Posted on 08/30/2002 9:57:21 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
Iraq said on Friday the United States would not be able to bring down President Saddam Hussein the same way it toppled Afghanistan's Taliban, as Washington pressed ahead with the case for action against the Iraqi leader.
The United States ignored calls for a new U.N. Security Council resolution to approve any American military action against Iraq as its key ally British Prime Minister Tony Blair faced opposition from his own party to a U.S.-led attack.
In a sign of rising tension, U.S. jets attacked an anti-aircraft missile site in a "no-fly" zone of southern Iraq in response to what the U.S. military said were repeated Iraqi attempts to shoot down American and British jets patrolling the zone. It was the eighth raid in less than two weeks.
A top United Nations arms inspector also said Iraqi reluctance to allow new inspections could suggest it may be hiding biological weapons.
Iraqi Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan said Washington knew it would not be able to overthrow Saddam the same way it ousted the Taliban.
"We don't want to compare the two; Iraq is not Afghanistan," Ramadan told reporters in Beirut. "I believe that the U.S. administration is convinced of that."
Iraqi opposition sources said they were planning to meet in September to elect a government backed by the United States.
But Ramadan said: "This talk about the Iraqi opposition is insignificant, something that doesn't merit a reply. It doesn't exist, and has no roots on the ground in Iraq."
On Thursday Vice President Dick Cheney hammered home Washington's case for pre-emptive action against Baghdad, brushing off a groundswell of unease among European allies, Muslim states and broader world public opinion.
President Bush, without directly mentioning Iraq or Saddam, reinforced the message in fund-raising speeches in Arkansas and Oklahoma.
"We owe it to our children, we owe it to our grandchildren to make sure that the world's worst leaders do not develop and deploy the world's worst weapons," Bush said.
But despite the drumbeat sounded by the Bush administration, military and security experts say U.S. plans remain shrouded in uncertainty and a war with Iraq could still be months away.
They said they saw few signs of the kind of buildup required for a ground invasion of Iraq, or even of a consensus on what shape it should take.
U.S. SILENT ON POSSIBLE U.N. RESOLUTION
At the United Nations, talk about a new U.N. Security Council resolution to approve any American military action against Iraq was gaining momentum though discussions around the world were still at an early stage.
Most Security Council diplomats argue that without another resolution, existing measures do not provide a legal basis for a "regime change" -- Bush's euphemism for overthrowing Saddam whom he accuses of developing weapons of mass destruction.
Russia and China oppose military action. France, another veto-bearing council member, has called for a Security Council vote with President Jacques Chirac criticising attempts to legitimise the "unilateral and pre-emptive use of force."
And in Britain, whose position is closest to the United States, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he would consider a report by a parliamentary committee to propose a U.N. deadline to readmit weapons inspectors.
The arms experts left Iraq in December 1998 on the eve of a U.S.-British bombing raid and have not been allowed to return.
Gabriele Kraatz-Wadsack, who led past biological weapons inspections, derided Iraq's efforts this week to disprove any development of chemical or biological weapons by showing facilities to journalists, saying reporters were not weapons experts.
Asked if Iraq had something to hide, she replied: "Apparently it seems (so) because also the new mandate for the new commission was passed by the Security Council in 1999 and they have not admitted the inspectors back."
BLAIR UNDER PRESSURE
A survey in London on Friday showed Britain's Blair faced stiff opposition from the grassroots of his own Labour Party if he backed a U.S.-led attack on Iraq.
The Times newspaper found 60 out of 100 Labour constituency leaders "expressed strong opposition" to a war against Saddam. Only five said they would support Blair if he decided to commit British troops to any military action.
In Amman, officials and diplomats said although Jordan might have deep misgivings about a U.S. attack on Iraq, the kingdom which sat on the fence in the 1991 Gulf War would have no choice but to join a U.S.-led campaign.
But Jordan, a pivotal U.S. ally in the Middle East, hoped any military action would be brief because of fears a prolonged war could go dangerously wrong and wreak havoc in a volatile region, they said.
The United States sent a conciliatory message to another key Arab ally, Saudi Arabia. Secretary of State Colin Powell said ties with Riyadh were strong.
But in remarks published in the London-based Ashraq al-Awsat Arabic-language newspaper, Powell cautioned: "There are more things that Saudi Arabia can do and we always explore cooperation aspects with the Saudi leadership."
Saudi Arabia, which played a pivotal role in the Gulf War, has said it will not allow U.S. forces to use its soil to launch an attack on Baghdad.
Yeah, I don't recall hearing about hundreds of Taliban or Al Qaeda surrendering to journalists.
Of course not. Afghanistan has a future.
Not a problem. We're all about "diversity" these days...
"Iran Tells U.S. It's No Iraq"
Not to mention the fact that they have a more or less traditional army - uniforms and everything!
Should be called Icrack!
To quote Ralph Peters, "American troops went through the Iraqi Army faster than Lizzie Grubman could back an SUV through a Hamptons Party."
I thought the estimated number of Iraqi dead was reported to be as high as 400,000.
That said, I hope it was the lower number. Those poor bastards were thrown into a meatgrinder by their fiendish dictator.
"Iran Tells U.S. It's No Iraq"
2004 Headline:
"North Korea Tells U.S. It's No Iran."
2005 Headline:
"China Says It's No North Korea"
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.