Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by Sierra Mike, Dec 19, 2002.
Looks like eyeballs are set on January now...
Read all about it at January Takedown
I have no doubt that it will be on, or about Jan 19 or 20. That is the anniversary date of the first war. LOL (slaps forehead) Yeah, that's a surprise, NOT LOL
The first date was chosen because of climate. The second date will be too. The date will not be exact but close as the military dictated both times.
Great - itll be Jan 28th, my birthday, continuing the tradition of that day being generally sucky and messed up since the challenger blew up in 86.
I think the Tet Offensive in Vietnam was launched the day I was born too.
Someone has to be so lucky, Domhain . Secy. Powell is on CNN right now (2:45pm 12/19) giving the US response to the Iraqi report. It looks 99.9999% that we will be in a shooting match by the end of January. Given the reports that Saadam plans a scorched earth policy for Iraq and its citizens, unless an uprising happens, this is going to be very, very bad news.
The next important date is Jan 27th. I believe it is the formal submission to the UN from the Inspectors. So on Domains birthday we might start the war.
My opinion has been late January 2003, early February 2003 since August 2002 when I posted about this at the old hang out. we didn't pick those dates last time because we would have to gear up during an election cycle, which was accussed last year. We atarted to gear up in August because it would reflect the time that we need.
Having been there the first time, as an infantry mortarman, and possibly this time, reserve transportation, I know that the climate will play a major factor. If we arent there by the end of Jan. then any large-scale operations will wait till the following fall/winter. You have to understand any troops on the ground will be wearing MOPP suits(NBC suits, basically thick charcoal-lined tops and bottoms) for protection in case of chemical attack. If we go in the summer we would most likely have more heat casualties than combat casualties. i think this is well known though.
About time you posted my friend!
Anyone involved in the 1st Gulf War has insights that help us to understand what may be involved.
Your comments are welcomed.
Support is not universal in the UK, even though the PM seems to still be behind Bush. But the press is doing some wonderfful things, like this,
The story opens...
BUSH'S RACE TO WAR PUTS WORLD AT RISK
THE day has been marked in President Bush's diary. January 27, 2003. The date when he will decide on war against Iraq.
But no one really believes that a big decision will be taken in the White House on that day. The die was cast long ago.
The mirror is one step below The Star--if that's possible.
The mirror is in a league of its own -- but you have to admit, that is a great front page image.
How do you like the new MOPP suits? I hear they are a 100% better. This one is yours and the next generation, I fear that I have to let this one go.
I never doubted that the Iraqi disclosure would be inadequate. I can only presume that such programs would involve millions of pages, not thousands - I mean, some litigation cases involve boxes of material several feet high, and that's nothing in complexity when compared to a nuclear-weapons program.
I look for a declaration in about a month, with an internationally televised disclosure of many areas Iraq is lying and developing WMDs.
Bush isn't as stupid as people think. I can see a right cross being wound up right now. Saddam has been playing so innocent, deny, deny, deny... I think Bush is about to give him a political haymaker so that nobody else can jump on Saddam's side without fully stating their approval of Iraq's terrorist intent.
It's going to be like the UN meeting on the Cuban missle crisis. It will erase doubts on the justification, but the timing has to be right, or the effectiveness is lost.
What I find amusing is the number of people who said we need to get UN approval. Bush did. Then they said they wanted Congressional approval. Bush did. Now they say the UN and Congress were duped and let's see the evidence given to them. I want to see it too, but I don't think the UN or Congress is Bush's mouthpiece so I think there must be sufficient evidence. The people screaming the loudest are the ones who will not believe it anyway, so I am really ambivalent about revealing it. Wanting to know and wanting our means of attaining this knowledge revealed are not always in tune.
Their will be no definitive smoking gun.
To release that info will release the means of getting it and hence it's counteraction.
It will have to be a masterful PR job to rekindle a national unity into the cohesiveness that exsisted immediatly after 9/11.
For all those who think Bush lacks intelligence be assured that he has methodically moved in one direction; national security.
The missing chemical, bio and military weapons, coupled with the release on a national scale the possible effects of their potential harm will galvanize public support.
This must be so. The danger of another 9/11 is to scary to fathom.
All i care is that they work. I guess they did some testing on the old ones ( after the gulf war) and found that the majority wouldn't have protected the troops anyway(i forget what the percentage was, but its unsettling to say the least).