U.S.A. to Invade Iraq

CNN reports that the U.S. plan to invade Iraq are now highly evolved . I first heard news of the invasion yesterday and was waiting for further information.

What are your thoughts?


I've heard that 250,000 American troops are to be deployed by air, land & sea.

See last post.

 

From what I was reading, they have a basic battle plan, but havent even approached other countries that would be used as staging grounds for an attack.

I therefore think that their plans arent overly advanced.

 

I disagree. I feel the release of such information means that the invasion is imminent!

 

I think we need to do it, get it over with, shoot Saddam Hussein in his ugly face. After our victory we grant Iraqi Kuridstan independence giving us a valuable ally that has oil (no matter what Iraq does from here on, we have Kurdish oil)

But I am also looking at the possibility of Iran joining Iraq, I am quite aware that these nations hate eachother but they remember the "Axis of Evil" speech all to well, and know Dubya has lumped them together. It is possible to see Syria and Lebanon joining Iraq as well, though less likely. If this happens I do believe the US will have a victory, a costly one. Unlike the USSR the US doesnt try to overwhelm the enemy until they collapse, we try to kill more than we lose and have smarter weapons.

What could happen? Most likely Israel would take care of Lebanon and defend itself against Syria, Turkey (who isn't fond of Syria anyway) will probably invade and defeat the Syrian army. The US will defeat Iraq/Iran with an Iraqi rebel being placed as President, and the son of the last Shah being named Shah of Iran. The US/UN will probably set up a Kurdish state from territory lost by Syria, Iraq, and Iran; Turkey might accept this and might give some land to the Kurds in exchange for rights to the Euphrates river damning (which Iraq protested), not too mention Kurdistan will set up a nice little buffer zone between Iraq and Turkey.

 

I think we need to do it, get it over with, shoot Saddam Hussein in his ugly face. After our victory we grant Iraqi Kuridstan independence giving us a valuable ally that has oil (no matter what Iraq does from here on, we have Kurdish oil)

That's a big "if", remember that.

 

Good point.

 

Iraq used to be our ally, we gave them weapons to fight Iran. Osama Bin Laden used to be our ally, we gave him and his friends weapons to fight the Russians.

Don't count on the Kurds giving us a deal on oil.

 

Well, it's about time. The intention was announced months in advance, giving Saddam ample time to prepare.

 

On the BBC or NPR they were talking about how the UN was trying to negotiate with Iraq, but then sounding so snooty because Bush and his "hawkish" millitary solutions wanted to just get rid Saddam. Figures.

 

About #$%@in' time.

 

I think we will be invading Iraq, in fact I think it's a certainty. However, I don't see it happening for a for months, mabye not until September. Though, with things relativly calm in Isreal right now, this might be the time to do it.

DarthNut,
the nuttiest guy around.

 

For the second time in our lives DN I agree with you. The World must be coming to an end.

I do not agree with you about the September timeframe. Once you've told someone you going to kick his arse, you'd be wise to move quickly before they develop further defenses or become "offensive".

 

I think its time Bush stops pretending that the Kurds are friends of the US for any reason other then their common enemy in Saddam. Most Kurdish groups with any clout in the region are fundamentalist muslims, and we have a long track record of not being loved by such groups.

Indeed, while Saddam may be a whacko, he is at least a secular leader, and as such he is much less dangerous then some of the fundie whackos. I would suggest that we simply keep him in power, with the occasional airstrike to destroy any practical military capability on his part. It beats having another Kohmeneni there.

Unfortunately, Bush either does not care about the long-term effects or does not realize them (most likely the former). He will time this invasion for sometime before the 2002 elections in an attempt to give the Republicans an advantage and to make the American public forget about all the unemployment benefits that are due to expire Nov 1.

 

I think it would be a great thing to get So-Damn-Insane out of power. I'm pretty sure the U.S. could do it. A problem would be setting up a gov't friendly to the West.

 

I disagree. I feel the release of such information means that the invasion is imminent!

The information wasn't released, it was leaked by some genius who didn't think describing the entire battle plan before we were ready to strike would harm us. Well we've lost the element of surprise.

And no, you can't mobilize that many troops and such and get 8 countries to suddenly decide to let you launch from their soil overnight.

We still got a few months before we take down Saddam.

 

A problem would be setting up a gov't friendly to the West.


Therein lies the problem. No such group exists within Iraq.

 

What about the iraqi congress that resides in Britain?

 

I'd like to know why everybody thinks that Saddam is "insane", he's ruthless sure, but not insane.

First everybody's his friend, then he makes a mistake by attacking Kuweit and suddenly he's and "insane" dictator?

ha.

 

I'd like to know why everybody thinks that Saddam is "insane", he's ruthless sure, but not insane.


Indeed, Saddam is smart. He wants to stay in power and will whatever is necessary to stay in power. He will bend to weapons inspection sooner or later.

Even if Bush does attack (which would require a local coalition that would have to include Arab states) Saddam knows what to do. If it gets that desperate, he'll send SCUDs to Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifia. With Arafat in charge, that'll definately get a retaliation. The Saudis will then be seen as on the side of Israel and POOF!, instant crisis!

 

This is a prime example of the hypocritical foreign policy of the U.S. Make a friend in Hussein in the '80's, help him ammass a large military force, then turn around and slap him when he actually uses it.

The CIA also convinced the Kurds in the North to rise up and fight him. Then when they did, the U.S. stepped back and didn't help.

I say they carve Iraq up between the Shiites in the South and the Kurds in the North.

 

Attacking Iraq without provokation will probably will be the worst mistake Bush will ever make. Having said that I would like to see Saddam removed from power. Attacking Iraq will only lead to full-scale war in the middle east. Sadly it also may lead to many more days like September 11 as an attack will only incite and provoke many more Islamic extremists.

The "Axis of Evil" speech was one of the stupidest statements ive ever heard by a world figure. Its comments like that which make people laugh and sneer at Bush and America`s 'wonderful' foreign policies.

 

'ehhh.....Saddam Hussein doesn't practice Islam as likes to be portrayed. He's not fanatically about religion, just his own power. So I really don't see this inciting anything.

 

Correct. Many fundamentalists in the region would support Hussein's ouster. Iran is no fan of Saddam, neither is Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.

 

Getting countries to help us would be no problem. You'd just have to guarantee the Arab countries that you wouldn't lose. I think they fear Saddam.

Anyways, the US foreign policy isn't hypocritical on Saddam. In the 80s we befriended him. But then he turned around and invaded Kuwait, a very US friendly nation. So who stabbed who in the back?

 

Yeah, so I doubt losing one lame dictator is going to make these people mad. Might even give them hope. The Mullah's in Iran have supposedly taken power from their own leader now. I wonder if and when Iraq is attacked if Iran will be too....