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

Skip to comments.

Senator: Bush will order iraq attack 'fairly soon', attack is 'immenent'
Fox News

Posted on 08/22/2002 2:20:58 PM PDT by StopDemocratsDotCom

Senator InHofe (R-OK): Bush will order iraq attack 'fairly soon', attack is 'immenent'.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 341-353 next last
To: Militiaman7
...if the politicians would conduct themselves with a little security in mind maybe plans and operations wouldn't be telegraphed to the enemy.

Politicians don't seem to care much about the safety of our troops. Many of them have never served and have never faced enemy fire before.

281 posted on 08/23/2002 12:45:29 AM PDT by SwordofTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: antiLiberalCrusader
Where are our boys at right now?

That is the question of the hour for our enemies ain't it...
282 posted on 08/23/2002 12:49:46 AM PDT by Robert_Paulson2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
I don't KNOW... but if they were our guys, or allies of our team... kudos fellas, heck of a job you did. Nice Cleaning... New York sends its love... keep up the good work.
283 posted on 08/23/2002 12:51:40 AM PDT by Robert_Paulson2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
:-)
284 posted on 08/23/2002 12:56:18 AM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: crystalk
I think it was a warning to Palestinians not to try to make any separate deal with the USA/Israel/West without him, Saddam, doing so first.

Very astute. I say that because I had the same thought last night. LOL Just as Israel was talking to the PLO and a withdrawal from Bethlehem had started, this guy was killed and IMMEDIATELY hostilities resumed. Saddam cannot afford any lowering of the tension in Israel while he is still a target and Arafat heard the message loud and clear.

285 posted on 08/23/2002 1:15:03 AM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
That's all well and good and I hope no disrespect towards Christianity was taken because none was intended, but what I was getting at is how to take the Senator's words. Can you take a stab at deciphering them? I mean what do his words mean definitively do you suppose? I mean, he need not have spoken at all. Since he has chosen to- what do you think he had in mind?

You see, it seems lately there has been a lot of chatter about SpecOps troops already in Iraq carrying out missions as well as a report about engineers in the north of Iraq actually building air bases. One "option" for Iraq was the "Afghanistan method"- using SpecOps, local opposition troops and air power to bring about defeat. The advisor to the President who championed this view resigned. Could it be that he actually only "resigned" to create a public ruse inferring that Dubya was displeased with that option when that is the option we are truly going with?

If so, I wonder if the Senator's words are a reference to this with some small bit of knowledge? Ya gotta admit, if this is what Dubya is doing, it would be- well- "Brilliant" is the only word that comes to mind. Building airstrips inside the country you mean to strike and then using them when no other country wants to let you stage from their borders? Whoowhee! That takes big brass ones- but it would work, if done properly. What would all the naysayers have to say about that?

It's probably too farfetched but then again there are a sizable amount of articles lately pointing to some meaningful logistical buildup in Turkey coupled with reports of SpecOps troops and Turkish troops coming down from the north to make this happen. Turkey has a key interest in all this. They want to make certain the Kurds don't get too much of an advantage in the region. It sounds crazy but it is plausible.

286 posted on 08/23/2002 1:28:38 AM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: billhilly
Agreed. Quite possibly looking for movement of mobile laboratories, etc. with our eyes in the sky. We will undoubtedly get Saddam to flinch a number of times prior to war in an effort to get him to reveal himself in case he pulls a "let the weapons inspectors back in" maneuver.
287 posted on 08/23/2002 1:47:30 AM PDT by Rockitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
This war talk might be an attempt to encourage the natives (military) to just shoot Saddam and save themselves a lot of trouble with us.

It seems the word for the era is "regime change" and Iraq is up to bat, now after the Afghanistan effort.

Remember the phrase "at a time of our chosing." Most would agree that if Saddam can be taken down, without massive US military effort, so much the better (saves our brave people's lives).

Iraq's military would be wise to do it, and save many Iraqi lives.

Of course, all the Iraq talk could be diversion, too. If so, where, then?

288 posted on 08/23/2002 2:04:52 AM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
No one really knows!!! Golly, I love this president!!!
289 posted on 08/23/2002 2:05:46 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lsee
If the senator is leaking, he will soon be in deep trouble. I've heard Bush detests this kind of behavior.

