WI: Saddam Really Did Have WMDs

[Jape]

OTL they were right, and I doubt the presence of Iraqi chemical or even bioweapons would change those feelings. I would like to think that if nukes had been found (they wouldn't) the attitudes of continental Europe might have been more substantially changed, but I doubt it.

Dr. Obeidi (?) the leader of the Iraqi Nuclear Programme did have a centrifuge buried in his back garden and Iraqi diplomats were discovered meeting with the North Koreans to discuss trading missile technology. Then you have Hans Blix who said off the record he was convinced Hussein was hiding stuff from the inspectors. Its a bit OT but I've always been a little surprised Britain and America got so hyperbolic over the 45 minute dossier etc. Intelligence pointed to him actively craving WMDs (the centrifuge got buried for safety until finances and technology were in order according to Obeidi) and he was one of the world's most impressive genocidal nutters. Seemed there was plenty of motivations without 'bending the truth'.

In the UK, the Stop the War coalition wont shut up but finding a ready to roll arsenal will give Blair a pop and probably hurt the Liberal Democrats in 2005 as the anti-war party. Labour win a larger majority and Blair might be able to cling on a little longer.

 

[Kung Fucious]

1) Don't worry, they'll screw the next pooch.

2) Um, he never lost it. If you've seen that recent documentary on him, in his interviews (WHY did he agree to be questioned!?) he admits no wrong, takes no prosoners, and just gives that unshakeable shark's smile.

3) Eating crow is in neither nation's nature, especially a country that swears they liberated themselves in WWII with "just a little help" from their allies. Though it might come down to new elections having to be called. Only for the governments in power to be returned to office with larger majorities. Staying out of Iraq was HUGELY popular for both the French and German peoples. OTL they were right, and I doubt the presence of Iraqi chemical or even bioweapons would change those feelings. I would like to think that if nukes had been found (they wouldn't) the attitudes of continental Europe might have been more substantially changed, but I doubt it.

That's fair. Perhaps I should have said "Rumsfeld's shit eating smirk gets, somehow, even more shit eating"

My general point was that, in the extremely unlike event that the invasion goes OTL up until some Army Ranger finds a warehouse full of nerve gas, the Neo-Cons have been vindicated, and you're going to see much more adventurism on the part of the US Military. While France and Germany might not "eat crow", they're probably going to be wary about standing up to another threat of American intervention in the Middle East.

But as I pointed out, it's super unlikely that that happens. If Iraq had chemical or biological weapons, they're going to get used once the country is invaded.

 

[deathscompanion1]

That's fair. Perhaps I should have said "Rumsfeld's shit eating smirk gets, somehow, even more shit eating"

My general point was that, in the extremely unlike event that the invasion goes OTL up until some Army Ranger finds a warehouse full of nerve gas, the Neo-Cons have been vindicated, and you're going to see much more adventurism on the part of the US Military. While France and Germany might not "eat crow", they're probably going to be wary about standing up to another threat of American intervention in the Middle East.

But as I pointed out, it's super unlikely that that happens. If Iraq had chemical or biological weapons, they're going to get used once the country is invaded.

Not sure it would make much difference.

The Coalition both times were super prepared for Chemical and Biological warfare because of the Iran-Iraq war and the kurds.

 

[Kung Fucious]

Not sure it would make much difference.

The Coalition both times were super prepared for Chemical and Biological warfare because of the Iran-Iraq war and the kurds.

It's less a question of the Coalition being prepared (OTL they totally expected someone to use Chemical/Biological weapons) and more the consequences of a nation using them in warfare for the first time in nearly a century.

 

[Ultimate Paragon]

It's less a question of the Coalition being prepared (OTL they totally expected someone to use Chemical/Biological weapons) and more the consequences of a nation using them in warfare for the first time in nearly a century.

As mentioned earlier, Saddam used chemical weapons against the Iranians.

 

[deathscompanion1]

It's less a question of the Coalition being prepared (OTL they totally expected someone to use Chemical/Biological weapons) and more the consequences of a nation using them in warfare for the first time in nearly a century.

Saddam was rather notorious for doing exactly that and using them against his own people after that.