U.S. General: Iraq Attack to Succeed Without Turkey

ABC News ^ | 3/3/03

[ErnBatavia]

Germany currently has 950 soldiers protecting U.S. military bases in the country, where 70,000 of the nearly 110,000 U.S. troops in Europe are stationed.

I'd like to see some "revised" numbers a year from now...

[maquiladora]

There will still be a presence in Northern Iraq. We have at least 2 upgraded runways in the Kurdish area and we can airdrop troops and some light equipment.

It won't be a heavy force, but then again, since the Iraqi's seem to be moving a heavy division further south that may not be much of a problem.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

"We will have to wait and see how the diplomatic dialogue resolves itself,"

That pretty much sums up the entire Iraq episode from beginning to end. And it's why we've had so many slips and stumbles. It's time (past time, actually) to change the equation, change the facts on the ground. Pursuing the diplomatic front is fighting on ground of the enemy's choosing.

[RobFromGa]

The information dumps at this point are all carefully scripted and released. We are in the foggy stage of this action.

[VRWC_minion]

I won't be surprised if after the attack we are told that a special secret USA force was allowed to attack Iraq from Turkey.

[SunStar]

In a setback to U.S. plans for a "northern front" against Iraq, and clouding President Bush's efforts to build international support for a potential war, Turkey's parliament on Saturday narrowly rejected a motion to allow as many as 62,000 U.S. troops to be deployed in Turkey.

Actually, it was narrowly passed, then rejected by the leader of the Parliament. Small difference, but then again, I'm not the "reporter"...

[COBOL2Java]

Here's what I would love to see happen. Of course, it won't...

TURKEY to US (after seeing the effect on their economy): We made a mistake on Saturday. We would be glad to host your troops for your offer of $30 billion...

US to TURKEY: Glad to hear it. We'll give you $5 billion.

[Tacis]

Turkey's refusal to help us causes another major problem. While we were concerned about Turkey's good will, the issue of the Kurds was pretty well closed. Now, that the Turk's have made it clear that they will not help, we have to be concerned about freeing and then, governing occupied Kurdistan. The Turk's won't like how it turns out but, what do we care.

There are 30 million Kurds in parts of Turkey, Iran, and Iraq. Cobbling them into a viable country will be difficult but is now on the list where, before Turkey backed out, it wasn't. "FREE OCCUPIED KURDISTAN!!"

[jayef]

Makes one wonder, don't it? Could this all be a setup? With the strange circumstances surrounding the vote in the Turkish Parliament, is it possible that this is all an elaborate ruse organized by the US and Turkey to confuse and handicap the enemy?

[RobbyS]

Eaprecially when the enemy turns out to be a putative ally who now is shedding crock tears about saving American boys from death and dismemberment. France dragged out the discusion on 1141 for seven weeks and since then has done everything in her power to keep it from being enforced. And why not: her real ally is Saddam Hussein.

[elhombrelibre]

I don't see why it needs to be heavy. The air power we'll have will work in the north the same way it worked in Afghanistan. The Kurds and the US special forces and light infantry should be able to handle even heavy Iraqi units. TOWs and Javelins will wreak havoc on Saddam's old tanks if they are dumb enough to fight, to say nothing of Apaches, AC-130's and A-10's.

[ex-Texan]

He will die a proper "Martyr's death" is U.S. custody. After a lot of psychological torture with the help of many truth-inducing drugs. In the end, at the very least, he will be stood in a line with other terrorists. Against a deeply pitted stone wall. He will never see his '72 virgins in Paradise.' Not a single one.

[areafiftyone]

Actually - what I would love to hear is:

US: Talk to the Hand cause the ears ain't listening! Buh Bye!

[mhking]

"Turkey? We don't need no steenkin' Turkey!"

[Teacher317]

Winning in Iraq should not really be a puzzle. The problem is that a supposed ally is making our work tougher for us, which means more lives lost on both sides.

The real worry is what the terrorists will do in response, and whether the US is ready for that kind of ugliness, either towards our troops there, or even here at home... are we ready politically, emotionally, and psychologically? (I'd guess no on all three counts.)

[cake_crumb]

Of course an attack on Iraq can succeed without Turkey....plus, it'll save American $$$ and we won't have to worry so much about a massacre of Iraqi Kurds.

On a side note: Is anyone else getting sick and tired of the State Department constantly being blamed for the actions of others? First, the Bush administration is blamed for the irrational greed of Jaques and Gerhardt. Then some publications took a stab at digging up some blame for Colin Powell's failure to convince the leaders of terrorist enabling or appeasing nations in the Security Council of the need to forcably disarm Saddam, though they really had to stretch the limits of imagination. And THEN it's the Bush administration's fault a Canadian MP publically called Americans 'b@stards' whom she hates. Now State's being blamed for the Turkish parlaiment's apparent cutting off of it's financial nose to appease the radicals.

SHEESH.

[maquiladora]

Costs a lot of money and effort to load up and move 25/30 huge roll on / roll off cargo ships, and could we really depend on a whole diverse range of Turkish politicians from various parties to give us a staged result?
Nah, I think it's a setback alright, but that one that we haven't made a Plan-B for.

I wouldn't get to worried about this, and beside, Turkey may have another vote on this and it may get passed.

Who knows.

[a_Turk]

"State warmly embraced the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution (backed by Tehran) and went out of its way to keep Saudi Arabia happy, but then they decided to screw our ally," complains a Defense Department official.