Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Coming War with Saddam
The Weekly Standard ^ | 07/29/2002 | Stephen F. Hayes

Posted on 07/20/2002 8:43:05 AM PDT by Pokey78

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 07/20/2002 8:43:05 AM PDT by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
It's a comin' real soon now (TM).
2 posted on 07/20/2002 9:03:37 AM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The reason this nation is not yet galvanized with the effort to use military force to unset Saddam Hussein, is that we are waiting for the other shoe to drop. Someday, and probably quite soon, Saddam will do something so outrageous, so egregious, the only possible remedy shall be to annihilate his leadership and the regime that stands behind him.

For Saddam, or any one of his ministers, spitting on the street should be grounds for action. The sum total of all his misdeeds has grown to enormous dimensions.

3 posted on 07/20/2002 9:12:31 AM PDT by alloysteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
I agree. For all intents and purposes, things look to be in place. The President has spoken with everyone needed. While the media is wasting "everyones" time kicking and screaming about it the administration has moved along at a G.W. clip. I suspect that the meat of any Iraqi regime change [ie.War with Iraq] will be completed by January.
4 posted on 07/20/2002 9:15:27 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
I believe that other shoe is against us directly, I fear, and it will be a whopper.

I fear not the lone suicide bomber, but the 5000 suicide bombers/gunmen/women in the malls, parking garages, schools, crowded buildings, dairy mart coffee dispensers...the death of a thousand cuts.

5 posted on 07/20/2002 9:17:57 AM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
I don't think you quite get the meaning of the expression "real soon now".
6 posted on 07/20/2002 9:25:37 AM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
There is a serious question about what strategies Saddam Hussien will use to stay in power. It is doubtful that he will try the same strategen used towards the end of the Dessert Storm campain so one must conclude he will try for the full monte against the USA and Israel. We should presume the assasination of Musharef in Pakistan and a number of attacks within the USA itself. It is clear those attacks will include CBW weapons and if Pakistan had had a regime change a nuclear device going off on American soil (or water).

The likeliest places for such a detonation include Washington, Dc New York City, Boston, Ma, Seatle/Tacoma, Wa. SanFranciso, CA and New Orleans if for no other reason than a ship carrying such a device could concievably get into one of those ports with such a device.

The CBW attacks may we can presume include airborne anthrax, Tulerimia, and maybe such agents as Ebola and smallpox. The Chemical attacks will be directed at urban areas. A coordinated series of attacks designed in response to an attack on Iraq prtoper may mobilize enough troops and regime changes to hamper efforts on the ground but Saddam is counting on the political fallout of a large number of dead Americans to have us call off the war. His succeeds will depend on how well we stop and respond to such attacks. Clearly while Al Qaeda has mounted some relative light attacks since September 11 they have not tried a large scale op post September 11. perhaps that is because of the effectiveness of our strikes against the Al Qaeda bases in Afghanistan but while Al Qaeda exists every American should be aware that the need to eliminate them exists because they may and will strike again in force and they will do it on their own timetable in a manner that will grab our attention.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

7 posted on 07/20/2002 9:27:37 AM PDT by harpseal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
This is a clear, thorough, excellent article. It has just one defect, and that is in the area of the constitutional authority of President Bush to order acts of war directed at Iraq.

On 18 September, 2001, Congress passed with but one dissenting vote in the House, its Anti-Terrorism Act. Folded into the text of that Act was a Joint Resolution which originated in the Senate, and that authorized the President to "take what steps are necessary" under the "War Powers Act." It was not restricted to Al-Qaeda, and did not mention Afghanistan or any other nation by name.

This was not as clean and obvious as the Joint Resolution introduced in the House by Rep. Bob Barr and six others. The House JR was a "Declaration of War" because it used that precise phrase. It was tabled in favor of the Senate JR that does not use that phrase, but DOES ACCOMPLISH THE SAME RESULT. The power to conduct war has been transferred from Congress which must act under the Constitution, to the President as Commander-in-Chief. That is all that is necessary.

