Iraq: In all but name, the war's on

Asia Times Online ^ | Aug 17, 2002 | Marc Erikson

[Kermit]

Interesting. Not the first place, where I've read that the war has already started. Bush did promise that this would be a war like no other.

[EBUCK]

There are no highfalutin' declarations.

Not that our supreme law of the land would demand such a thing. I mean it's not like the pres has to ask permission to commit our troops and resources to a war or anything, that would of course curb his power and subject him to the people. Wouldn't want that.

EBUCK

[RightWhale]

Good find. It has the ring of accuracy, including improved versions of various reports from other sources such as DEBKA that are normally garbled at best.

[Rocko]

Reference bump.

[Grut]

There are no highfalutin' declarations.

Well, look at it this way: given the quality of our Congress, any declarations they made would be lowfalutin' anyway.

[The Great Satan]

Bush is going to implicate Saddam in 9-11. That has been already been promised, sotto voce, and the leadership will deliver when the time comes to act -- just as Tony Blair promised last month. Bush will also either expose Saddam's attempted anthrax blackmail, or simply allow the phony "Amerithrax" investigation to die on the vine, and let people draw their own conclusions. He is going to ask the Iraqis to hand over Saddam for trial -- which is going to take everyone by surprise, because we are being set up to expect an attack or an invasion. All possible means will be used to isolate Saddam (just as Arafat has been isolated), including military pressure. However, there will be no direct assualt on Baghdad, either by aerial bombardment or ground invasion. Far too dangerous, given Saddam's WMD threat to US civilians. However, there is nothing to stop us from reprising the Afghanistan strategy and gradually lopping off bits of Iraq over a period of 12-48 months, while we build up our civil defenses. Kurdistan would be one obvious place to start the dismemberment. By the end of this process, with the threat of nuclear-biological war at flash-point, Saddam will no longer be able to intimidate people to stay in Baghdad (they are already sweating bullets and leaving in droves), and Saddam will be a leader without a country. Better hope that imprisonment looks better to him than death.

[EBUCK]

Good Call. But I'd still rather have a lowfalutin' declaration than none at all, at least for precedent's sake. We don't want Pres. Hitlery weilding that kind of power on the basis of established precedent alone.

EBUCK

[Aric2000]

If he can prove that Saddam had ANYTHING to do with 9-11, then he has his declaration already. As of 9-28-2001, he got the authorization to do whatever was necessary.

The declaration he has, he just needs to announce the link.

[maquiladora]

In late June, the Turkish foreign ministry reported heavy air traffic of US military transport planes.

American cargo planes are landing and taking off on weekly basis from Deyar and other bases in Turkey.
Theres also a lot of pre-positioning at Incirlik.

Still though, I think we're still quite a while away from any military action.

[maquiladora]

Links to 9/11 is only part of the sell.

The WMD is the big point, but if there's a shred of evidence to 9/11 you can be sure that it'll be used.

[dpwiener]

I've also had similar thoughts. Among the potential problems with an Iraqi invasion are:

(1) Saddam retaliates against Israel and against U.S. military forces with chemical/biological/radiological weapons, because he figures he's a dead man and has nothing to lose;

2) Other Arab countries shut off oil shipments and encourage a new wave of suicide attacks on Israel;

3) World opinion lines up behind Iraq and actively opposes the U.S. (e.g., trade disruptions);

4) Americans around the world are targeted by terrorists (presuming they lack the capability to again attack us in our homeland);

(5) Bush gives up the element of tactical surprise by requesting Congressional authorization or a Declaration of War, or else is heavily criticized at home for failing to do so.

Now none of the above problems are insurmountable, and indeed some are rather unlikely. But if there is no distinct start to the war, but it just slowly increases in intensity, then there is no occasion for any of the above to happen. Of greatest importance is that Saddam might refrain from using WMDs, because he couldn't be sure of his fate and because it would be much harder to rationalize to world opinion (and would certainly precipitate an all-out military offensive by the U.S.).

[mvpel]

They're describing the Iraqi army as "rusting," but somehow they've managed to put together nukes, according to DEBKA. Yeah right.

[okie01]

"All possible means will be used to isolate Saddam (just as Arafat has been isolated), including military pressure."

Not only Arafat, but bin Laden and the Taliban.

Isolating the cancerous cells before conducting the operation has thus far proven a very satisfactory course of treatment.

[Eala]

In late June, the Turkish foreign ministry reported heavy air traffic of US military transport planes.

A couple of days ago a German colleague near Frankfurt mentioned that there has been an unusual amount of air traffic through Frankfurt -- Galaxy transports(troops? materiel?) coming in from the west and leaving to the southeast. Along with other indicators of buildup to war he mentioned was one that surprised me because if he is correct (and if I understand him correctly) it implies German preparations for participation.

[blam]

(from today's Mobile Register)

BUSINESS BRIEFING

Docks Closed-Mouthed About Military Copters

An Undisclosed number of U.S. military helicopters circled downtown Mobile on Thursday and were loaded onto a ship bound for an un-named foreign port, according to Alabama State Docks officials

Dock officials said further information about the shipment was confidential.

(short brief little article)

[Eala]

They're describing the Iraqi army as "rusting," but somehow they've managed to put together nukes, according to DEBKA. Yeah right.

Well, it was the arsenal they said was rusting. But it may be that the nukes might offer him more leeway than more conventional weaponry that, let's be blunt, we can easily afford to take out in short order no matter how much he has it polished up... well, it might seem to him that the money's better spent on nukes.

And it's not like he has to develop the most technologically advanced lightweight and compact nukes. Some really ancient nuke technology such as what we had in the 1950s (remember then? before B-52s, before calculators, before most Freepers) might do just fine.

[the_doc]

Impressive writer, at the very least.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

I've always been a subtle contrarian.

I believe all the European bluster against our impending "war" against Iraq is just a smoke screen to the reality.

That reality says that the Euros are on board.
The Saudis are on board.
The Dems and Pubbies are on board.

The proof of WMDs has been shown to the leaders.

When the time comes, we will all be amazed at the speed and efficiency with which Iraqi opposition will be dispatched.

The plan is to catch the enemy with his pants down.

The battle plan could be called the "Clinton Operation".

[Miss Marple]

This sems to be a fairly accurate summary of what has been going on. I am glad to see a lot of info put together in one place.

[Billy_bob_bob]

So Saddam is playing the role of Monica? Just wondering.