Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's not going on is the key in this war
New York Daily News ^ | 3/26/03 | Zev Chafets

Posted on 03/26/2003 2:43:54 AM PST by kattracks

TEL AVIV - It's been a week since President Bush unleashed the dogs of war in Iraq. That's enough time to notice which ones haven't barked.

The Arab street, for example, which was supposed to yelp at the first sign of American aggression, has remained eerily quiet. There's been more anti-war agitation in Cleveland than Cairo. The Arab League met in solemn conference over the weekend and produced an anti-war resolution not much stronger than the peace pronunciamento of the New York City Council. In the real world, Iraq's Arab neighbors, with the exception of Syria, are active partners in the anti-Saddam Hussein coalition.

Iraq has failed to undermine this partnership by dragging Israel into the war, as it attempted to do in 1991. Iraq hasn't managed to launch a single Scud missile at Tel Aviv - or any other neighbor. The puny missiles fired at Kuwait have been mostly downed by the reassuringly successful Patriot anti-missile system.

The terror dog also has been conspicuously silent. No Saddamite sleeper cells have sprung into action. The only Islamic bomber so far has been a disgruntled Muslim American G.I. in Kuwait. And, despite dire warnings, there has been almost no eco-terrorism. The Iraqi dictator has managed to ignite only a few oil wells; Iraq's major petroleum assets are already in coalition hands.

There have been no unconventional attacks on U.S. troops, and, hysterical headlines about fierce battles notwithstanding, not much in the way of conventional attacks, either. The plain truth is that so far, the Iraqi army hasn't put up a real fight.

The proof is in the numbers. In the first six days of the war, only 11 Americans were killed by Iraqi fire - nine in a single ambush. Every casualty is a tragedy, of course, but Brooklyn has had mob wars with higher body counts.

It is too early to know exactly how many Iraqi civilians have been killed, but obviously coalition planners are keeping that toll down, too. Whatever the military merits of the policy of precision bombing, it has prevented mass slaughter in Baghdad. So has the tactic of bypassing towns and cities on the march north from Kuwait. The best evidence for this is the absence of reports about imperialist-crusader massacres, even in the highly fictionalized coverage of Al Jazeera and the rest of the Arab "news" media.

Critics of the war correctly point out that some key administration assertions and assumptions remain unproven.

No weapons of mass destruction have been found. No Al Qaeda link has been unveiled. The army hasn't deserted en mass. And if Iraqi civilians in Basra and other southern cities feel gratitude toward their American "liberators," they have been extremely good at controlling their emotions.

But it's still early. The 1991 Gulf War took six weeks. This one will be over long before that. Once Baghdad is taken and Saddam is definitely dead, there will be time enough for insincere Iraqi rejoicing and the disclosure of genuine horrors.

In military terms, the first week of the war has been an almost unqualified success, a fact that should occasion confidence, not smugness. In the coming days and weeks, there will be setbacks: more casualties - many more if Saddam uses chemical or biological weapons - more captured Americans and Brits and perhaps an uptick in terrorism. War is unpredictable and unpleasant, especially against an enemy like Saddam.

Americans will continue to see this war's temporary setbacks (and ultimate victory) through the eyes of its embedded reporters. But it is not enough to watch a war. You need to listen, too - especially to the silence of the dogs that are not barking.



TOPICS: Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: arableague; iraqifreedom; willingcoalition

1 posted on 03/26/2003 2:43:54 AM PST by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
INDEED!

My sentiments exactly!

2 posted on 03/26/2003 2:48:29 AM PST by wingster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wingster
Its what's not happening that's as revealing as what we do see happening.
3 posted on 03/26/2003 2:54:41 AM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This will not be over quickly.

In our age, a defensive war such as Iraq is fighting is impossible to win against a technologically superior enemy who is on the offense.

The US should surround Baghdad and very patiently begin the laborious process of identifying and taking out heavy armor and heavy fortifications.

