Now, we all know that Iraq bomb Tel Aviv with both chemical and biological weapons on January 18, 1991, which lead to Israel to bomb Baghdad with a nuclear weapon. What if the Scud's was not chemical, or biological?
DBWI:Saddam does not bomb Tel Aviv with chemical and biological Scud's
- Thread starter Historyman 14
- Start date
Well, the 12,000,000 people who died, were maimed or will die earlier than would otherwise be the case when the Israelis retaliated with nuclear weapons would still be uninjured.
The disproportionate Israeli response would not the major controversy that it is today.
It is still hard to say how much damage would have been caused to the Coalition if the inevitable IAF conventional strikes had been the only reaction.
The disproportionate Israeli response would not the major controversy that it is today.
It is still hard to say how much damage would have been caused to the Coalition if the inevitable IAF conventional strikes had been the only reaction.
Egypt and Syria would have been forced to withdraw from the coalition anyway even if Israel and Iraq only fought with conventional weapons.They couldn't, politically, afford to fight on the same side as Israel, atleast, Syria couldn't. The military probably wouldn't have allowed it, even if ordered to.
If Israel hadn't used nukes though... the Republican Guard would have fared pretty well against the coalition if it still had a government to fight for. We would have still won, but the casualties...the Iraqi's were dug in, well armed, expierienced...(OOC: IIRC, the coalition expected them to put up one hell of a fight before they were curbstomped OTL)
Also, I doubt ISIS would never have existed if the Iraqi government hadn't been destroyed. We wouldn't have the ME as fractured as it is today.
If Israel hadn't used nukes though... the Republican Guard would have fared pretty well against the coalition if it still had a government to fight for. We would have still won, but the casualties...the Iraqi's were dug in, well armed, expierienced...(OOC: IIRC, the coalition expected them to put up one hell of a fight before they were curbstomped OTL)
Also, I doubt ISIS would never have existed if the Iraqi government hadn't been destroyed. We wouldn't have the ME as fractured as it is today.
Is it really a controversy except for the enemies of Israel? It was at first until the award winning news coverage showing the pre school with the children dying a slow agonizing death that took an hour one of the many type films. I was against the use of nukes until that film came out but the Iraqi's at least, for the most part had a quick death. Those who didn't will suffer for the rest of their lives just like the Israeli's. So many need less deaths but would any other country with nukes respond differently.
Orville_third
Banned
I don't think John Hockenberry would have won his Peabody and Pulitzer. He was outside a sealed room when the attacks came, and got infected with anthrax. Due to his condition, he was under triage compared to other anthrax patients. He pulled through, reporting all the way. I dare say he would likely not be America's most respected news anchor had this not occurred.
(The sealed room incident happened OTL-though no WMD were used. For those who don't know him, he's a former NPR reporter and wheelchair-bound paraplegic.)
(The sealed room incident happened OTL-though no WMD were used. For those who don't know him, he's a former NPR reporter and wheelchair-bound paraplegic.)
Son of Leman Russ
Banned
Did you sugest that if Iraqi attack didn't occur, the News Anchors will still overwhelmingly filled with good looking, perfectly healthy people?
Not that I dismiss the great man himself, but well, looking at his pock marked and rash scarred faces (although he's 100% non infectious now), caused Children to shy away from his news. Although the effects on Adults are the reverse, they really hold him in high regards because of his struggles.
At least the anti-discrimination against disabled people is a good thing to have in show business.
OOC: That's killing Mothra sized butterflies there, pal.
OOC: Well I'm not expert so you're probably right. I just thought that if Saddam had stayed in power, ISIS would be less likely to exist, so if Saddam fell in the 1990's (which he probably would, if he gets nuked), ISIS exists earlier.
The beaches of Tel Aviv will still be full of tourists; that damn war spoiled it into a desolate wasteland.
OOC: That may be, but would it still be called that? The original name of the group was Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad when it was founded in 1999, and only became the Islamic State of Iraq in 2009, with the more well known ISIL acronym not taking hold until 2013 because of the chaos in the Syrian Civil War. With Saddam gone I could see a similar group popping up, but I'm rather uncertain about the name. No need to change it though, there's no real harm with it. Let's make the acronym the same, but assume that the violence from the insurgency had spilled over into Syria as well after the eastern part of the country gets swamped with refugees and falls apart.
Well at least they still have Haifa and Eilat. Needless to say, of course, the war did definitely make tourism take a really huge hit, and the economy did go quite deep in the shitter for the first couple of months after the incident. I don't think it'll ever recover again.