Posted on 09/16/2002 12:30:06 PM PDT by EternalHope
If this is what he's saying and we fall for it, we are fools.
Why should we think that he'll be satisfied with "Even Stevens"? Once he has found a vulnerability, he will continue to exploit it. Moreover, so will every other barbarian out there, once they realize that we blinked (which will be pretty fast).
He's buying time, because time is on his side. The longer we delay, the more he will have built up his WMD.
And, on top of all this, do you think Israel would go along?
This is the key. Time is not on our side, since Iraq continues to develop WMD.
Moreover, if we continued to wait, at some point the world would decide that we were simply unable to retaliate. This revealed vulnerability would be our downfall, as every barbarian and bully would decide to take theirs while the getting was still good, before the other barbarians and bullies took it all.
I am confident that the U.S. government will act to prevent this scenario from occurring.
Meanwhile, Bush is taking every step to isolate Saddam. Not just in the conventional diplomatic and military senses, but in the political and personal senses, as well.
It is clear to me that there will be no laying nuclear waste to Baghdad, nor any other location in Iraq, unless the target is Saddam in his bunker. Why ask for trouble? Especially, when you don't need to.
Is anybody really concerned at the prospect of anybody other than Saddam (or, perhaps, Uday or Qusay) actually issuing the order for a WMD attack on the U.S.? Or of any subordinate actually following that instruction, once Saddam is removed from the equation. Once Saddam has departed the Iraqi scene, there is no idea, institution, or symbol left to command one's loyalty. Only one's self and family...
Recall how clearly Bush identified and isolated the enemy in Afghanistan. Our war was with the Taliban. And with them only because they wouldn't hand over Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. At no point was the Afghanistan state or its people threatened. This distinction was, I believe, critical to our success there.
The same distinction is being very clearly made in Iraq. The state and its people -- be they Kurd, Sunni or Shi'a -- are not our target. Saddam's propaganda will obviously claim the contrary. But, nowadays, thanks to the internet and satellite TV, the truth has more friends than it has ever had before.
What are the odds, then, that Saddam will suffer a betrayal? Rather good, I'd say. Once the U.S. prevails, as they must know we shall, what will be the average life span of a Republican Guard general? The army is known to be unreliable...and thus vulnerable.
Today, in his bunker, Saddam has enemies he didn't know he had before. And he is gaining new ones every day.
The possibility of 'regime change' due to 'internal action' prior to 'external action' is, I suspect, rather high. And, if it comes to an actual attack, how many friends will Saddam have? And how long will they stay that way? How long will they do his bidding? Will they actually push that button...???
By focussing so sharply on Saddam the person, the affair could come to a successful end quite quickly.
In the absence of a premature conclusion, there is every liklihood that an attack on Iraq will be a.) militarily successful and b.) brought to a quick conclusion.
We will win. Sooner, rather than later. And Saddam will be deposed...or dead. Thus, the only real question is whether we can avoid a retaliatory (or pre-emptive) attack on the domestic front. And, if we can't, how can its effects be minimized.
The strategic corollary to this is that, when an attack does come, we will not be able to identify the attacker. How can we then know who to retaliate against? (After all, in the midst of crisis with country A, country B might decide to attack the U.S. covertly, figuring that the U.S. will retaliate against A, incorrectly assuming that A was the guilty party. We would then have been an unwitting patsy of country B, and our actions would, in fact, encourage the future use of biological weapons against us, because B's secret attack would have succeeded in its goals.)
Moreover, Iraq and everybody else will know that, in the absence of identification of an attacker, retaliation isn't a possibility. Therefore, the former guarantee of retaliation for the use of WMD has ceased to be a deterrent; the attacker just must be careful to deploy the weapon covertly and untraceably.
With the failure of deterrence as a strategic discipline, the only option remaining to us is pre-emption: stopping the development of any WMD which might be a threat to us, before it is used. That's what we're doing with Iraq right now.
By the way, an attack could even originate from some place outside the Islamic world. We do have other enemies who might be sufficiently emboldened to do something like that if they thought they would not be caught.
But you're right, our best option is pre-emption. The problem is that in a world where WMD technology (especially bio-chem weapons) is accessible to third-world terrorist cesspools, and hiding them from our detection equipment virtual child's play, pre-emption becomes increasingly difficult, if not downright impossible. In short, we're f**ked.
Any ideas?
I wish knew.
I do not think there is anything we can do as individuals to prevent an attack.
On the personal/family defense side, I do not think there is a lot either. A lot depends on what happens, and if it happens near you.
A water purification pump such as used by backpackers might be helpful. If you are not a backpacker, you might want to practice using it.
Talking about it might get you labeled a kook, but an easy addition is to have some potassium iodide tablets. They are cheap and easy to find on the internet. Taking them will saturate your thyroid with iodine if you are unlucky enough to be in a fall-out area.
Radioactive iodine is one of the more dangerous and long lasting parts of fallout from certain sources, and it accumulates in the thyroid. However, if your thyroid is already "full" of iodine, the radioactive stuff will pass right through your body, doing little long-term harm. (Not all fall-out will include radioactive iodine, so this is not always going to help.)
Some people have stocked up on cipro for family anti-biotic use if they are exposed to anthrax. I have not, and do not know how to do so. I assume it takes a prescription to get it. Since cipro has to be used before symptoms develop, having some on hand in advance may be the only way to get it in an emergency.
It might help to have a place to go in an emergency that is away from a big city. However, the odds of being able to get out of town after an emergency has begun are very low. If the attack is biological, movement is likely to be prohibited anyway.
Hope something here was helpful. We are still at the stage where talking about what can be done in advance for protection is considered a little bit over the top.
Little people like us need to worry about different things than what kings and presidents worry about.
If there is a major attack, it may be difficult for the country; many will be in dire straits. Talking basics, such as food and shelter, not about owing $200,000 on a $300,000 hovel without electricity or running water. Those with existing medical situations may be in severe trouble.
There is a war coming, odds are. That's in addition to the existing war, or Phase 2. Plan for the worst. It might go well, it might spiral out of control. Do you have enough of the very basic supplies to hold out until order is restored? [Not you, TM, that's a general question.]
I'm also making sure I'm ready for emergencies in general. I recently renewed my CPR certification and made sure the family is well-trained in first aid.
Won't help against a direct WMD attack, but might come in handy in dealing with the aftermath.
Self-reliance will be the key, and no guarantee. Self-reliance in the individual person and in the neighborhood. Cities will be useless, worse than useless. Maybe Phase 2 won't take it this far down, but the war has only begun, it's early. But, hey, I'm feeling optimistic today.
No doubt about it. Even worse if world aid is disrupted.
OTOH, it could spiral out of control, in which case all Europeans in the middle east will be lynched, and we will have to quarantine those areas from the civilized world. NO visitors.
That sounds like a good idea. I was under the impression that the weaponized anthrax used in last year's attacks was so fine that it would penetrate most off-the-shelf stuff, like surgical masks. I'll have to do the same, just in case.
Cheap now, more expensive than platinum the day after a mass anthrax attack.
Ain't that the truth. Thanks for the ideas. Stay well, my friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.