Three months of patient destruction should just about do it.
4 posted on 03/26/2003 2:59:28 AM PST by peeve23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wingster
No weapons of mass destruction have been found.

What about the chemical plant which was found. That doesn't qualify as a WMD? I thought it did.

No Al Qaeda link has been unveiled.

Again, I thought that had been established earlier.

The army hasn't deserted en mass.

Didn't the 51st surrender as well as about 25% of the Republican guard? Did I just dream these things?

5 posted on 03/26/2003 3:25:29 AM PST by Jemian (Ignorance is Blix)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: peeve23
I don't believe one is able to be patient during 3 months of 120+ degree heat.
6 posted on 03/26/2003 3:28:17 AM PST by KKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: peeve23
The US should surround Baghdad and very patiently begin the laborious process of identifying and taking out heavy armor and heavy fortifications.

That's the strategy I've come up with in my war room too. I don't want a single American soldier to set foot inside that city of assassins until the entire place has been autopsied.

7 posted on 03/26/2003 3:31:24 AM PST by PoisedWoman (Fed up with the liberal media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
bump
8 posted on 03/26/2003 4:06:17 AM PST by moneyrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: peeve23; PoisedWoman
A successful siege of Baghdad will be dependent on an uprising within the city. Only when a rebellion has carved out an area of control will the commando marines be able to go into that part of the city and then lead the rebels to victory.
9 posted on 03/26/2003 4:12:52 AM PST by ricpic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jemian
No weapons of mass destruction have been found. What about the chemical plant which was found. That doesn't qualify as a WMD? I thought it did.

Not really.

No Al Qaeda link has been unveiled.

Again, I thought that had been established earlier.

Jury's still out on that one.

army hasn't deserted en mass.

Didn't the 51st surrender as well as about 25% of the Republican guard? Did I just dream these things?

The story about the 51st Division has fissled out (was it originaly disinfo?) and many of its troops are fighting in Basra again. 8,000 Iraqi troops were also supposed to have surrendered to the US but subsequently it turned out to be only 2,000. As for a quarter of Rep. Guards - I think that was speculation too.

Fog of War. Stories come and go.

10 posted on 03/26/2003 4:27:20 AM PST by Int (Ever notice how the Freepers that have been here longest are the most 'moderate'?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: KKing
120 degree heat is far more tolerable than is 3000 body bags and twice as many wounded. A head-on assault into their strength makes sense only when the enemy is not provided substantial concealment and cover.

If we are outside the gates, and have closed with them, the use of chemicals or biologics on us is the same as using it on themselves. If we are close and have trapped them inside their city, then patience destruction of identified targets is the right answer, in my opinion.
11 posted on 03/26/2003 4:58:57 AM PST by peeve23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Good analysis by the author.
12 posted on 03/26/2003 5:41:43 AM PST by Coop (God bless our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: peeve23
I've been here in the Middle East 12 years now and 120 degree heat is only tolerable when you are lightly dressed, in the shade, and constantly drinking water.

Our armchair quarterbacking of this could go on for awhile - I think I know what you mean and it is my hope the people paid to make the decisions make the right ones.
13 posted on 03/26/2003 7:10:12 AM PST by KKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jemian
No weapons of mass destruction have been found

What about the chemical suits found by the ambulance, uh I mean tank in the hospital?

14 posted on 03/26/2003 7:17:55 AM PST by WKB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: KKing
120 degree heat is only tolerable when you are lightly dressed, in the shade, and constantly drinking water.

Summer in Palm Springs can be that hot and dry. People go out and jog before sunrise when it's passably cool. I suppose no comparison really, since there are swimming pools on every corner in PS. Don't we train our troops in places like Palm Springs to acclimatize them?

15 posted on 03/26/2003 11:40:09 AM PST by PoisedWoman (Fed up with the liberal media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PoisedWoman
I believe many train in Ft Irwin California, which is pretty close in the summer time for heat.
16 posted on 03/26/2003 9:46:44 PM PST by KKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson