Where did all Saddam's firepower go?

[Davidu]

Oh, Bush...

Why the hell do you let yourselves be used like that? It looks to me that UK does everithing US asks.

[nemafakei]

It's hardly something we choose - after all, only one sixth of the UK actually voted for Blair.

[Davidu]

So how did he actually became Prime Minister?

In Romania the next president needs al least 51% of the votes to win...

[nemafakei]

Most of the rest of the population didn't vote. All he needed was the majority of votes in the majority of regions.

[Davidu]

Doesen't seem fair...

And everybody should vote. In Belgium (or Holland) they gave of law to fine the people that didn't vote.

[Warlord Ripskar]

Not even that, he needed 50% of the MPs who each needed to get more votes than anyone else in their constituency. As each constituency usually has between 4 and 12 people running for election you can guarantee that the person who gets it didn't get 50% of the vote and turnout is dropping faster than a brick.

[SurlyPIG]

The traditional British "first past the blocks" system HAS to go. Everywhere. The only countries that still use it are the UK, the USA, Canada, and Jamacia. It's awful. It has to go. Democracies are about PEOPLE, not regions, ridings, or constituancies. Make way for proportional representation! No more regional alienation! No more percentage loopholes!

[XCH]

I was hoping Saddam would have put up a much better fight. Saddam has disappointed me a lot. He was supposed to be a force to be reckoned with. I thought he had a ton of SCUDS and other devious USA-crushing weapons.

I knew the USA would win, but I thought Saddam would at least kill a sizable portion of the Americans during the fight.

Now it turns out that the Americans are going to have killed more of their fellow Americans than the Iraqi army did. LOL. Funny, I know - but comic value aside, it would have been better if Saddam had done more damage.

So the mystery is, where did all his weapons ago? Not only does he have no WMD's, but he also has none of his usual tricks. Did he sell them? If so, where did he put the money? Why did he sell them? What posessed Saddam to get rid of/lose his substantial firepower?

I am sure if the USA knew that Iraq would be such a push-over, they would have stole it's Oil years ago instead of waiting until now.

I think that they were destroyed in the initial bombings.

[Ice_Cube]

I thought the iraqies had an airforce (be it a small one). I am surprised they didn't use chemical weapons though.

[Acriku]

I think that they did have a small airforce, but America's superior aeronautical systems mowed them over.

[SurlyPIG]

About the airforce, the US AA is such that the 'Iraqi Airforce' might as well have used the Wright brother's plane.

[Ice_Cube]

We all heard about "formidable AA" around Baghdad but only one plane was shot down by it! Was it just propaganda to make us think the Iraqies could fight back?

[lowzeewee]

I think the Anti-Air weapons they use are batteries,thus needing to aim and fire manually while their their SAMs 'SEEM' to have been uses up to hit down those drones >:(

[Ice_Cube]

Oh, you would of thought they could of hit at least one of those B52's thou! They are huge!

[lowzeewee]

B-52 are quite fast right?But nevertheless USA might not actually reveal the actual number of downing and casualties ;)

[Terror]

agreed, oh and the patriots weren't very effective in Gulf War 1 either :) . They only shot down one SCUD, cuz the iraqi's combined 2 scuds into one, so they had a longer range ;D

[Ice_Cube]

Suppose, they looked pretty slow on the take off and in stock footage.

[Terror]

Suppose, they looked pretty slow on the take off and in stock footage.

B52 Bombers have a very hard time to take off when fully loaded. Even with their 8 engines they can hardly get off the ground. When this happens, you see black smoke trails behind the engines. It looks pretty neat

[lowzeewee]

Those carpet bombers like B52 simply have too many bombs to hold in their cargo compartment ::)

[Ice_Cube]

So technically you would only have 2 hit it with 1 bullet and it would make a spectacula explosion!?!?

[lowzeewee]

I think those Iraqi troops have no war experience and hardly any proper training,though the training is harsh,it will not affect their mental and physical strength[if the training is total rubbish,only shooting and their loyalty

[Terror]

So technically you would only have 2 hit it with 1 bullet and it would make a spectacula explosion!?!?

well... one bullet? no i think not :) . B52 Bomers are quite tough.

Those SCUDS gave the Patriot's a hard time, cuz the patriots were designed to shoot the SCUDS when they entered a certain heigth. The problem however was that at that moment, the 2 scuds would fall apart because of the heat and the patriot missiles didn't understand what to do, as all that scrap metal was in the air and so they just exploded without hitting anything. Now they have updated the patriots so that they intercept at an earlier stage, before the SCUDS fall apart

[lowzeewee]

Well....as according to the CNN.com's special war on Iraq 3D animation and introduction to Scud C,they saw that SCUDs were very inaccurate :)

Nice vechicle "simulator" games- http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/weapons/index.html

Those "simulators include M1A1 as well as the Scud C

[Ice_Cube]

Lets face it....even if they were making WOMD in iraq then they would probably be faulty and/or just fall apart!

[lowzeewee]

Play the 3D simulators then ::)

Saddam got killed when a SCUD missile fell on him,get those americans to stop digging for oil and go dig for saddam now ::)