Posted on 08/16/2002 11:22:11 AM PDT by ejdrapes
http://www.msnbc.com/news/788858.asp
Key figures involved in the Persian Gulf War have questioned America’s preparedness for another attack on Iraq. Retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft say international support is critical for a campaign to remove Saddam Hussein from power.
SCHWARZKOPF, SPEAKING on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” also argued that the United States will need better intelligence before it attempts a “regime change” in Iraq. He noted that during the Persian Gulf War, when he led the international coalition that defeated Iraq, the military was never able to locate Saddam Hussein. Schwarzkopf commanded a force that involved more than 40 nations in 1991 and the general said a coalition in favor of ousting Saddam was essential. “We have to have that kind of support,” he said. Schwarzkopf told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on Thursday that a military campaign without the assistance of Saudi Arabia would be difficult. More than 200,000 American troops were based in the desert kingdom during the 1991 war but the Saudi leaders have refused to help in a new attack on Iraq.
Separately, Scowcroft, a former national security adviser to President Gerald Ford and former President George Bush, warned against moving on Baghdad while the war on terrorism in progress. In the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, he wrote there was little evidence linking Saddam to terrorist organizations and “he is unlikely to risk his investment in weapons of mass destruction, much less his country, by handing such weapons to terrorists who would use them for their own purposes.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
Were the Republicans not in a position to take over ALL of Congress, and start instituting their agenda next year, I think the media would be all for getting rid of Saddam.
Bush, the Elder, left a coalition of the Islam nations that are now on Perle's hit list. His son and Clinton have dissipated the coalition and made the USA suspect throughout the world. All in 10 years. Bring back the grown-ups. Bush, the Younger, needs to be exorcised.
A follow up question should have been asked by Wussy Chrissy to Schwarzkopf: So we need a host nation base from which to execute the invasion, not allies to help take part in the attack? The answer: Yes. We already do have Kuwait, Turkey, Qatar, Bahrain, and Jordan. Saudi Arabia would help, but is not essential this time.
It seems picky these days to bring up such an arcane issue as national sovereignty, but none of the Gulf nations will permit us to launch an unprovoked attack on Iraq from their territories. Turkey might, but it borders on Iraq's west, far from the Persian Gulf. Warfare is not magic...
HELLO - this is another battle in the same war on terrorism, it's PART OF the war we are fighting.
That's like saying we should deal with the Solomon Islands and other Pacific islands after Japan is defeatd, or we'll liberate France after we have defeated the Nazi's!!
Now he is tied to Henry Kissinger, of Vietnam fame.
It's not crap, and the general is not merely spouting. When he speaks on this issue, he is speaking for most of the senior general officers who have advised against an unprovoked attack on Iraq, but who cannot speak publicly. While war is favored by suited men without military backgrounds, military men are strongly against it.
By the way, are we to believe that Dick Armey has also lost his mind because he is also expressing his principled opposition to attacking Iraq? When respected leaders disagree, it might be wise to carefully examine the issue -- and not merely assail the personalities.
Middle eastern leaders say one thing for their own public's consumption and certainly may be saying something entirely different to President Bush and his close advisors. I can't conceive of the US military being sent to battle without the necessary ducks lined up.
I recall long before Desert Storm, many ME countries were blathering about staying out of it, and ended up assisting us, overtly or covertly.
With all due respect, Mr. Scowcroft, what hard evidence do you have that "there is little evidence linking Saddam with terrorists"?
The President and Defense Secretary Rummy beg to differ with you, and they're not telling you or anyone what it is. Does this miff you? It will be revealed at the proper time, I'm sure.
Remember, esteemed gentlemen, Pres. Bush told us a long time ago that the war on terrorism will be a DIFFERENT kind of war, that things will often not be as they seem, that things will not be done as they were in traditional warfare, and that things that are up will be down, and things that are down will be up.
Oops, strike that last clause.......wrong guy!
Leni
"Always fighting the last war."
Perhaps, perhaps not. You stated that these countries were onboard, but vital logistics are not based upon mere assumptions.
Many of those nation say things for public [Islamic] consumption. Keep an eye on what they do and not what they say.
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.