Some people are under the misimpression that we cannot "declare war" without naming a nation. This is historically false. In 1806 we declared war against "the Barbary Pirates," who were Muslim criminals operating through the territory of several nations, especially Libya. In a 10-year low grade war, we crushed the Barbary Pirates. (That's where the line comes from in the Marine Hymn, "to the shores of Tripoli.")

The War against Terorists is similar to that War, except that the Barbary Pirates did not kill Americans, but only captured them and their ships, freeing them after ransom payments. Their interests were purely economic. In 1805, 20% of the US budget was spent on ransom for captured ships and people. The phrase, "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute," comes from this period.

Bottom line: a new declaration of war against Iraq is constitutionally unnecessary. For political reasons, as the article points out, the Administration may seek such a declaration, but it does not have to do that.

Congressman Billybob

Clink for: "There Once Was a Lady from Knizes...."

8 posted on 07/20/2002 9:36:14 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
Details?
9 posted on 07/20/2002 9:36:59 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
The only death by a thousand cuts is coming from Congress, Bush, and all those the bureaucrats working under him.
10 posted on 07/20/2002 9:37:50 AM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
>>the 5000 suicide bombers/gunmen/women in the malls, parking garages, schools, crowded buildings, dairy mart coffee dispensers<<

Incredible that they're still here, isn't it?

Even more amazing that they are still ARRIVING?

11 posted on 07/20/2002 9:44:26 AM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
I may agree. I am very concerned for New York City. It is a idolization of the Terrorists to destroy it....and It simply has too many avenues of approach to be properly defended. I dont believe the American government or people take that seriously enough. I have made a personal decision not to travel there and you wont catch me anywhere downwind of it either.

I dont mean to be morbid but I honestly feel that the city's days are numbered.

12 posted on 07/20/2002 9:46:54 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dr_who
It's a comin' real soon now (TM).

Starts on the one year anniversary of the war against the Taliban in October.

13 posted on 07/20/2002 10:16:43 AM PDT by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Not only are hey arriving by the day, any attempt to stop them is characterized by the Bush Administration as "neo-Nazi" and "McCarthyite".
14 posted on 07/20/2002 10:20:10 AM PDT by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
This time, keep the oil fields to pay for the war on terror.
15 posted on 07/20/2002 10:25:13 AM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Oh, I think it could be esaily defended, it is just an impossible idea to lock it down!

There are only certain large streets to block. It would leave the terrorists to attack the common places instead...and that is just what i fear is going to happen, the multiple attacks, not even simultaneous, in common places, like Joe's Cigar stand, Betty's Hairdo Shoppe, Movie theaters, the local Gas Station blowing up...on every corner of 2 or 3 towns...after they poisoned the coffee pots with anthrax or something....for the previous 2 days...

16 posted on 07/20/2002 10:32:34 AM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
The reason this nation is not yet galvanized with the effort to use military force to unset Saddam Hussein, is that we are waiting for the other shoe to drop.

That's a possible explanation, except that the "other shoe" we are waiting to drop could be Iran. Events seem to be accelerating there, and U.S. intelligence may indicate (and may be helping) a near-term revolution and overthrow of the theocracy. If that is indeed eminent, we don't want to joggle their elbows just before it happens by engaging in a war in neighboring Iraq, and thereby risk short-circuiting the elimination of a major center of terrorism.

17 posted on 07/20/2002 10:41:15 AM PDT by dpwiener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
Well, that'll be easily verifiable.
18 posted on 07/20/2002 11:03:31 AM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
I dont think the ultimate attack is going to be conventional. I think it will be Nuclear...there are simply too many ways to get a Nuclear device into proximity. Top it off with having the UN and all of the diplomatic immunity for individuals from the middle east and to me it simply is a matter of time and intent. The intent is apparent....all that remains is time. At least that is my take.
19 posted on 07/20/2002 11:48:37 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dpwiener
I disagree. I would think that a military enforced regime change in Baghdad would help to fuel the fires of change in Iran. As long as our sabre rattling against Iran is perceived to be focused on the religous government and not the Iranian people.
20 posted on 07/20/2002 11:52:46 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson