WHAT EXACTLY IS BUSH WAITING FOR AND WHY HASN'T THIS WAR STARTED ALREADY?

February 26, 2003 | Myself

[Megalomaniac]

Not to be critical of Bush becuase i believe he's doing a fantastic job on all fronts but what is he waiting for? Troops are in place, Ships are in place and everything appears to be a go but whats holding everything up? The UN? The Inspectors? What is it? Your thoughts please.

[mass55th]

We have to unload the troop ships near Turkey.

Yes, and I believe I just heard on Greta's show that it will take approximately 5-7days to put the tanks they are unloading, in place.

[2rightsleftcoast]

I hope it's soon. Arrest all ME visa expired visitors.
Deport asap.
God Bless President Bush and our troops.

[mass55th]

The recent refusal of Iraq to destroy the missiles helps to garner world opinion also which the latest Blix moves have accomplished.

Also, since Sadaam has refused to destroy these missiles, it's obvious that he's never destroyed any of the other stuff either. Why start now? Anybody, and I can think of a number of morons on the left, who actually thinks that Iraq has destroyed all their WMD is kidding themselves. This guy just proved to us in his refusal to destroy these missiles, that he's surely never destroyed any of the other stuff he's got.

[BlackVeil]

Some people say that - that it is all bluff and there will be no war. It is also unclear - if you sweep away the propaganda - why Iraq would be the target of this war. List all the factors on paper, and they ought to be slamming either Saudi Arabia or Iran. However, they have apparently decided not to. And for even more obscure reasons, the US has decided to increase foreign aid to North Korea, which is waving nuclear weapons around.

These are very strange days, in terms of foreign relations.

I have heard that for symbolic reasons, they are waiting for 3 March - 03/03/03 - to launch the war. That is when the moon is in recess, and the last day before the Islamic New Year. But it is very odd that they would wait this long, rather than last year, in December. Then the weather would have been much better. Dreadful heat building up from now on and dust storms in April.

[In mourning for six years]

I hope it's soon also, but with sooooo many enemies waiting to pounce on the slightest mistake, our President has to be absolutely sure everything is in order. God Bless our troops and the Commander-in-Chief!

[Jeff Chandler]

since Sadaam has refused to destroy these missiles, it's obvious that he's never destroyed any of the other stuff either.

Maybe if we proposed a UN resolution he'd destroy them. Waddaya think?

[mikegi]

I thought the same thing before our attack on Afghanistan. It turned out that we were very busy in the background connecting up with the Northern Alliance and getting all the support structure in place (rescue forces, etc.).

As for Iraq, here's a couple of possibilities:

1) Rumsfeld vs. Franks. According to press reports, Rumsfeld wanted us to use a smaller, high mobility force to take over Iraq. Franks wanted a large, conventional force. Franks won. It's taking us a long time to get this large force in place.

2) Working on defections. I suspect we've been working on Iraqi military commanders in the field, trying to make arrangements for their rapid surrender when hostilities begin. More time gives us the ability to coax more arrangements.


My guess is that #1 is most likely. I was discussing the various Iraq invasion plans with my father the other day (he's a retired USAF MAC navigator). I preferred the Rumsfeld plan because our air power could crush any Iraqi military threat. He likes Frank's large force because we'll still do the air bombardment PLUS invade with a large army. His idea is that Iraqis may believe they could survive a bombardment and small army but when they see that the bombardment will be followed by a massive invasion, they'll surrender quicker.

My two cents.

[2rightsleftcoast]

You are right. Thank God we have President Bush.
Let's Roll!

[WFTR]

He's letting the other side (in all of its forms) stew on these same questions.

Texas Wasn't Kuwait
Bill

[mass55th]

"Maybe if we proposed a UN resolution he'd destroy them. Waddaya think?"

The UN could produce a resolution ordering Sadaam to wipe himself after he takes a crap. Of course he'd refuse and the UN would fail to enforce it's own resolution.

[foreverfree]

given the tone of Bush's speech tonight..clearly it won't be long.

I watched the speech tonight on FNC. The local ABC and CBS affiliates carried it also. The local NBC station did not, however, airing "Inside Edition" and "Hollywood Squares".

foreverfree