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

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

[Amelia]

It's a Silent War. Saddam knows it's happening, but he can't do anything about it.

Oddly enough, our press is reporting the bits and pieces, but they aren't connecting the dots.

[Miss Marple]

Now why do you think they aren't connecting the dots?

Are they being patriotic?

Or obtuse?

Or deliberately ignoring it until they can figure out a way to criticize it?

[Amelia]

Good question, and I haven't figured out the answer yet. I'd like to think they are being patriotic, but that doesn't really fit with their recent history.

Then again, 9/11 combined with anthrax attacks on members of the press might have driven them to some sort of realization that protecting our country also means protecting themselves....

Or they could be so obtuse that unless they are spoonfed all of it, they don't bother to look and connect the pieces, which seems to be true for many of them.

[Dog Gone]

Already, 1,800 US troops (mostly Special Forces) are inside Iraq, at least since the end of March and, in fact, units there were visited two months ago by CIA director George Tenet during a side trip from Israel and Palestine.

[Miss Marple]

I must admit that that paragraph is the one that souded entirely too Debka-like for me. Some of these troop deployments are accurate. Others I don't know about.

But Tenet in Iraq? He doesn't seem to me to be the type to take such a risk, and furthermore I don't see the administration as taking such a risk as allowing someone like that into enemy territory.

President Bush better make another one of those speeches telling us how patient we are, because I am gettting a bit antsy. LOL!

[LibWhacker]

If there is even one Iraqi general who gives a tinker's damn about his army, now would be a good time to walk into the office next door and put a bullet in Saddam's head.

[illstillbe]

Thank you for bringing this article to my attention, Miss Marple. And I agree ... very informative ... as the President has stated ... this war is unlike any fought before ...

section9 ..."Why worry about basing rights when you've siezed the northern tier of the country ..."

Indeed ... very good point ... seems thinking out of the box keeps your from being boxed in ...

[The Great Satan]

Why worry about basing rights when you've siezed the northern tier of the country? They become your main base.

Saddam's strategy is all-or-nothing. There is absolutely nothing he can do to stop us from dismembering his country. And, when he's left ruling over the rump of a country -- and I'm guessing maybe we're talking early 2004 now -- who is going to want to stick around in Baghdad, knowing what's next on the menu?

When Ariel Sharon said, months ago, that Israeli policy was to "isolate" Arafat, he was describing a trial run, a prototype for the end game. All this was figured out in September-October last year. They looked at the chess board, they looked at our assets, they looked at his assets, and they figured out what to do about it. And, no, nothing the New York Times can come up with is going to make a lick of difference to what happens next.

[RightWhale]

non-rusted metal from Babylon 4000 years old.

Meteoric iron has this characteristic. Back then, meteoric iron was the preferred iron, just pick it up off the ground. They progressed to mining iron ore when this source gave out even though smelted iron is prone to rust. Nickel, too, can come from old meteorite hits. Canadian nickels seem to be meteoric nickel.

[foreshadowed at waco]

Today on Meet the Press Henry Kissinger said that before Bush 41 got commitments for a coalition in the Gulf War that he had put almost all the military in place. Kissinger said that once everything is set up that many Euros will jump on board.

[maquiladora]

Kissinger said that once everything is set up that many Euros will jump on board.

I think that despite what weve heard recently, the Germans will come on board.

[crystalk]

I would agree with those who say that Germany is going to shift and be far more on our side, in part due to an election. Maybe many countries, not just Iraq, need a "regime change."

I would expect Germany to be the most reliable European ally over the next generation. Britain is going to be too busy dealing with the social and racial catastrophe it has created for itself.

There'll always be an England? Don't bet on it!

[EBUCK]

You don't think we should have a declaration of war "before" we invade Iraq? Not that I don't think he deserves it. He certainly does IMO. But a formal declaration of war would go a long was towards showing that the government is ruled by the Constitution.

EBUCK

[bert]

Steve Forbes wrote a piece in December '01 describing much of the above.

The account of the Turkish incursion and capture of an Iraqui air base was mentioned in an article here but I strained to find a report on Fox News or other USA source.

it seems the American press has clammed up.

[bert]

....All possible means will be used to isolate Saddam....

Great thought. So its not the Afgan Model or the Gulf model or the Graneda model.... it's the Nablus model

[bert]

They become your main base.

I think The Troops are now in Afganistan along with a 3 star Corps commander.

[gitmo]

The Congress shall have Power To ...
Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

I don't see where the constitution makes a Congressional declaration of war a prerequisite to waging war. In this case, the Congress gave the President approval to pursue war against any nations or people he determines are connected with terrorist activities against the United States.

[EBUCK]

I don't see where the constitution makes a Congressional declaration of war a prerequisite to waging war

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Well, in a purely Constitutional sense if congress doesn't do it then the people or states are the only ones with the power to do it.

Congress took the end around. They didn't want to commit themselves to actually having declared war (much like Vietnam) so they prostrated themselves to the pres in essence saying "we don't want the responsibility so here you go, you take the heat". Already they begin to critisize him for doing what they gave him the (unlimited?) power to do.

It would sit a whole lot better with me if they just took it upon themselves to take responsibility and be answerable to us for it.

EBUCK

[maquiladora]

There'll always be an England? Don't bet on it!

Quote of the week.