March 16, 2003

ON THE CLOCK:

6O HOURS TO CONFLICT: First wave 'on Tuesday' Dress rehearsal done (Colin Wills, Mar 16 2003, Sunday Mirror)
WAR with Iraq could now be as close as 60 hours away. Military sources believe that the first wave of attack aircraft and cruise missiles will be launched against Saddam overnight on Tuesday.

The stakes were raised dramatically when the mighty American B-1 bomber was used for the first time in the southern Iraq no-fly zone, pounding mobile radar installations with unheard-of firepower. The attack was only 230 miles west of Baghdad.

On the front line in Northern Kuwait, the urgency quickened noticeably yesterday. In an around the clock operation, troops in Camp Coyote, the British camp closest to the Iraq border, are being supplied with everything they need to fight the first hours and days of war - the priorities being ammunition and water.


You'd have to think that any time after the House of Commons votes the war could start. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 16, 2003 11:19 AM
Comments

For all the political prognosticators & foreign policy savants that frequent this blog, I'd like to hear your opinions on the following questions:





1. When the war starts, will Hussein use WMD?



2. Will the US use them?



3. Will Israel use them if attacked?

Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at March 16, 2003 1:31 PM

1. Yes.

2. No.

3. No.

Posted by: David Cohen at March 16, 2003 1:52 PM

(1.) He'll give the order--getting it followed is another thing entirely.



(2.) No



(3.) They will if they receive a WMD attack.

Posted by: oj at March 16, 2003 2:00 PM

It would be a dereliction of duty for the psyops guys to not be spreading the word that anyone who survives the Daisy Cutters after using just one shell of gas will be tried for War Crimes by a US led (and non-ICC) tribunal. That's why its called "command-and-control".



Of course, what happens depends on just how crazy and suicidal the "Arab street", when it comes to military officers, really is. What's the point of being a martyr if no one is left behind to celebrate your act?



As for question two-- thinking that this is possible is right on the edge of crossing over into moral equivalence. Unless, of course, one truly believes that a US goal of this conflict is to kill as many people as possible, and in the most gruesome way possible. And from what I hear from the Appeasement Movement, that's what they believe.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at March 16, 2003 2:25 PM

1. Yes, Saddam will give the order but it will only be executed partially (by a combination of desertions and destruction of communication infrastructure)



2. No, unless Saddam happened upon a nuke (thank you, Jacques) and manages to destroy an important troop concentration or a carrier group. In that case, bye bye Tikrit. The US cannot afford to let a nuclear attack pass unpunished. Otherwise the Chinese, the Russians, the French or the North Koreans might get funny ideas.



3. More or less the same as answer 2) If the attack is sufficiently devastating, Baghdad and a lot of other places change into a radioactive glass. Israel will show great restraint, but if Tel Aviv is wiped out, Israel must retaliate in a truly devastating way (they can't afford being seen as weak by the Arabs, who despise weakness).

Posted by: Peter at March 16, 2003 2:31 PM

1. Yes - the order will be given by Hussein (scorched earth approach). Question is whether it will be followed or blocked by the US forces

2. No - MOAB and other armaments will get the job done.

3. If attacked a little Israel may not respond or respond with missiles. If a massive attack maybe. US priority should be to prevent Hussein attack on Israel first thing.

Posted by: AWW at March 16, 2003 3:41 PM

I've always thought that what Israel should announce is that if it is attacked by the Ba'athist regime in Iraq it will retaliate against the Ba'athist regime in Syria.

Posted by: oj at March 16, 2003 5:05 PM

Thanks, all. I suppose I am worried about #3, wherein a sequestered & doomed Hussein decides to lash out chemically against (say) Tel Aviv with substantial casualties leading to....what? We'll see.

Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at March 16, 2003 6:25 PM

No opinion on 1. Will Saddam go down in

a blaze of what I suppose he would

view as glory, or just kill himself? I dunno.

How crazy is he? Is Paris burning?



2. Not this week. I expect we will in N.

Korea and western Asia eventually. We

could be dissuaded by the other side

declaring peace on us, but that's not gonna

happen -- ever.



3. Why not? What would they have to lose?

Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 16, 2003 8:52 PM
« POLITE, BUT TROUBLED: | Main | THE NECESSITY OF IRONY: »