[r9etb]

I expect the next two weeks could be very, very interesting.

My guess is that we would rather not go to war with Iraq in mid-September, and that this stuff is basically an attempt to rachet up the pressure on Saddam, personally.

Notice, for example, that the rhetoric is not so much about war, as it is about getting rid of Saddam. To me this sounds like we're trying to get the Iraqi military to mount a coup.

(One wonders if Abu Nidal's recent "suicide" has any relation to this effort....)

It may not work, of course. But it'd be November or later before we did anything overt.

[lideric]

To me this sounds like we're trying to get the Iraqi military to mount a coup.

Right. After getting clobbered by us once before there may be enough Iraqi soldiers that will decide it would be safer to go the coup route than face the U.S. military again. But then again maybe the Iraqui's aren't that smart.

[3k9pm]

Nah. Regime change can be made much sooner.
Requirements:

1. Intelligence on S. Hussein's location
2. SEAL Sniper

Unofficial SEAL sniper motto: Sneak,sneak,sneak. Shoot them in the back. Run,run,run.

If we want to change the leadership, one sniper team is all that is needed.
Rattle the cage until intel points his location, then execute him like the rabid animal he is.
This would serve as an example to the next Iraqi leader as well.

[Trust but Verify]

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Someone who else who has noticed the subtleties of what is being said by the Administration and what is not being said. The media and punditry focusing on the upcoming WAR, when no such thing has been proposed.

There's a BIG difference!

[robertpaulsen]

"But it'd be November or later before we did anything overt."

Do you say this because GW will make this a political decision rather than a military one? I ask because I'm hearing alot about how GW can't attack before November because it would be perceived as a gambit to influence the outcome of the election.

I say attack when ready, even if it's November 3rd.

[steve-b]

My guess is that we would rather not go to war with Iraq in mid-September, and that this stuff is basically an attempt to rachet up the pressure on Saddam, personally. Notice, for example, that the rhetoric is not so much about war, as it is about getting rid of Saddam. To me this sounds like we're trying to get the Iraqi military to mount a coup.

That's fairly obvious -- it would be foolish not to try for the option that solves the problem at no real cost to us, if there's any hope that it might succeed and the attempt won't foreclose the use of other options if it doesn't.

[WKB]

My guess is that we would rather not go to war with Iraq in mid-September,

We better hurry! Isn't Rum-A-Dum in October?