Posted on 11/16/2001 1:14:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2
Most people, even on this forum, seem to have forgotten what happened in 91.
The failure to act against Saddam usually is justified by saying
the alliance had no UN mandate to depose Saddam
only to liberate Kuwait.
Furthermore, it is argued, taking Baghdad would be a difficult and costly operation.
However, it probably was unnecessary to take Baghdad,
all that probably was required was
to annihilate Saddam’s elite Republican guard,
his ‘personal bodyguard’ so to speak
while it was in flight,
However, not even this was attempted,
even though everyone expected it and welcomed it
The business of the ‘lack of mandate’ does not hold water
because the alliance had even less of a mandate to annihilate non-combatants
who were fleeing Kuwait on the ‘Highway of Death’
No, the real reason, was that the alliance, the USA included,
did not want to destabilize Iraq!!!!
Quite a joke that seems in retrospect.
Boy, we really have stability now, don’t we!
We had not been attacked and it would have been difficult to carry out a such a war- which would have teken civilian lives and would have been waged against a foe who is a considerably better propagandist than Al~Qaeds and Osama. Half the country and all of the Democrats would have been crying over the spilt 'baby milk' and so forth, and begging for an end to it, jsut as the furor was kicked up over the highway of death.
9/11 showed people what the rest of us knew all along- that if you don't relentlessly pursue your enemies you will hear from them again at a time of their choosing. But without that loss of life so close at home, Americans would still believe we are impervious to harm and would be unwilling to destroy the scum who do that sort of thing.
Here's hoping James Woolsey returns to head the CIA if this is, in fact, the next phase.
I remember how Saddam would not let us in to check out what he had and we were supposed to be allowed . He fought every step , every move that was tired .
Thanks John so much for this.
They were rushing back with their cars and vans filled with loot, stereo sets, appliances, etc.
Maybe this has something to do with it becoming public knowledge now: Asian markets rise on unsubstantiated rumors of bin Laden capture
That being said. I think it was right not to take Baghdad. That would have unnecessarily enraged SA and possibly provoked Iran. The proper course of action would have been to move the Armored/Airborne Corps towards Basra destroying the Republican Guard. Holding Basra in the South for a temporary period would have allowed an effective opposition to get on track and made it impossible for Sadaam to get his oil to market without our saying so.
I think our current Secretary of State is biggest reason this course of action was not attempted. Schwarzkopf, I am pretty sure desired it and was overruled by Powell. Both Bush 41 and 43 listen to their military leaders and if you have the JCS chairman advising against eradication of Sadaam's hold on power you might listen. Bush 41 should have listened to Schwarzkopf (or been given a chance to listen to Norman's arguments). Schwarzkopf knew far more about the region than Powell could ever dream of and I think Norman was well aware of what the Saudis would have wished for. The Saudis hated Hussein for attacking an Arab neighbor.
One little post war story to give my perspective on what the Saudi people may have been thinking. I was driving around in a HMWWV preparing to go back home. I was stopped by a Saudi soldier at a checkpoint. For some reason he wanted to chat. He asked me what I thought of Sadaam in broken English. I basically said he's a creep. In suddenly very precise English he said, "F*&* Sadaam!" I think most Arabs really dislike this guy. This was your average joe Saudi.
Bush 41 had a very hostile congress (and unfortunately never saw their willingness to undermine him) and a JCS chairman that was a political creature with very little command experience. I think Bush 43 inheirited his tenacity from his mom not Old man Bush. I think and hope he will pursue this to the end.
It sure is amazing. Best of all, President Bush has refused to respond to all the naysayers out there like McCain, smart move. Mature. Kinda lets them hang out there to dangle on their own ropes and keeps the dialogue one-sided, fully exposing their need to obstruct or get photo-op time, until each success in our mission to rout terrorism finally tightens the noose end of their rope, choking them shut in their tracks. Hehe.
You have my vote for Quote of the Week - Month -
President Bush has a terrific ability to focus forward and ignore (publicly) those who would drag him down. Remember all the way back to Jan 20. He never commented on the crude departure moves of the previous administration. In fact, I don't think I have ever heard him say the name of the previous president.
I wonder what is going on behind the scenes as a result of Sen Daschles's stupid remarks when discussing getting judges through the consent process. No doubt President Bush, with VP Cheney, etc has a plan. I am just waiting for it to unfold!
You got that right.
They also specialize in re-inventing the wheel. Am I mistaken, or didn't we start in Vietnam with special ops and air support but then get gradually pulled in?
Now we are committing the 'peace' troops in Afghanistan, but they are just what those old boys have really been waiting for. Canadians, Brits, Turks, blue hats. It won't take many flayings for that to turn into an unwelcome business, and all they need to really make life hell is some outsource of new weaponry. Korea maybe through Pakistan or maybe the Chinese set up in some Moslem country. We can't keep the lid on all the fires all the time, especially now that we don't even have two ocean capability as a marker.
Leave it to the Feds to start a bunch of 'fire-breaks' and have one turn into a real burn.
Lord, please make it so!!
Bet the Butcher of Bahgdad ain't sleepin' too restfully these last few nights. Hehehe...
Wouldn't it be kinda nice if the Rangers could kinda herd Osama down Iraq's way?
Perfect excuse for a twofer.
;-)
Rumsfield understand 4th generation war, which is exactly what we're in, what we're seeing in Afghanistan and throughout the war on terror. I don't really understand it myself yet, but I'm still reading. But Rumsfield really, really gets it. He's dragging many in the Pentagon along willy nilly, though.
Shabbat
Annual Selection:
Toledot: Gen. 25.19-28.9.
Malachi 1.1-2.7.
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
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.