Txiasaeia

I've just finished "The Gulf War did not take place", and I've ordered "Simulacra and Simulation". I don't know what to make of Gulf War -- his basic premise, I think, is that, since Saddam Hussein was still in control of Iraq after the "war", since most of the war had to do with media exposure rather than actual fighting, and since there was very little in the way of traditional fighting itself, that the Gulf War wasn't really a war.

My problem is that he seems to want to inflame his reader, instead of presenting his arguments in a rational, calm manner. Is this typical of his work? I'm anxiously awaiting Simulacra, but discussion regarding either book (or Baudrillard in general) is welcome