"More Suicide Attacks" ("Just the beginning" says Iraq's vice president)

Sky News ^ | March 29, 2003

[dennis1x]

legitimate military targets.

[RightWhale]

It didn't work for the Kamakazi

It worked very well. Their best weapon, and it nearly stopped the invasion of Japanese-held territory. Too bad they weren't flying taxicabs.

[weegee]

Where's Saddam and all his bluster about the Iraqi army winning this war and humiliating the US?

Why does he have to send one of his p!$$ boys now? Hmmm?

Don't expect to see Peter Jennings ask this question on the evening news. He'll only ask it of the American President (as in, "Where is the President at this time of crisis? His people want to see him and be reassured, some presidents do this sort of thing well while others...< roll eyes > do not." (loosely paraphrased from his 9/11 tirade).

As a Canadian citizen, Petah is just as much in his place asking this of Saddam as he is in asking it of the American President.

[thoughtomator]

Yep, count me in among those who believe that anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism are two faces of the same beast.

[Lijahsbubbe]

Two faces of the same beast

What an excellent way to describe it.

[MississippiMan]

Yep, count me in among those who believe that anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism are two faces of the same beast.

Absolutely. It's all a part of that cosmic good vs. evil thing going on. For even though this nation has slipped a long way from its Christian roots, in the eyes of the world it's them vs. anything they perceive as being representative of the Judeo-Christian system. IOW, Israel and the U.S. In a way, all this is not surprising—in another way, it's stunning just how quickly this vitriolic hatred is growing and revealing itself more by the day.

MM

[Mitchell]

Perhaps because if he did, the penny would drop, light bulbs would go off over peoples' heads, folks would be slapping their foreheads saying "D'oh," and so on and so forth.

The argument for ambiguity is getting weaker and weaker. It used to be that one could say that if everything were fully acknowledged, the public would force the U.S. into a dangerously premature war with Iraq. Now, however, the war is on.

So, what would happen at this stage if the ambiguities were resolved? I don't think it would drive public opinion to take a stance on specific military questions, such as an invasion of Baghdad. At this point, is it only about protecting the stock market? (I wouldn't minimize the importance of the stock market, but still....)

[El Cid]

"...What do they expect? The Arabs and Muslims are not allowed to develp missiles and bombs as powerful as theirs."

That's right, join the civilized world and maybe we'll let you keep some of these toys. Until then - damn straight we don't want you having any of them.

[The Great Satan]

So, what would happen at this stage if the ambiguities were resolved?

For one thing, it would make it very, very difficult for Bush to cut a deal with Hussein where he gets to leave the the country. And, even though nobody wants to admit it or talk about it, that is our best hope, and perhaps are only hope, for an end to this conflict that does not involve massive allied civilian casualties.

[Kevin Curry]

The Veep, huh? Where's Waldo?

[Mitchell]

Yes, you're right about that. It would limit our options considerably.

[Poodlebrain]

The driver was a member of the Iraqi Army who attacked wearing civilian clothing. Ramadan not only condones the action which violates the Geneva Conventions; he announces the awarding of decorations for the action and promises more. Do you think he signed his own death warrant?

[The Great Satan]

And, to take the other side of it, it's not like we need extra motivation to get riled up at Saddam right now. What we need is a way of persuading Saddam to give up. That's really the summum bonum at this point.

[Mitchell]

On the other hand, Pres. Bush has an underlying political problem, in that the country does not truly understand the rationale behind this war, and that is why much of the public questions the necessity of the war.

I'm not talking about the overtly antiwar crowd, but the mass of people in the center, and even many conservatives. They're going along with the President for now (this shows up as a high level of support in the polls, but I think the support is relatively shallow). If things get sticky, Pres. Bush is going to have to provide a more cogent, to-the-point rationale to avoid losing public support. I hope it won't be too late at that point; it would be less convincing then than now, since at a later date it might be portrayable as a supposed act of desperation.

(By the way, one can't judge public sentiment via FreeRepublic; FR is definitely not a representative sample of the U.S. population)

[The Great Satan]

Well, I hope we haven't outfoxed ourselves with this clever little charade. OTOH, it is very hard to see what else the administration could have done, under the circumstances. One of the scary aspects of this is that it means all the decision making has taken place in a vacuum, with no meaningful criticism from anybody but a very small circle of insiders.

[willgetsome]

Afixing liberation objectives to this war was a mistake. We should smote the Iraqi capability to make war, eliminate all WMD, kill as many Ba'athist as possible, and leave the SOBs to pound sand.

[LaineyDee]

Dead man walking. He doesn't have many threats left in him :)

Agreed. This dude just signed his own death warrant.

[sheik yerbouty]

They are so perverse, they will insert a stick of dynamite up their nether passage and shout "Allahu Akbar!". Just shoot them at a distance.

[sheik yerbouty]

It might actually work!

[sheik yerbouty]

That's absolutely right. Let some other country do ?Meals on wheels!"