For a number of months I’ve had it in the back of my mind September 11th would be a really good day to begin the take down of Saddam & Co. I think I’d still put a small wager on it.
I would guess the DOD re-arming has progressed sufficiently by now; troops are certainly in place or at least near at hand. The deployment of a major medical unit is indicative a serious ground offensive is due about now. The recent news from Kuwait (all thanks be to Instapundit for the link) reveals there are friendly places from which to launch an attack. We’ve long known preparations were under way in Turkey.
I’d expect we have serious forces already across the Turkish border working with the Kurds in Northern Iraq and either in Kuwait or perhaps already into the the Southern no-fly zone. Airfields were purportedly under-construction in Northern Iraq and are probably in service now. Special Forces will be in-country and ready to move on their objectives: the early capture of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and the extremely prejudicial termination of Mr Hussein. It would not surprise me in the least if contacts have been made and entire Iraqi divisions are ready to turn coat when the shooting starts.
It is difficult to read the Saudi situation: they could actually be supporting us behind the scenes. There is a lot of very empty desert out there in which to hide a US division or two. Logistical support flights could come from Kuwait or the Emirates so long as the Saudi Air Force is in on the deal, and they know where their spares come from. Out of sight, out of mind as far as Saud internal problems go. You just can’t be sure, particularly when masters are doing their best to maximize the fog of war. That is comforting: it also means Saddam doesn’t know from whence the hammer will fall.
I’ll bet on an armoured nutcracker from north and south backed up by airborne troops delivered to key objectives. Blitzkreig American Style. Our pieces are in place on the battlefield and the initiative is all ours. The eleventh would be a good day symbolically but the attack will come when the commander decides it will come. If Saddam were to attempt a pre-emptive strike to seize the initiative, we’d just chew up his best forces and spit them out. A classical offense takes a much larger force than a classical defense. The force tables are only turned when one side has near total battlefield information, absolute air superiority and the ability to place a bomb in a bunghole from ten miles away.
Saddam had better be taking care of the “eat, drink and be merry” part… his tomorrow is not long to come.
Speaking of wagers – it’s quite coincidental that I just made a bet with another blogger that said (in part) that Iraq would be invaded on 9/11/2002.
See here.
MommaBear would love to think the date would be 10SEP2002, so that the day the change came would have its own date of remembrance, taking the 11th out of consideration.
If it’s true. We shall see what Bush is made of. It has been so long since there was a leader, as opposed to a follower, in charge of this nation. If he can withstand the mounting opposition—
The need for the action isn’t obvious to all, it seems. How a dynamic was created that causes a majority of the world to believe that it is preferable to leave a paranoic madman to develope (and use) weapons capable of killing millions, I have no clue. On second thought, the dynamic is working in the opposite direction. The dynamic is that civilized states do not attack other states without provocation. What constitutes provocation today? Is the foreknowledge (or even strong suspicion) that a Saddam will use the resources of his state to murder as many innocents in your country as possible sufficient provocation?
There has to be an inertia, perhaps a healthy inertia, working against this. To my knowledge, this would be the first example of a publically acknowledged preemptive strike ever attempted by a republic. I don’t know how healthy that is as a precedent. Maybe the state of weaponry and transportation has advanced to the point that it is no longer possible to await the occasional psychopath’s death after a glorious career of murdering his subjects.
I think that it’s self evident that it’s clear that an adult needs to establish dominance of the squabbling children of the world. I thing that Bush is an adult. The problem arises with the precedent of an interventionalist America and the reality that for every Bush there are 3 Clintons.
The world has reached a point in which great power, exercised intelligently, is necessary to perserve order. Great power will always be abused. I have no idea how to reconcile the two. Maybe we’re screwed.
I couldn’t agree more. We are where we are regardless of how we’d like to revise history, and we have to use the power to stop or at least minimize the terrible things which will happen to us otherwise. It simply comes down to realipolitic and self interest. If killing 100,000 Iraqi’s saves 10,000 americans, it will be done and few of us will complain that *our* friends and relatives are the ones kept alive.
The other side of the equation is the fasces, once seized, can be desparately difficult to set down.(1)
(1) Read your Roman history if you don’t understand the reference!