From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu Aug 22 2002 - 12:26:59 MDT
On 22 Aug 2002 at 19:42, Blunderov wrote:
> joedees@bellsouth.net RE: virus: On war Thu 2002/08/22 06:32 PM wrote
> <q> The reason he didn't used weapons of that kind against coalition
> forces in the Gulf War was indeed because of a message communicated to
> him promising a 'devastating response' should he be foolhardy enough
> to do so. However, although missiles fired are traceable back to
> their launch points, thus limiting the deniability of catastrophic
> amounts of chemical weapons, biological and nuclear weapons may be
> delivered by other less traceable means, such as ships or cargo
> containers in the case of nukes, and even more various ways in the
> case of bioweapons. It is likely that he would depend upon people
> like some denizens that inhabit this list demanding absolute proof
> that a WMD attack was facilitated by Iraq or that a WMD weapon was
> supplied to a terror group by Saddam Hussein before a massive response
> could be launched, and thus hope to evade or elide retribution. Of
> course, here his hope would
>
> be forlorn, but he has severely miscalculated vis-a-vis the US before,
> and his animus towards the US does little to clarify his judgment
> policies, plus, as he gets older, surviving such an action may become
> less important that a legacy as a modern-day Saladin (whom he idolizes
> and styles himself after, and who was born in Saddam's home city of
> Tikrit), the first Muslim to employ nukes against the hated infidels.
> It's not like concern for the people of Iraq would ever stay his hand.
> The longer the US waits, the more dangerous and costly it will be to
> oust him; it should be done sooner rather than later for the benefit
> of all, including those in Iraq suffering under his murderous,
> iron-heeled rule. </q>
>
> [Blunderov]
> Your prescience is striking. Not only do you seem to have a deep
> insight into the intimate character and intentions of Hussein, but
> this insight is sufficient for you (and Bush) to presume to predict
> the future as if it were as ineluctable as a Greek fate.
>
> I must remind you that in previous post you characterized Hussein as
> "insane". Yet you later posted an article in which it was made clear
> that he is not. I asked you for a source for the "threats" that you
> have repeatedly asserted that Hussein has uttered. Nada.
>
Actually, I posted several articles which alluded to his continuing
threats against the US and Israel. And his 'insanity' is actually an
agressive type of sociopathology, firmly wedded to megalomania, a
sense of personal destiny, an implacable hatred and lust for retribution
and revenge, and a penchant for horrible and catastrophic
miscalculation.
>
> It seems to me that you are deeply afflicted with some malignant meme.
> Perhaps it is "terror"?
>
The malignant meme is inhabiting Hussein's brain, and yes, it involves
terror.
>
> At least that would explain why a normally rigorously rational person
> should become so unamenable to even the most telling arguments.
>
I have seen no such arguments here.
>
> This is not a good time to panic.
>
And when isthe 'proper' time to panic? After the mushroom cloud rises?
How much better to forfend that possibility; even if uncertain, it is far too
devastating a possibility to risk its actualization.
>
> Warm regards
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:54 MDT