Posted on 06/22/2002 8:16:51 AM PDT by Phil V.
Napoleon
If a real war played out the way the simulation did, and the Hashemites were killed and lost Jordan, then even if Arafat didn't want to take Jordan his people would take it without him. I don't see how he could restrain his people from leaving the west bank and heading towards Jordan. They would perceive it as a friendlier place to live then on the west bank.
Since they would have control of Jordan, but still be in hostilities with Israel, natural laws would dictate that, like water, the people will move along the path of least resistence. With heavy resitence on the west bank and none in Jordan, it wouldn't take very long before the west bank emptied itself of Palestinians.
That is NOT the way things happen in the Middle East - or anywhere else for that matter. Some people of ALL groups choose the path of least resistance. Many do not.
It was not the path of least resistance that lead Israelis to the settlements. Some Palestinians may indeed leave. But the task of much "cleansing" will remain to be done.
The true purpose of goy-boy-Bush?
I understand your point....and perhaps I'm missing something in the reading but, the logic, to me at least, doesn't sound kosher.
Follow me if you will.
Aside from military targets, the only other of strategic value is Bagdhad. Since, according to the wargaming, we are already involved in the conflict, and given your observation of keeping the Israelis out of the conflict, why would we need to resort to a nuclear strike.
The above scenario does not hint as to why we would up the ante. Let's suppose the price of appeasement to Israel (like the Patriot Missle in '91), is the destruction of Bagdhad. A Rolling Thunder style event could reduce Bagdhad to shreds in a matter of hours. As a matter of course, I would think that a combination of BLU's, Cave Buster, and Dumb multi thousand pounders would do a more effective job on deep bunkers than an air blast. The above ground result is more or less the same.
Part of the problem I'm having with this is, why the wargame scenario assumes the worst case option, if in fact, part of their reason is to send a message. Wouldn't the credibility of the message be enhanced by, let's say, a conventional strike and the ensuing Dresden firestorm. A description of damage of that sort, is more conveniently poignant to portray.
I think it was. Free/subsidized housing and little resistence at the time was a great incentive for families to move. How many are moving in today?
It's not the governments, its the citizenry. Virtually all the people of the arab states (including Egypt and Jordan)want to take on Israel and the rest of the West. The governments are actually providing a small hedge against this for the moment since they know the ramifications. They'll fail eventually, however, if and when Israel rightfully annexes land "officially" and/or take out Arafat.
The one body not mentioned in the wargame is the UN. Their "refugee camps" would still be extant and those who have lived in them without working for five generations would go on living and being supported there. The problem would persist.
Not sure what you mean there. I don't think Bush is on strings controlled by the Mossad.
Bush wants to end the regime in Baghdad for personal and political reasons. Remember, Saddam tried to put a hit on his dad. For that reason alone W would want to take him out. Plus, his funding of war machines, his megalomaniacal nature, his desire to build WMD, and his connections to the CIA are probably all more reasons to take him down.
I feel pretty sure all these scenarios have been covered by our generals already. The one that bears watching is Syria.
And if the dream is to destroy Israel, perhaps moving to Jordan to consolidate your energies and your forces might be a good strategic reason for you to go.
Remember how easily they fled during 1948.
Their scenario also does not take into account the reaction of Eygpt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the terrorist elements in Lebanon. Another battle group in the Med or a LA class sub or two there should be enough to make Eygpt stand down should it come to it. Saudi Arabia may not attack Israel directly, but radicals inside the country may attack our troops based there. If the House of Saud are found to be complict in the attacks, they'll go from selling oil to working at a 7-11 rather quickly IMHO. Syria can be kept in check with a build up at the Golan. Russia must lean heavily on Iran not to become involved.
Perhaps they remember '48 as a "retreat". Perhaps they intend to not "retreat" again.
It will take more than another Deir Yassin to cause them to "retreat".
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.