To: LS
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?
To: kansan
You didn't ask me, but I have a hunch it will be the Ides of March....March 15....9 days from now.
Don't ask me how I know....I can't tell.
1,547 posted on
03/06/2003 6:25:59 PM PST by
Palladin
(Proud to be a FReeper!)
To: kansan
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.there are higher costs, true, but they are primarily to iraq. why? because in order to make a biochem attack less likely, we would have to hammer them all the harder. if we go in sooner, the damage to iraq and its people will be significantly less.
dep
1,551 posted on
03/06/2003 6:26:21 PM PST by
dep
To: kansan
I have spoken to my own ROTC students and heard from several military people, and the "weather" thing is overblown. Remember how supposedly we "couldn't fight" in Afghanistan's mountains. BS. I heard one U.S. military official (maybe Rumsfeld or Franks) say that the timing of the operations would not be driven by weather or "phases of the moon."
That said, I have no idea. I do know you can't leave 250,000 soldiers, with lots of reservists, on station indefinitely. So it has to be soon.
1,691 posted on
03/06/2003 6:54:54 PM PST by
LS
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson