Replies

I have explained the waiting on at least five different threads. First, let's see what it is NOT about:

it is not about the military. The military is ready, willing, and able.

it is not about the UN. Bush knows the diplomatic route is garbage, but we do need to maintain alliances for the larger "war on terror," so he couldn't come out and call the French cheese-eating-surrender-monkeys.

So what IS it about? One of two things. If you saw the post by Mansoor Ijaz on NRO Monday, ("Brain Drain") he had a very important paragraph, where he said that the arrest of KSM and the info we were getting likely pre-empted some pretty big attacks that were supposed to happen with the onset of the war. So first, this delay has been about making sure that the "retaliatory" attacks by AQ did not occur.

Second, you have NOT heard anything about this, but I am convinced that Tom Ridge has been one of the keys, closely tied to the issue above. Perhaps Ridge knows of some expected attacks and the CIVILIAN response in the U.S. wasn't yet ready to deal with it. Obviously I don't know what specifically that might be, but I'm convinced that Homeland Security has been one of the major factors in delaying this war. As you (and STRATFOR) show, from a purely military point of view, waiting is silly.

Sorry for making you rehash what you've already posted.

My understanding is that after the 1st of April, conditions will be very difficult for the military, given that the internal temperatures of the protective suits is about 50 degrees higher than the external temperature. I'm not convinced that the timing is irrelevant. There are costs to waiting, how high, obviously I can't say.

No one can credibly argue that Bush is indifferent to the allies. He's bending over backwards to find a consensus. To me the UN, and Britain's insistence on diplomacy is a sideshow. If we waited for the UN or Europe to get on board anytime something needed to be done, there would be millions of refugees from Kosovo camping out in Macedonia today.

Given this, I find your second argument most compelling. There must be a greater risk to going in today than what we currently understand. This realization is highly unsettling.

In what timeframe do you anticipate us going in?

have explained the waiting on at least five different threads. First, let's see what it is NOT about:
it is not about the military. The military is ready, willing, and able.
it is not about the UN. Bush knows the diplomatic route is garbage, but we do need to maintain alliances for the larger "war on terror," so he couldn't come out and call the French cheese-eating-surrender-monkeys.
So what IS it about? One of two things. If you saw the post by Mansoor Ijaz on NRO Monday, ("Brain Drain") he had a very important paragraph, where he said that the arrest of KSM and the info we were getting likely pre-empted some pretty big attacks that were supposed to happen with the onset of the war. So first, this delay has been about making sure that the "retaliatory" attacks by AQ did not occur.
Second, you have NOT heard anything about this, but I am convinced that Tom Ridge has been one of the keys, closely tied to the issue above. Perhaps Ridge knows of some expected attacks and the CIVILIAN response in the U.S. wasn't yet ready to deal with it. Obviously I don't know what specifically that might be, but I'm convinced that Homeland Security has been one of the major factors in delaying this war. As you (and STRATFOR) show, from a purely military point of view, waiting is silly.

This is such an insightful and well-reasoned post that it deserves to be bumped.