Posted on 03/03/2003 9:09:59 AM PST by areafiftyone
American B-52 bombers have begun arriving in Britain, as Iraq claims six civilians were killed and 15 others injured in the latest round of US and British air raids inside the no-fly zone.
The last time the bombers were stationed on British soil was for the attacks on Yugoslavia four years ago.
Once again the long-range B-52s are based at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire.
The first of the huge jets landed just before noon on Monday. About an hour earlier, what appeared to be a U-2 spy plane had taken off. Two transporters aircraft are also at the base.
British military sources say a large group of US warplanes is due in Britain this week, including 14 B-52s.
Peace campaigners witnessed the arrival of the bombers. One commented: "It gives you a feeling like a stone in your throat and an even bigger stone in your heart. This may as well be American soil here."
In the no-fly zones in Iraq, British and American pilots have been launching new raids on Iraqi defences.
Iraq claims that six civilians died and 15 were injured in one of the raids on the city of Basra located in the southern no-fly zone.
Senior Pentagon officials say the strikes have been on ground-to-ground missile systems and multiple launch rockets, which could be used against coalition troops invading Iraq.
But Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon insisted to the Commons that the RAF's planes were acting "entirely in self-defence" within international law.
US and British warplanes have patrolled the northern and southern zones since the end of the 1991 Gulf War. They were set up to protect Kurds and Shia Muslims from persecution.
Officially, the pilots' missions are defensive, attacking surface-to-air missile sites and aircraft in response to Iraqi hostilities.
Experts say an increase in the raids last year heralded America's determination to blitz Saddam's air defences in preparation for war.
Ministry of Defence and US Central Command officials insisted that the additional raids were in response to increased Iraqi aggression against their aircraft.
But analysts pointed to an apparent intention to destroy Iraq's air defences piece by piece, including anything which could be used against an invasion force.
And they get their Ammo for those birds from RAF Welford right down the street. Where millions upon millions of Net Explosive Wieght comprising of MK 80 series GP bombs are located, until many were retrograded back to the U.S. in the early ninties.
Now, theres probably just millions pounds of explosives.
B-1s carry about the same load of about the same types of bombs as the BUFFs. Depending on external carriage that is, configured for max carriage the old BUFF can still carry more iron than the Bone.
It is getting a big hole in its hull with this unconstitutional waging of war by the President. The constitution clearly states that THE CONGRESS declares war. The congress can not legally "resolve" to give the President that responsibility. Check the line item veto attempt a few years ago: Congress passed a law which gave the President a line item veto power which the Supreme Court overturned saying that Congress can not abdicate its constitutional power and responsibility to the President.
Saddam must be delt with but not in a way that ignores our constitution. If the President does not follow the law of the land why should the rest of the country? But then again, if the military followed George's example, they would just not show up for required duty if that was inconvenient (See George's reserve record). This country is greatly in need of LEADERSHIP and George is not providing it here. Just being firm is not enough; you must be firm in right action. Ignoring the Constitution is not right action.
LOL....uh....PLEASE tell me you forgot to close your sarcasm tag.
The situation was quite different in 1991. Iraq had invaded another country which then asked for help. An international coalition led by the U.S. waged a war to push Iraq back within its borders. The congress passed (by 1 vote) what was essentially a declaration of war (in concert with the U.N.). The President was experienced in war and did not even "appear" to have a questionable agenda.
There are some who say that the bombing of the bunker full of women and children (by mistake) was the real motivation for the long term effort to finally bring down the World Trade Center Towers (an earlier attempt failed but they did not give up). If we bomb Iraq again, do you really believe that terrorism will stop? Would you give up if someone bombed and killed your people? Bombing is a short term fix and not really a solution at all. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely - we are as close to absolute power as any country has been in history. We better be really careful because we are going down a path that can lead to destruction. The only solution is real leadership and we do not have that now.
Please tell me you will open your reasoning tag. Would you give up if someone bombed and killed your people? Why should they? As long as we act like we don't need to respect international laws or even our own constitution, why would anyone respect us? Because we can bomb them back to yesterday? They are already there and they have nothing to lose - we do. For me, it is enough to realize that waging war (especially when it is not a last resort) is not compatible with the actions and teachings of Jesus Christ.
There are some who say that the bombing of the bunker full of women and children (by mistake) was the real motivation for the long term effort to finally bring down the World Trade Center Towers (an earlier attempt failed but they did not give up).
Then why does OBL claim it's because we have troops in his holy land, or that it's in support of the Palestinians ??
If we bomb Iraq again, do you really believe that terrorism will stop?
I don't recall many attacks on the US after 1991... You hit people with a big enough stick, they tend to learn the lesson. . .
Would you give up if someone bombed and killed your people? Bombing is a short term fix and not really a solution at all.
Violence is not the solution ? Ask the citizens of Carthage, of the Warsaw Ghetto, or the victims of Pol Pot. Violence settled THEIR destinies quite nicely. . and finally. And in any case, B-52s are likely to be used against mass formation of armor or troops, not cities.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely - we are as close to absolute power as any country has been in history. We better be really careful because we are going down a path that can lead to destruction. The only solution is real leadership and we do not have that now.
I disagree: this is the first time in years we've had real leadership. If our leadership was truly corrupt with power, most of the Arab world would be dead, neutron-bombed or nuked out of existence after September 11th. . .
Ummm... like tomorrow?
Nope.
But there will be one less despotic, sympathizing dictator supporting them. The terrorist's world is going to keep getting smaller and smaller.
Will they lash out like the desparate nut cases they are, and will we take another hit?
Yep to the first part, and probably to the second. And their world will keep getting smaller and smaller.
Would you give up if someone bombed and killed your people?
You mean like September 11?
Do I really need to answer that?
No. That is a bogus picture. Because something was done wrong in the past does not make it ok now (See slavery, Native American genocide, etc.).
Besides, if Congress declares war, the it loses whatever control it has anyway.
Wrong. Congress controls the money - that includes money for war. If they want to stop the war, they stop the money. Right now we are spending our children's money to prepare for war - we are borrowing from the future. If we continue on this path, our country will be much weaker in the future because of oppressive debt! We were in trouble before this military action began, now we are just digging a deeper hole for ourselves and our future generations. That is not good leadership and therefore our leadership must change or be replaced or we will not prevail as a free nation.
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.