Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gulf war figures question Iraq plan: Schwarzkopf says U.S. needs a coalition
MSNBC ^ | August 16, 2002 | MNSBC

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 ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 next last

1 posted on 08/16/2002 11:22:11 AM PDT by ejdrapes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
I am convinced that all these stories about Republicans against the war with Iraq are nothing but the media's attempt to avoid Bush having war-related 90% approval ratings right before the next election.

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.

2 posted on 08/16/2002 11:28:19 AM PDT by BuddhaBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
Is it time for Bush to speak out on this...with a definitive plan? I'm starting to feel a little uneasy about where the momentum seems to be taking us.
3 posted on 08/16/2002 11:32:33 AM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
The Gulf War Coalition came together because we were going in with or without them. The coalition members made the decision that they should not sit on the sidelines. Even France was there. Even Syria, and the Afghans, were there.

The decision to attack was never hostage to the coalition.

Likewise, it is necessary that we make our plans to do what we are going to do, and our coalition will be built of those countries who decided they do not want to be left out.

In terms of troops, we have enough to do this on our own, but British help would always be appreciated. Canadians too, and we'll buy the bus tickets. French Legionnaires are good in certain situations, if they want in.

Those countries who do not want to help, and this includes EU and Muslim states alike, must be left to wonder what will become of them afterward.
4 posted on 08/16/2002 11:37:31 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
Perle and the Neo 'Con Men' are trying to stampede the nation into a war of their choosing. The American interest is to solve the Israeli-Palestinian dispute pronto. Think beyond the next election - think 50 years and visualize if we will have Germany and Japan type friendly nations.

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.

5 posted on 08/16/2002 11:41:10 AM PDT by ex-snook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
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,” ....Chris Matthews on Thursday that a military campaign without the assistance of Saudi Arabia would be difficult.

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.

6 posted on 08/16/2002 11:45:20 AM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
When you get back to the planet earth, give us a buzz.
7 posted on 08/16/2002 11:52:04 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
Calm down. This ain't Gulf War II. Bush is thinking out of the box and has bigger fish to fry.
8 posted on 08/16/2002 11:53:06 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
I can't believe Stormin Normin is spouting this crap.
9 posted on 08/16/2002 11:54:20 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
...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...

10 posted on 08/16/2002 11:55:18 AM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
Scowcroft...and former President George Bush, warned against moving on Baghdad while the war on terrorism in progress...

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!!

11 posted on 08/16/2002 11:57:46 AM PDT by Psalm 73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always A Marine
I'll bet you when the time comes, those nations I mentioned will be on-board.
12 posted on 08/16/2002 11:58:20 AM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
There is little evidence that Skowcroft has a brain and certainly there is much evidence that he was a perfumed dandy in the military, a warrior he was not.

Now he is tied to Henry Kissinger, of Vietnam fame.

13 posted on 08/16/2002 12:00:01 PM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
I'll bet you when the time comes, those nations I mentioned will be on-board.

Perhaps. However, so far the only people in the world Bush has convinced are his die-hard followers, who would support a war against Canada or Britain if he suggested it.
14 posted on 08/16/2002 12:03:12 PM PDT by Belial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: weikel
I can't believe Stormin Normin is spouting this crap.

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.

15 posted on 08/16/2002 12:03:32 PM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
With all due respect, Gen. Schwarzkopf, what hard evidence do you have that "we don't have a coalition"?

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

16 posted on 08/16/2002 12:04:31 PM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weikel
I can't believe Stormin Normin is spouting this crap.

"Always fighting the last war."

17 posted on 08/16/2002 12:05:30 PM PDT by Stentor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: demlosers
...I'll bet you when the time comes, those nations I mentioned will be on-board.

Perhaps, perhaps not. You stated that these countries were onboard, but vital logistics are not based upon mere assumptions.

19 posted on 08/16/2002 12:08:28 PM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Belial
Perhaps. However, so far the only people in the world Bush has convinced are his die-hard followers, who would support a war against Canada or Britain if he suggested it.

Many of those nation say things for public [Islamic] consumption. Keep an eye on what they do and not what they say.

20 posted on 08/16/2002 12:10:46 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson