the balls to become a hero.
Better living in Lybia with 100 Million dollars, then lying dead in Iraq or worse being captured by the US.
By: Glenn - 18th March 2003 at 12:12
He will stay, at least thats what he is saying at the moment..
By: KabirT - 18th March 2003 at 07:05
Maybe Saddam asks France fr asylum! 😀 😀 😀
By: Arabella-Cox - 18th March 2003 at 03:53
“He most probably will flee iraq…”
Where to?
His neighbours love him…
And Vortex is right Geforce… how shallow of you to want peace for your birthday… or at any time… cheap fuel everytime we go to the pump is much more important than peace…
(Good luck getting it anyway… when in world history has there ever been a time of peace? )
By: KabirT - 17th March 2003 at 15:49
He most probably will flee iraq…but wont come under USA’s hands…they say they want him dead or alive?? PFFFTTT! they said that about Osama to and hes nicely giving TV and radio interviews……while his niece is trying to become a pop start in UK. :rolleyes:
By: Jonesy - 17th March 2003 at 13:29
Erm… Eric, I don’t think anyone around here is a SH supporter… The motto is not to protect SH, he is recognised by a b*st*rd by everybody, and everybody agrees that he has to go, the dissention is on how to oust him.
What youve written highlights part of the problem right there though Frank. By speaking out against the US and UK after underwriting UN1441, before they even got near use of vetoes, the French and Germans had clearly given Saddam Hussein a foothold in getting around the WMD surrender obligation.
If those nations had simply done nothing Saddam would be facing coherent international opinion and the threat of force may have been credible enough to make him deal honestly with UNMOVIC without the need for 200,000 troops to be sent into the desert. As it stands the ONLY reason Hussein has and will ever comply with UNMOVIC, thanks to the French et al, will be with direct military force backing them up kicking in the doors that Hussein tries to deem off-limits, setting up permanent VCP’s around the whole country, keeping permanent Predator aerial surveillance over his bases, palaces, factories and headquarters and doing it all until every drop of proscribed material is accounted for.
Or in shorter terms – an invasion. Saddam Hussein is either not going to allow the UN to do this or, if he does, it will be a stall for more time and as soon as the blue berets start getting too close to something sensitive the Republican Guard will move in, disarm them, and shoo them away and we all go back to square one.
That, as I see it, is the only way that “peaceful disarmament” could move us any further forward along the path of ensuring Hussein has no WMD arsenal at his disposal. Unfortunately its flawed from the kickoff as, without a commitment from the French, Germans, Russians and all the rest of the do-nothingers to actually deploy in support of a UN intervention like that (‘cos US and UK forces are certainly right out!) nothing will happen. We return to the 91-98 UNSCOM charade that ended up with Hussein terminating the support for UNSCOM inspections he was obliged to provide and denying them access to the sites they needed to inspect when he thought world opinion had shifted off and he’d get away with it.
Net result – Saddam Hussein “wins” the standoff and survives. If you’re stating that French people, Belgians, Germans and whoever else dont support Hussein your governments have a funny way of showing it.
Regards,
Steve
Sign In
March 16, 2003 at 12:00 pm