tennyson, on Nov 2 2006, 05:09 AM, said:
and I'd bet that their actual range is a lot less, based on the first Gulf war.
Why would you say that?
Because studies done after the war suggested that the Patriot missles did a lot less in bringing down the Scud missles; that the things were in such poor condition that it's likely that some of the just self-destructed in-flight.
The Al-Sammoud isn't a Scud or Scud derivative, it is a development of the FROG(Free Rocket Over Ground) series of Soviet artillery rockets, also supplied to Iraq.
Al-Samoud (الصمود, alternately "Al-Samed") of the former Iraq regime is a liquid-fuel missile which is essentially a scaled-down Scud, though parts are also derived from the Russian SA-2 'Guideline' surface-to-air missile...On February 13, 2003, a UN panel reported that Iraq's Al-Samoud 2 missiles, disclosed by Iraq to weapons inspectors in December, have a range of 180 km, splitting opinion over whether they breach UNSCR 1441. The limit allowed by the UN is 150 km.
Wikipedia isn't perfect, but that's my source.
In any case, no 180 km missle fired from Iraq put the US in any danger.
They made him a danger to his nieghbors, him having used his ballistic missiles on three of them, two of them US allies.
And which of these countries asked for our help? We launched a war because Bush claimed that Iraq was a threat to us, not their neighbors.
Those missiles had been designed to carry nuclear or chemical warheads and could have delivered them to anywhere within thier range.
But only if such weapons actually existed.
Bush also specifically mentioned the Al-Sammoud as a violation during the UN speech so it was exactly among the things he was talking about.
And as I mentioned before, Iraq was dismantling them when we invaded; had we invaded, they may have finished the job.
Saddam was afraid at this point; otherwise he wouldn't be dismantling the weapons.
Edited by Broph, 02 November 2006 - 07:12 AM.