[elfman2]

”That should be used first I would think and we don't send any of our boys in just NUKE IRAQ!”

Sure, that wouldn’t pull the plug on anti- terrorism cooperation we're getting from Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Antarctic. Tens of millions of radioactive civies wouldn’t send the rest of the world scrambling to the UN’s world government vision for protection. That wouldn’t nations racing into covert WMD programs. Why is it that the Left is able to portray us as Kooks again?

[pickemuphere]

[I]Sure, that wouldn’t pull the plug on anti- terrorism cooperation we're getting from Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Antarctic. Tens of millions of radioactive civies wouldn’t send the rest of the world scrambling to the UN’s world government vision for protection.[/I]

I happen to agree. Nukes simply aren't necessary in this situation. Our boys have the equipment to stroll right through whatever cloud of chemicals Saddam might be able to waft their way. And if he hides in a bunker, we can certainly wait him out--six months, a year, who cares? Heck, just seal it up with another 6 ft. layer of concrete. :)

Pre-emptive nuke strikes would do more harm than good.

[putupon]

Sure, that wouldn’t pull the plug on anti- terrorism cooperation we're getting from Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Antarctic.

Nuke them too if they want act up.

[Poohbah]

Sure, that wouldn’t pull the plug on anti- terrorism cooperation we're getting from Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Antarctic.

What, the penguins are tracking al-Qaeda operatives for us?