Joe wrote :

> I am deathly afraid of only two countries in the world today:
> Iraq and North Korea. Why, because neither leader would have
> second thoughs on the use of nuclear devices on the world.
> If they don't care about their own people, what makes any
> rational person think they would care about the world's
> people or the results of their actions.

I may have one item of a possible explanation to offer : it's all about
survival. Neither Kim nor Saddam has yet (and I hope they never do) used
nuclear devices against their own people. Of course, we all know Saddam
gassed the Kurds (but does he consider the Kurds as his own people ? Just a
question ...) and Kim is starving his population into blind obedience and
semi-slavery. But they both (so far ... fingers crossed ...) have refrained
from using The Bomb. Which ***COULD*** mean (I'm tripping on unstable
ground, here) that they ***MAY*** care more for their own long-term survival
than that of their own population.

So ... if we try to assess what Kim's and Saddam's priorities could be, I
would offer the following order :

1) Stay alive
2) Stay alive and in power
3) Stay alive and in power, and perpetuate the good life, even at the
expense of the population

If we get them to think that neither 3) nor 2) nor even 1) can be fulfilled,
then we may be in for a round of scorched-earth strategy. There is a record
for that : What did Saddam do when he was kicked out of Kuwait in '91 ? He
ordered the oil rigs to be incinerated. What did Hitler do when the Nazis
had to leave Paris in '44 ? He ordered Paris to be incinerated (good idea
his generals did not follow the orders, incidentally).

That does not make any of them an innocent man.

Please read : I'm not advocating bargaining with any of these guys. I'm
simply trying to assess what could happen in the future, which may be pretty
soon in the case of Irak. If Saddam feels cornered in such a way that he has
no way out to ensure his own survival, what do we expect him to do ? Lock
himself inside an underground bunker, grab his pistol and shoot himself in
the head ? That would be a lesser evil and certainly no great loss. But what
would a bigger evil be ? Put a nuclear device on a Scud and bomb Tel-Aviv ?
Do we want to take a chance ? I have certainly nothing against Tel-Aviv and
its inhabitants. I'm just elaborating on the fact that, during Gulf War I,
which country was the most hit by Scuds ? Israel.

Once again, I do not advocate passivity. I advocate a carefully thought-out
and carefully implemented course of action. At this moment, I do not have
the impression the US Government is proposing that.

And, once again I have to repeat myself, I have nothing, repeat NOTHING,
against the American people.

We are separated by the same misunderstanding.

Christian

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *