RUMOR: Saddam to destroy all oil?

I was watching the tale end of a piece on FoxNews here at the office. A former mid-east advisor to Reagan, and international arms expert, was warning that Saddam may poses the ability to drop one or two small nuclear warheads down his "high capacity" oil wells whose pipes are apparently plenty wide for this. If he does this, it could destroy much of the mid-east's oil supply.

I'm going to try and find out who this was, if he's credible, and if the concept has credibility. However, I do/ recall this concept being discussed on another news source some months ago.

Has anyone else heard of this?

That would be quite a succesful PR Strike for Saddam .. going down into history as the man who educated the fascist plutocrats

I've heard he already has the oil fields mined, and it's the British engineers job to defuse them before they are set off. Don't know anything about him using nuclear weapons though. Could just be more scaremongering.

Doesn�t sound logical, why? is the only resource available for them to do something, and also a lot of ppl depends on it, they won�t get anything good, and it won�t change the situation....

The nukes are reagan/bush intox, of course.

Blowing up the oil fields sounds logical to me .. that would prevent an american aggression

Originally posted by CoLD aNGeR
Doesn�t sound logical, why? is the only resource available for them to do something, and also a lot of ppl depends on it, they won�t get anything good, and it won�t change the situation....

True, but Saddam probably figures if he is going down he might as well take his oil with him. Sort of like "If I cant have it, no one will."

I certainly wouldn't put it pass him. If he wants to f*ck up the west its a good way to go about it.

well then the little support he had from arabs will be gone for his insanity, which also is not good in anyway for him, don�t know i think is just a thread to make ppl believe that saddam is even worse than what we though....

No criticism...just curious...

Originally posted by Gazrok
No criticism...just curious...

To be frank, i prefer Saddam disarming peacefully, as he was doing until yesterday, than another 700 000 useless casualty ...

Not many are falling for the little pony trick show that's been going on the past couple weeks...

Originally posted by Gazrok
Not many are falling for the little pony trick show that's been going on the past couple weeks...

Well, that Saddam already disarms, is what the inspectors say, and they're the only people who know what they talk about, unlike anyone in US.

Originally posted by Karl Molarius
Well, that Saddam already disarms, is what the inspectors say, and they're the only people who know what they talk about, unlike anyone in US.

Then perhaps you could help explain why what the inspectors say, and what is written in their reports, are two different things.

Originally posted by William

Originally posted by Karl Molarius
Well, that Saddam already disarms, is what the inspectors say, and they're the only people who know what they talk about, unlike anyone in US.

Then perhaps you could help explain why what the inspectors say, and what is written in their reports, are two different things.

Suddenly questioning the inspectors honesty because they dont report what the american governement wants is really the last resort of a dying cause.

There is plenty of evidence of the us governement lying about iraq, though.

Originally posted by Karl Molarius
There is plenty of evidence of the us governement lying about iraq, though.

Perhaps you'd like to actually answer the question. Question reversal is the last resort of someone clinging to an erroneous concept.

Why are Blix's oral reports different than his written reports?

Why can't Blix find the underground tunnels, that dozens of Iraqi escapees have described in detail?

Why didn't Blix ever inspect divisions of the standing Iraqi army?

Originally posted by William

Originally posted by Karl Molarius
There is plenty of evidence of the us governement lying about iraq, though.

1. Why are Blix's oral reports different than his written reports?
2. Why can't Blix find the underground tunnels, that dozens of Iraqi escapees have described in detail?
3. Why didn't Blix ever inspect divisions of the standing Iraqi army?

1. they're not (what are you trying to say ?)
2. Why didnt these "refugees" describe the access to these underground realms that have a transdimensional portal to Mars?
3.of course they did where do you think are the Al Samoud rockets from ? a scrapeyard ?

Now now Karl, you're helping to privide example of how disinformation is rampant on all "sides" of political and conspiratorial issues.

1- Apparently you haven't been keeping up with current affairs and issues of drones and such.

2- They have... again, keep up with news... BBC.com is a great source on this angle.

3- Those missles are from warehouses. If he were to inspect standing troops, he'd discover chemical warfare survival kits... why would they need those. (Something covered on CNN.com, BBC.com, WashingtonPost.com, etc.)

All three points have nothing to do with any government's opinion, but items discovered by multiple journalists.

Originally posted by CoLD aNGeR
well then the little support he had from arabs will be gone for his insanity, which also is not good in anyway for him, don�t know i think is just a thread to make ppl believe that saddam is even worse than what we though....

And that is why he will do that if he can, no other nation will send troops to defend him right ? So what kind of support does he get ? Only that they don't support the war ? Will that safe him ? He knows he'll go under, he just won't go quietly.