Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: freegeeks
IMO it's ridiculous to compare Iraq with WWII
German was a REAL threat to the world, they had the military to back it up and were not afraid to use it. It took 5 years and the combined powers of 2 superpowers to defeat them.
Iraq was not a real threat. They didn't had the convential power to be a threat and we all know by now that they also didn't have the WMD.
Germany was a real threat (and eventual invader) to it's neighbors because Europe and the US appeased Hitler, and refused to enforce the Treaty of Versailles.
Germany gained that stength in under 8 years. In under 8 years Germany went from a defeated, depression struck nation with no military to a world superpower that required tens of millions of lives to defeat.
Why in the world would we ever wait for something like that again? Especially in the age of nuclear and bio weapons?
Saddam got bitch slapped out of Kuwait and sanctioned. He also lost a healthy chunk of his army and air force in the process. The nation was crippled.
He was making mounds of money and supplies through the "oil for food" program. He was still quite well armed. And every single intelligence agency in the world had credible evidence that he had, and was producing more WMDs.
It's easy to play Monday Morning Quarterback now, but by going only with the intel the world had before the war, Saddam was a very real threat and had fully and completely violated UN resolution 1441 calling for his disarmament. Ignoring such orders before is exactly what led to Hitler and Geramny.
Germany was bitch slapped out of France and sanctioned. Germany also lost their entire army and air force in the process. Yet, after Hitler came to power, Germany built the strongest army in the world in under 8 years while the world appeased him and ignored him and refused to enforce the Treaty of Versailles.
Saddam's army was indeed quite well armed. If he bought a time machine and went back to 1970 he could really have kicked some ass with it. To say nothing of how poorly trained the majority of the force was. They mostly used old Soviet tactics, which the U.S. forces had trained extensively for decades to fight against.
The second that he would deploy special weapons against another country, most likely Israel, he would be done and he knew it. Hitler was allowed to step out of his box, Saddam was not.
BTW Germany was not exactly bitch slapped out of France after WWI, they got screwed at the armistice talks. Most of the army had was already on the way home and domestic support for the war was gone.
You're missing the point. While Saddam's army was not yet any real threat to us, his WMD potential (as understood by every intel agency in the world) was a threat to world peace. His ability to invade neighboring countries was very real.
Why must we wait for an aggressor nation to become a "real" threat before stopping them? Mind you, not just any nation, but an aggressor nation bound by treaty to disarm, or have it's government put out of power?
Your argument is that because Iraq was not as strong as 1941 Germany, there was no reason to stomp it. Do you realize how dangerous this line of thinking is? By waiting that long, you end up costing millions of lives. ANY aggressor nation bound by disarmament treaties or resolutions that violates those resolutions MUST be stomped. THAT is the lession we learned from WWII.
And, as I said, in the day of nuclear and bio weapons, if you wait until they use them, IT'S TOO LATE.
