Skip to comments.
New strategies for Gulf War II: Generals devise ways Iraqis can surrender, spare infrastructure
SF Chronicle ^
| 3-11-03
| Michael R. Gordon, New York Times
Posted on 03/11/2003 4:55:56 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:42:00 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Camp Doha, Kuwait -- American and British commanders say that they are devising a strategy intended to defeat the Iraqi military without completely destroying it, and to limit damage to Iraq's infrastructure.
Lt. Gen. David McKiernan, the commander of land forces if the United States leads an invasion of Iraq, said he and other commanders were devising procedures for Iraqi units to signal their intention to stay out of the war.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Canada; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Germany; Government; Israel; Japan; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Russia; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: av8bharriers; campdoha; jamestconway; warlist
To: Oldeconomybuyer
But you have to understand that you are out of this, and you are part of the new Iraq.An interesting way of handling an enemy. Vichy France comes to mind.
The Iraqi military must have vivid memories of the last time.
To: Oldeconomybuyer
I don't think this has ever been done before.
I'm trying hard to convince a couple of liberal friends that we're not going in ready to roast and eat Iraqi babies. Maybe it'll be our generals and troops who really do the convincing.
3
posted on
03/11/2003 5:33:07 AM PST
by
ChemistCat
(Zen and the benzene ring)
To: ChemistCat
Ask your friends how they feel about the Iraqi babies and mothers Saddam Hussein gassed.
4
posted on
03/11/2003 5:43:54 AM PST
by
Coop
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Another example of American ingenuity and "stratergy". My guess is that it will prove pretty viable and reduce casualties on both sides (especially since some of the Iraqi Army has tried to jump the gun and surrender early).
5
posted on
03/11/2003 5:49:07 AM PST
by
trebb
To: Tom Bombadil; Oldeconomybuyer
capitulate and take care of their own troops in something other than a prisoner of war camp," Conway said. "That makes it easier on them and makes it easier on us. We can say: ' . . . [Go along and get along], and you are part of the new Iraq.' " "Be reasonable--do it MY way!
To: trebb; hchutch
some of the Iraqi Army has tried to jump the gun and surrender earlyTheir biggest allies are the French...what do you expect? :o)
7
posted on
03/11/2003 6:05:25 AM PST
by
Poohbah
(Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
To: *war_list
8
posted on
03/11/2003 6:08:31 AM PST
by
Free the USA
(Stooge for the Rich)
To: Poohbah; trebb; Dog; section9; Grampa Dave; Miss Marple
Thankfully, they seem to be following the yellow-streak example of Frank Jack Fletcher. Hard part's gonna be Baghdad (Tikrit gets the Sir Arthur Harris treatment, as little reminder to Kim Jong-Il what will happen if he decides to use that artillery he has targeted on Seoul), but if the script kiddies and crackers react as I think they will to the FBI's warning about hacktivism, then Baghdad might not be so hard after all - I doubt the Republican Guard will fight too hard if their paychecks bounce.
9
posted on
03/11/2003 7:07:57 AM PST
by
hchutch
("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: Coop
I can't convince them that SH has done things like that--they see it as propaganda. They answer the question with a question--why haven't we gone after Saudi Arabia, why haven't we gone after North Korea...blah blah blah. They are GOOD PEOPLE but on this they are completely blind.
They say we're going to leave ourselves open to terrorism if we attack SH. I say that indicates that there is indeed a link between SH and the terrorists. They say the whole Arab world will rise up against us--I tell them that OPEC stands willing to supply our oil needs for the war. I ask them whom we were bombing September 10, 2001, that made us deserve 9/11. What it really comes down to is, we're evil for supporting Israel. :SIGH:
If the Palestinians ever get a real state it will be because we supported THEM. We have restrained Israel time and time again. But none of the liberals gets that.
11
posted on
03/11/2003 7:19:16 AM PST
by
ChemistCat
(Zen and the benzene ring)
To: Poohbah
Their biggest allies are the French...what do you expect? :o)
To: hchutch
To those overly concerned about the vote in the UN. Just relax.
If the French/German/Russian/Whores veto or say no, GW just states that the UN has made itself irrelevant. Later he announces that Operation Freedom for the Iraqis is on.
If they vote yes, he does the same thing that the war has started.
It doesn't matter we started the war about two weeks ago.
We are running 500 to 800 sorties each day over Iraq. Our specops, the UKS and the Aussies are on the sands of Iraq.
The Marines are running people and equipment through the cut fence on the DMZ in Kuwait. We have had bases with the Turks in N. Iraq for about a year.
French Diplomacy Is A Lilliputian Nuisance
By GEORGE F. WILL
March 10 2003
The war against Iraq has begun - much as America's war against Nazi Germany really began months before Pearl Harbor and Hitler's Dec. 11 declaration of war on America. It began when President Roosevelt ordered aggressive patrolling by the U.S. Navy against German submarines in the North Atlantic.
The Second Gulf War was underway weeks ago, with special operations forces in Iraq and U.S. and U.K. aircraft expanding their target lists in the name of enforcing no-fly zones. Soon the bow wave created by the movement of the great ship America into full-scale war will wash away Lilliputian nuisances, such as French diplomacy.
Excerpted. For Will's full article:
http://www.ctnow.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-will0310.artmar10,0,7204557.story?coll=hc%2Dheadlines%2Doped
13
posted on
03/11/2003 7:26:06 AM PST
by
Grampa Dave
(Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
To: Grampa Dave
I'm not convinced the Russians will veto.
My money is still on an abstention. Putin has said no veto, I don't know WTF Ivanov's up to.
14
posted on
03/11/2003 7:32:46 AM PST
by
hchutch
("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
To: hchutch
It doesn't matter.
If the resolution is vetoed, GW will come on the TV and announce that he gave the UN all this time to do their job. Since they didn't, the war is on.
If they approve the resolution, GW will come on TV and say that now that the UN has approved the War, the war is on.
GW wants an official body count of who is with us, and who is against us re the nations in the Security Council. The vote will show this. That is what he is waiting for.
In the meantime the war has been started and will continue.
15
posted on
03/11/2003 7:37:44 AM PST
by
Grampa Dave
(Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
To: ChemistCat
They answer the question with a questionThe standard response of one who has no real answer (a.k.a. a liberal).
why haven't we gone after Saudi Arabia, why haven't we gone after North Korea...blah blah blah.
Tell them we're going in priority order, and Iraq has a twelve-year head start of violating truces, 17 UNSC resolutions, attempted assassination of a U.S. President, and involvement in the first World Trade Center bombing.
After all that your "friends" will probably huff, call you a warmonger, and stomp off.
If they are still around, ask them where they were when the Impeached Rapist was doing the Serbia thing to distract everyone from his impeachment.
16
posted on
03/11/2003 8:21:31 AM PST
by
Coop
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