Who's the greater threat, Saddam or Castro

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by tenorjedi, May 6, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Darkside_Spirit Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 3
    What a surprise. Everything is being discussed from the point of view of the US. The thread is title "Who's the greater threat", leaving the reader to expect a global point of view, but of course, it really pertains to who poses the greatest threat to the United States, which is the only country of any significance.

    Saddam is by far the greatest threat to the world situation. There's no evidence to indicate that Fidel Castro is stockpiling NBC weaponry, whereas it's almost undisputed that Saddam is.
  2. obi_wan_kanathan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 10, 2001
    star 4
    Saddam is definitly the bigger threat. Castro has no reason to attack the US because we make money for his country and he's smart enough to know that if he did try anything, we'd kick him out in an instant. Saddam on the other hand is not only a much worse ruler, but I wouldn't put it past him to launch a couple missles at Isreal. And the excuse that Castro has weapons of mass destruction doesn't work because I can name some other countries that are much more dangerous and also have weapons of mass destruction.

    And why would Castro want to mess with the US? Unlike Saddam, he's seems pretty sane, so he's not going to try anything stupid.
  3. Runaway_Shadow Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 4
    Though I think they are both a big threat, have you thought about this.

    If Saddam is killed or out, one way or the other everything will fall apart and all will be harder to control.

    Now they only have to watch Saddam, but if he's gone they have to watch thousand of diffrent groups, cause that is what happens.
  4. JediStryker Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 5, 2000
    star 4
    Castro is still hoping that eventually the US will lift it's embargo and begin trade with Cuba. He's not going to attack us or anyone else anytime soon. Besides, he has the US breathing down his neck 24/7, and if he were planning anything big the likelyhood is that we would know about it with a fair amount of time to spare.

    Saddam, on the other hand, is not only completely indifferent to his relationship with the US, he openly despises us and anyone who supports us. Thanks to his support from the other ME nations, he is pompous enough to believe that he could repel any real attack made by the US and it's allies. He does have one of the largest air forces in the world, after all.

    It's painfully obvious that he is developing not only nuclear weapons, but biological ones as well. He used chemical weapons freely during the Gulf War. He has the means, despite what many civies around the world think, to hold a protracted conflict with us.

    Another threat that a lot of people forget is his hatred of Israel. During the Gulf War he sent a missile their way, and I have no doubt that if we attack him again, he would do much worse to the Israelis. Of course, if we sit on our laurels, then he will probably do the same anyway.

    Thanks in part to the weakness of the UN, Saddam is now one of the greatest threats to many of the nations of the world. The nations that oppose US action in Iraq are largely those that have nothing to fear from the madman of the Middle East, but those that do would benefit from timely and swift action from the US and it's allies. I guarantee you that if something is not done soon, Israel is going to suffer greatly.

    EDIT: If Saddam is killed or out, one way or the other everything will fall apart and all will be harder to control.

    Now they only have to watch Saddam, but if he's gone they have to watch thousand of diffrent groups, cause that is what happens.


    The splinter groups formed from Saddam's fall would be a lot less likely to cause mass destruction on a world-wide scale. Most of them would probably be mopped up quickly, and the rest would fall to the fringe with the rest of the rebel groups that exist in the ME, killing themselves off before they could grow into a real threat.
  5. SidiousDragon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2001
    star 4
    Trust me, anyone is better than Hussein. I know a few Iraqis and, although both the Iraqi and the US government would have you think otherwise (the former to pretend Sadam has support, the latter to justify bombing Iraq), the population can't wait to be rid of him. Iraq was working fairly well before his Coup d'Etat in the 70s, with multiple parties, ranging from both sides of the political spectrum. Since then, most of his political adversaries have been eliminated or are in exile, and its impossible to say anything against Sadam. If he dies, exiled party leaders will return.

    Of course, I'm not sure Sadam will ever be removed. He demonstrated the difficulty of that task during the Gulf war and ever since: there are just too many places for him to hide and too many decoys. All the US has done with its stupid attacks is ruin a country and futher increase the misery of an oppressed people, whilst the real culprit enjoys total freedom. I really hope they don't start any new strikes and lift the embargo soon. However, to do so, they need to assassinate Sadam.
  6. JediStryker Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 5, 2000
    star 4
    We changed our policy on assassination for a reason...

    I think that the UN has done more to hurt situations in Iraq more than any one country by itself, including the US.
  7. SidiousDragon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2001
    star 4
    Ummm...America's the one who wants to bomb Iraq again, and most of the UN nations want to lift the embargo but thats made impossible by america's refusal.
  8. shinjo_jedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 5
    Castro is closer to the US, and has the advantage on launching Missles at the US, but Saddam is more dangerous. He has the manpower and weapons to start a big war, and his people don't care if they die. While Castro, doesn't entirely have an army. Now if you put Saddam where Castro is, god help us.

    Cheers,
    Shinjo
  9. WiseOldProphet Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Because we focused on the snake, we missed the scorpion.
  10. JediStryker Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 5, 2000
    star 4
    Ummm...America's the one who wants to bomb Iraq again, and most of the UN nations want to lift the embargo but thats made impossible by america's refusal.

    ???

    The UN Security Council extended the embargo. Everything I've read says that the UN favors the embargo over military action.

    Why should we lift the embargo, anyway? Iraq has not met the requirements set out for the embargo to be lifted. Do we really want to set the precedent that little dictators can do whatever they want as long as they are willing to hold their ground against global pressures? Hussein is the one who starves his people, not the US, and I doubt that lifting the embargo is going to change that.

    If we removed Hussein, we could get rid of his chemical/biological weapons that we know he has, we could ensure that Iraq has no nuclear technologies, and we could help set up a more humanitarian regime, all while making sure it was safe for you to sleep at night. Like it or not, Hussein is a world threat, not just a threat to the US. Like I said, he would have no qualms about using his weapons on Israel. If he did that tomorrow, I bet a lot of people would be singing a different tune.
  11. Duckman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2000
    star 4
    Neither. Saudi Arabia is a greater threat because they fund and support the terrorists who attack the West. Yet the American government acts all pally with them because they have oil. Isn't free enterprize wonderful?
  12. Duckman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2000
    star 4
    Well, it's true ya know.
  13. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    If america were to drop out of the picture, do you think saddam would be more or less of a threat.

    What's really happening here is that no-one wants to get their hands dirty. Removing saddam will be painful and cause a lot of destruction, but it needs to be weighed against what will happen if he is left alone.

    So I say it's better to end him now, rather than risk a much larger war. If Iraq attacks Israel, a nuclear war in the ME will most likely result, and that doesn't benefit ANYBODY. Saddam is a threat to free nations everywhere, not just america; if america vanished tomorrow, it would only increase his ambition and likelihood to act.

    Peace,

    V-03

  14. GrandAdmiralPelleaon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2000
    star 6
    I don't believe either of them are a real threat, sure everybody's saying "Saddam's crazy and would fire nukes" but what evidence is there for this? I'm pretty sure that he's more then happy by the way things turned out, do you really think he would give up his secure position as leader of Iraq by doing something as stupid as firing a nuke? I fail at all to see why Castro is so dangerous.
  15. tenorjedi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 17, 2000
    star 5
    The reason why saddams is a threat is because he's used WOMD on his own people and desires to obtain nuclear capability so that he can begin a middle east conquest of the smaller nations without retaliation from other nuclear powers. Militarily he's not a threat to the US but strategically he's a threat to not only Israel but if he succedded in taking over much of the middle east he would be the most powerful man in the world due to a strangle hold on oil.

    Castro is more of a silent threat, and has inflitrated US gov't agencies to draw attention away from Cuba so that he can plan whatever he wants without the US knowing. This is a threat to the US only. Of course Castro is harmless to European countries. He's a threat in that terrorists could use Cuba as a stop off point and that he's the one unfriendly country within landing distance of the US. That will always make him a threat. I'm not worried about invasion, just infiltration.
  16. GrandAdmiralPelleaon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2000
    star 6
    The reason why saddams is a threat is because he's used WOMD on his own people and desires to obtain nuclear capability so that he can begin a middle east conquest of the smaller nations without retaliation from other nuclear powers.
    Militarily he's not a threat to the US but strategically he's a threat to not only Israel but if he succedded in taking over much of the middle east he would be the most powerful man in the world due to a strangle hold on oil.


    Oh please, do you really think Saddam will be stupid enough after what happend with Kuweit to try and start a conquest of middle eastern nations? He knows what even trying would lead too.

    Castro is more of a silent threat, and has inflitrated US gov't agencies to draw attention away from Cuba so that he can plan whatever he wants without the US knowing. This is a threat to the US only. Of course Castro is harmless to European countries. He's a threat in that terrorists could use Cuba as a stop off point and that he's the one unfriendly country within landing distance of the US. That will always make him a threat. I'm not worried about invasion, just infiltration.

    Israel has also infiltrated US gov't agencies, what does that make them?

    Cuba could become friendly to the US but the US doesn't give them a chance, maybe it's your own policy with Cuba that you should be worried about.
  17. DESERTJEDI Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2001
    star 4
    There already are terrorists flooding into the US from Mexico. Why go to cuba, then to america when its easier to get into the country from Mexico.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.