Bush won't do anything to the senator. Bush wants Saddam guessing, regardless of the senator's motives.

Personally, it looks like yet another role in the big propaganda play, and Bush must be having the time of his life watching the dominate media squirming in their seats wondering what is really going on.

290 posted on 08/23/2002 2:13:46 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Militiaman7
doesn"t matter what I chose to believe. Any information that could in the least way aid the enemy is IMHO wrong.

First, you don't know if it helps or confuses Saddam.

Second, this propaganda war has nothing to do with Sadddam, but is simply Bush messing with CNN et al. And Bush is winning by a country mile.

291 posted on 08/23/2002 2:20:42 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Seriously Saddam has to be running so scared right now it isn't funny.

I don't know. I am laughing pretty hard right now...

292 posted on 08/23/2002 2:22:27 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
If you want to totally overwork and blind swipe Iraqi intelligence, how many people do you have like InHofe to pick from to make a statement like this to the press? President Bush said that this war would include disinformation and we are seeing it. The only trouble is that "we" don't know if this is real or not. We are just as much in the dark as Iraqi intel.
293 posted on 08/23/2002 2:38:21 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: happytobealive
Will all you "attack at any moment" people please explain how George can avoid getting Congress' approval.

By messing with Saddam's mind so much that Saddam preempts, giving Bush the pretext to go to war immediately.

294 posted on 08/23/2002 2:47:48 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: happytobealive
Would George WANT to get approval from Congress so that if something goes wrong there'll be blame to go around?

If Iraq struck first, no. There would be no time. Bush would have to retaliate immediately.

I would have no trouble believing that Bush wants to mess with Saddam's mind so that Saddam strikes first, handing Bush the pretext he needs for immediate action without anyone's approval. This would save both Bush and Congress if something went bad. Saddam would be blamed for having started the mess, particularly at a time when Bush is sounding more and more like he is "heeding" the voices of European Appeasers.

295 posted on 08/23/2002 3:03:54 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: gunshy
"If GOD were really with us, he would not have allowed 911 to happen. "

Wrong.

296 posted on 08/23/2002 3:16:51 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
God doesn't prevent human actions,

Wrong.

297 posted on 08/23/2002 3:20:28 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: gunshy
Then how can we tell if GOD is on our side.

God is on God's side. You must be on His side. As to why 9-11 occurred, let me explain something here, but it won't come close to really explaining this subject in any kind of detail.

God is not a law breaker. He is a law abider. Do you understand the difference?

God set into motion certain laws. One such law is that he can do nothing for humanity unless someone asks. He cannot simply stop bad from happening if we don't ask him to, lest the devil can then accuse Him of inteferring with man's will on earth. This is why God says He does nothing unless He first tells His prophets.

We can avert disasters by praying for Divine intervention. And this has happened a lot more than you realize- you never hear about the disasters that have been averted.

The Gulf War unfolded as it was prayed out by some people who KNOW HOW TO PRAY. They wrote it down and said later they could have handed President Bush SR the script to the war and he could have known AHEAD OF TIME how it would have turned out. That is what "praying out the plans and purposes of God" is all about.

I can say a LOT LOT more, but I don't want to spend the time right now- it would be too much to type.

298 posted on 08/23/2002 3:31:58 AM PDT by greggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: lexington minuteman 1775
I suspect the 7th. Even though the 11th would be a popular and symbolic choice, four days is simply just too much 'dark' time to just throw away.

I believe that Bush cares too much about the troops safety to expose them to the risk without taking advantage of the darkness. We are making more attacks against the Iraqi radar sites these days and that is surely part of the preparations for the main attack.

If we can eliminate most of his radar sites before the attack, we may put it off those four days but I wouldn't count on it. We would have to be certain that we didn't need the darkness before we would discard it. Most of our offensive doctrine is predicated upon the usage of the new moon to protect our planes from visual sighting and that is a very beneficial policy not to be discarded lightly.

299 posted on 08/23/2002 4:01:04 AM PDT by dglang
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Well, he said it wouldn't be in October or November - but didn't say it would not be in September.
He also said he would not attack without "consulting" our allies - he didn't say he wanted thier permission, just that he would let them know about it...!
God Bless America, and LET'S ROLL!!!
300 posted on 08/23/2002 4:44:25 AM PDT by Psalm 73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 341-353 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