16th January 2003, 10:40 AM
Of course war with their millions of soldiers would be a disaster. Such a decision would result in heavy losses. However, even though there are millions of those soldiers there, they are tiny.
However, even though controlling oil is likely a reason indeed, it's hardly the only reason to declare war on Iraq. I think it's just a decision of which threat is the easier one to get rid of first. I mean, when you play an RTS game, you don't just go after the most heavily fortified base, no, you take out the weaker base, steal the resources they had to increase your army even more, and THEN go after the bigger threat. Well, that's what the good players tend to do. I tend to kinda flop around and dry up in the midday sun.
However, even though controlling oil is likely a reason indeed, it's hardly the only reason to declare war on Iraq. I think it's just a decision of which threat is the easier one to get rid of first. I mean, when you play an RTS game, you don't just go after the most heavily fortified base, no, you take out the weaker base, steal the resources they had to increase your army even more, and THEN go after the bigger threat. Well, that's what the good players tend to do. I tend to kinda flop around and dry up in the midday sun.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)