Skip to comments.
U.S. campaign to oust Saddam: Effort dubbed 'Rumsfeld Plan'
WorldNetDaily.com ^
| Thursday, November 15, 2001
Posted on 11/16/2001 1:14:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2
GEOSTRATEGY-DIRECT INTELLIGENCE BRIEF
U.S. plans campaign
to oust Saddam
Effort to include bombing, support of opposition forces
Editor's note: WorldNetDaily brings readers exclusive, up-to-the-minute global intelligence news and analysis from Geostrategy-Direct, a new online newsletter edited by veteran journalist Robert Morton and featuring the "Backgrounder" column compiled by Bill Gertz. Geostrategy-Direct is a subscription-based service produced by the publishers of WorldTribune.com, a free news service frequently linked by the editors of WorldNetDaily.
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
The United States plans to launch a campaign to oust Saddam Hussein in Iraq as part of the international campaign against terrorism. The plan calls for U.S. aerial bombing to support anti-Saddam opposition forces in the country.
The plan was revealed by Turkey's Hurriyet newspaper, which reported last week that the so-called "Rumsfeld Plan" – named after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld – calls for setting up a secular, pluralist, democratic Iraq and preserving Iraq's current borders after Saddam is ousted. The newspaper is Turkey's largest circulation daily.
The plan was said to have been discussed during Rumsfeld's trip to Ankara, Turkey, last month.
The newspaper listed the main features of the plan:
- Iraq's territorial integrity will be preserved, and there will be no autonomous regions or federative structures within the country.
- All the various ethnic groups will be represented in the central government that is formed after Saddam's ouster, including Kurds and Turkmens.
- Turkey will enter northern Iraq and obtain a share of the oil at the Karkuk field. Business and foreign trade in Iraq will exceed $50 billion, a key benefit to Turkey. Discussion of the transfer of energy, specifically a natural gas pipeline from Iraq to Turkey, will be a priority.
Subscribe to Geostrategy-Direct.
If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: terrorwar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
To: AuntB; nunya bidness; GrandmaC; Washington_minuteman; tex-oma; buffyt; Grampa Dave...
To: JohnHuang2
Ruminator bump
3
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:45 PM PST
by
PRND21
To: JohnHuang2
Isn't amazing what can happen and how fast it happens when a president simply states the mission and then let's the professionals take over until the mission is complete. No politics, no thought about what others might think; just accomplish the mission and report back when it is completed.
To: a_Turk
ping
5
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:46 PM PST
by
Nogbad
To: JohnHuang2
I was just about to go to bed, but decided to do one more "self search" and found this gem!
This is so awesome!
Iraq has been moving it's troops north, and I was wondering...why?
It looks like Turkey and the Kurds have a new alliance! If this is true, Saddam is in a world of hurt! And, we won't have to use anything other than special forces there, either.
JH2, do you remember when Rummy wanted to "cut" the military and just have a "rapid response" special ops team? He was roundly critized for having that thought!
I think we are seeing it in action.
To: JohnHuang2
The ultimate source of this news is Hurriet, which is a reasonably reliable Turkish newspaper.
Has Rumsfield visited Turkey recently?
I believe he has but I am not certain.
However, I remain somewhat sceptical,
since there has been such a strong US disinformation campaign
intended to keep eyes off Iraq,
why would Rumsfield be blabbing about it to the Turks?
Perhaps he put out some feelers.
Such a plan undoubtedly exists, but whether it will be implemented still is highly uncertain.
7
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:47 PM PST
by
Nogbad
To: connectthedots
No politics, no thought about what others might think; just accomplish the mission and report back when it is completed. Exactly. Had Vietnam been fought that way, that country would be free today.
To: JohnHuang2
"Exactly. Had Vietnam been fought that way, that country would be free today."
Don't get me started. GGRRRRR
To: dixiechick2000
I think we are seeing it in action.Indeed we are, my friend =^)
To: JohnHuang2
Thanksgiving coming early this year, and all these cute turkey stories...its enough to warm the cockles of my heart.
11
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:47 PM PST
by
crystalk
To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
hehehe...
A hardy Good mornin' to ya, amigo =^)
To: RummyChick
ping
To: JohnHuang2
Very good...I just posted on another thread about ObL that while we are paying so much attention to that little wheasel (however you spell weasel) that we had better be watching Iraq...(they have some pretty large stockpiles of bio and chem weapons.)
And some major training camps for terrorists.
14
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:55 PM PST
by
Syncro
To: dixiechick2000; JohnHuang2; Alamo-Girl; amom; Yellow Rose of Texas
"JH2, do you remember when Rummy wanted to "cut" the military and just have a "rapid response" special ops team?
He was roundly critized for having that thought!"
I think we have had enough cuts in the military since the late 80's and on, to do more now will further hinder the ability of the US Military. It takes alot of "back support" military for the "front line" to be able to perform and do it's job.
Congress in Sept of this year voted to close more bases. There was really no opposition votes to even stop it.
That will be the 5th round of base closing since 1989 when the big cuts in the military began.
I'm sure we have plenty of federal government jobs in other sectors that can have the fat trimmed
before we yet again carve into the military.
For example all that staff and money the ESA uses should be eliminated once and for all.
Let's start building up the military, not reducing it. 12 years of cutback after cutback is enough.
We just "found" BILLIONS of dollars to give the airlines, why not at least match that amount for our troops.
In March of this year the Coast Guard budget was cut and now we see the results of that judgement.
Don't get me wrong,
I'm not critizing Rumsfeld, I'm just asking why the military gets the cutbacks while the rest of the federal machine gets fatter.
To: JohnHuang2
This is just a general interest question for my own information, so if anyone can help, I would appreciate it.
Why didn`t we take out Saddam back in `91 when we on his back doorstep?
16
posted on
11/16/2001 1:14:56 PM PST
by
Slapper
To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Don't get me wrong, I'm not critizing Rumsfeld, He's/they're doing an outstanding job alright. But if he/they deserve criticism, he/they should be criticized and we shouldn't apologize for it.....ever.
To: Slapper
I believe it was because #41 bowed to pressure of the Arabs in the alliance. The nation felt, from my own recon and what I have read / talked with others about, that we failed in our full mission when we stopped short of Baghdad. Yes, Kuwait was liberated and atrocities there ceased. Yes, saddam's army was significantly reduced and his power to aggress was cut down. But he was left in power to do God knows how much mischief and evil. I am just extremely thankful that #43 has a better coalition under better terms and with a better end goal.
To: lewislynn
"But if he/they deserve criticism, he/they should be criticized and we shouldn't apologize for it.....ever."
I agree but to place the blame solely on Rumsfeld is not appropriate.
Congress has been feeding off the military for at least the last 12 years to bolster junk programs like the ESA etc.
That, in my opinion, is where the problem is.
Makes no difference if the Republicans or Democrats are the majority, the result is always the same.
To: JohnHuang2
Problem ain't nothin' some napalm runs, heavy bombing followed by search and destroy missions can't solve.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
