A quick tour through my murky mind...

[Follow Ups] [Post Followup] [Our Discussion Forum]

Posted by Lilly from ? ( on Sunday, July 14, 2002 at 3:49PM :

In Reply to: Read thoroughly. posted by Lilly from ? ( on Sunday, July 14, 2002 at 3:25PM :

Hi, kids! It's time for a quick trip through the murky recesses of Lilly's mind...

: This is an exact echo of the Pentagon view under President George Bush Sr 11 years ago, when Colin Powell - then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - opposed the Gulf war, but was bullied into fighting it by Bush and his then Defense Secretary, Dick Cheney. Powell and Cheney have despised each other ever since. Powell is known to be opposed to another war against Iraq.

xxx I had NO idea about this.

: 'There has to be a defining moment,' said one State Department official, '...which is a recognized international offence in order to justify an attack under the [United Nations] charter'... But if Powell and his allies are trying to bluff the Iraqis into concessions while simultaneously undercutting the hawks in the administration...

xxx Interesting...

: For the Turks the fear is that their own Kurdish minority will try to use the opportunity of a war to carve out their own state. Wolfowitz's visit is designed to allay those concerns. He will point out that the huge forces would mean that the Iraqi Kurds, whose fighting capacity has not impressed Pentagon planners, would actually be little more than passive partners during the assault, undermining their negotiating position after Saddam is gone.

xxx There go the hopes of the Kurds & Assyrians & any other minority group in Iraq for any sort of democratic reform...

: It would be the first genuine 'network centric' war - as strategists are now calling it. Ground troops would be left without orders while hi-tech missiles destroy everything that is needed to keep an army going.

xxx Does this mean that they're going to bomb all those water treatment facilities again? Or the hospitals? Or bomb shelters that "look suspicious?" What does this mean, to "destroy everything that is needed to keep an army going???" I suppose, the US government could just starve everyone in Iraq to death, & maybe after all the food stored in Saddam's bunker runs out after 10 years, maybe then they'll have "solved" the "problem" of Saddam?

: So Plan B - the Surgical Strike - may be preferred. That involves a series of strikes by precision munitions and special forces that effectively disarm the dictator. While Saddam and his 300,000 men are disorientated more special forces units would help locals and defecting soldiers to take over. 'You cut the head off and leave the body,' said one analyst.

xxx They couldn't precision guide my ass! If they cut off the head, you can just bet they'll accidentally cut off the arms, legs, & hack a bit into the chest cavity as well. What will the US government say? Oops?

: However, there is one question that analysts say is getting none of the attention that it should, whether Bush goes for the Surgical Strike or the Big Battalions approach: What happens next? 'What is most worrying is that there is no clear map through to the endgame,' Hollis said. 'The prognosis for stability is not great. How do we avoid a bloody settling of scores?

xxx Great questions!!! Damned if I know!!!

: At the London conference last week what would happen after Saddam went was the main topic of conversation. 'Given Iraq's 40-year history of repression, it is highly likely that blood will fill the streets,' said Major-General Saad Obeidi, in charge of psychological warfare before defecting in 1986. 'We have to prevent this.'As yet no one seems to know how.

xxx I'm glad they mention this! Will this deter Bush & company? If it does, it doesn't mean that Bush & company gave a damn about anyone in Iraq...

-- Lilly
-- signature .

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

E-Mail: ( default )
Optional Link ( default )
Optional Image Link ( default )

This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com